December 21 2012

Very well said!

We will be as the 'Archons.' Never 'absorbed' into the 'body'.
The rest will be A-B-S-O-R-B-E-D.

You may consider this, United States is not a country its a corporation - Obama (unelected but appointed) is a president of a corporation (family owned and operated for the most part see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ldZS9PL ... re=related its a bloodline thing - if a person also can be known as a corporation check out blacks law believes themselves to be a US citizen that give the corporate government jurisdiction over the unaware US citizen, which makes them corporate slave or corporate assets (http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm) you may research and find that these things are fact. Check out how they get us from birth http://www.gemworld.com/EdMandellHouse.htm

As much as folks would like to dis conspiracies I feel most have some truth to them, and can only be realized by opening the mind and exposing one's self to valid factual information

but how could you impeach him? he just won the nobel peace prize??

Never mind impeaching him; there may be a chance the military simply removes him!


Newsmax had planned to run an article about this which it removed from its site. Here is what they replaced it with:http://www.newsmax.com/john_perry/obama_military_coup/2009/09/29/266012.html

Statement from Newsmax Regarding Blogger
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:35 AM
By: Newsmax Media

In a blog posting to Newsmax, John Perry wrote about a coup scenario involving the U.S. military. He clearly stated that he was not advocating such a scenario but simply describing one. After several reader complaints, Newsmax wanted to ensure that this article was not misinterpreted. It was removed a short time after being posted.

Newsmax strongly believes in the principles of Constitutional government and would never advocate or insinuate any suggestion of an activity that would undermine our democracy or democratic institutions.

Mr. Perry served as a political appointee in the Carter administration in HUD and FEMA. He has no official relationship with Newsmax other than as an unpaid blogger.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the original article they had run:http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/09/full_text_of_newsmax_column_suggesting_military_co.php

Here is the full text of John L. Perry's column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to "resolve the Obama problem" is becoming more possible and is not "unrealistic." Perry also writes that a coup, while not "ideal," may be preferable to "Obama's radical ideal" -- and would "restore and defend the Constitution." Newsmax has since removed the column from its website.


Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention

By: John L. Perry

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

# Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.

# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.

# They can see that the economy -- ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation -- is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.

# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.

# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America's troop strength is allowed to sag.

# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.

# They can see the nation's safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran's nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, "I'm not interested in victory") that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America's military leadership is lost in a fool's fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don't shrug and say, "We can always worry about that later."

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clearly there are plenty of reasons to impeach Obama just as there were plenty of reasons to impeach Bush. The difference is that Obama has set in motion, multiple plans to fundamentally change this nation and is using the Constitution as a piece of toilet paper. It is important to remember that soldiers take an oath to the United States and Constitution....NOT to the president no matter who he happens to be. There are a great many patriots who will not simply sit idly by and watch this nation be turned into a Marxist-style state with a socialist economy. Remember, the Constitution says enemies, both foreign and domestic!

even though enlisted swear to obey the orders of the president you have to draw a line. we swear to defend the constitution as well and were tought to think for ourselves , to obey all lawful orders and not be afraid to question unlawful ones. so the officers wont be standing alone should this article hold merit.
as far as the peace prize lmao , im super pissed at this one , even obama supporters should be pissed off at it . I can think of a dozen people that should have it off the top of my head and obama isnt one of them.
did he get them to tear down the wall? no
feed all the hungry? no
disarm nukes? no
peace to the middle east? no
In the first twelve days in office exactly what did he do that over shadowed everyone elses accomplishments and earn him the peace prize? he was the first black president , that was it , that was all . so question to his supporters (and you have the right to feel as you wish) tell me what he did that was so great that earned him the nobel peace prize?

This is what they have been doing in the public school system for years when they have an event like a ball game or a spelling bee,they give every one a prize even when they don't accomplish any thing or come in dead last.
.
This is so the rest of the world will drop to there knees to the almighty Obama funny how he went there to get the games to go to his home state, and yet he claims not to have a clue he was getting the award, even when they let you know in advance.
I have read and seen many stories were people who got the award were told in advance.
this was for the accomplishments he will do in the future what kind of crap is that.
.
The election was tainted from the start to the finish it was all planed by the republicans and the democrat, funny how the founders of Acorn came from the same state the Clinton's came from and how the elections they and Gore ran had so much controversy with the votes they are all a part of it.
They had a deal Bush Sr. wanted JR to be president, so he gave up his second term, so Clinton could win. then Bush Jr. would be next, then it would be Hillery's turn but she desired world travel.
she wanted to travel and as president she would not have the freedom she would as Secretary of State hence she remembered this young black lawyer who worked for Acorn that was now in the Illinois Senate. need I say more the rest is history and it was all put together by Bush Sr. Ted Kennedy, Barny Frank,Charlie Rangel, and a few other congressional mummies. and the one thing that they wanted to seal the deal was the health care plan Ted Kennedy the bootleggers son who knew from first hand how much money they could rip off like they did with medicaid and medicare.

we don't need to Impeach Obama we need to get rid of all the politician that have been there for more then 8 years and then put term limits on the congress and the supreme court, then hold them all accountable if they get caught in a scandal they go to jail just like any one else.
bring politics back to the local governments why should our tax dollars pay for some idiot who builds his house in a place that floods every few years knowing it will be destroyed again, like Katrina every house was destroyed 5 times since the 1900's and each time they rebuild it.
Just help the idiots by homes some were else and turn that area into a park or something.
Quit wasting our tax dollars,another place that could use reform the unions they have fallen down the hole to socialism and are a great part of what is wrong with government.

I - you - gerafd.afer...


ARRRGGG!!!!

I CAN"T BELIEVE ALL OF THE STUPID I AM SEEING!?!:!@!#

Ok... calm down... I'm cool.

Now then, let's begin - I don't have anything better to do anyway.



This entire article sounds like a load of crap - I have found that any article that uses the terms "Marx" "hate-America" and Obama's middle name, they are usually written with a certain point of view.

While I agree that a president should be impeached if he is found in violation of the constitutional law, I just don't see Obama doing that. I am going to go through this article, line by line, and see what I can find.

* Lied to the American people when he said people could keep private insurance, knowing full well that his legislation would inevitably drive private insurers out of business.
~this is just a flat out lie. Have you even read the health-care bill?

* Vindictively fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin, who investigated Kevin Johnson, a buddy of the president, for misuse of funds from an AmeriCorps grant.
~This is true, but I fail to see how this is a crime. A touch suspicious, but you can't convict someone with suspicions.

* Supervised the effective takeover by government of banks, the largest insurance company (AIG), and General Motors (GM) and Chrysler... the bulk of the U.S. auto industry, thus depriving bondholders, shareholders, and others of their property.
~Also saving the economy and preventing the recession from being a million times worse - but I will concede, it is unconstitutional.

* Pursued cap-and-trade legislation. It would in a manner of speaking tax the very air people exhale and give the government unprecedented control over the economy and American businesses.
~Flat out lie

* Added a trillion dollars to the national debt in just a handful of weeks.
~And saved us from a depression

* Appointed "Czars" to oversee everything from the closing of Guantanamo to the nation's food.
~Every president in modern times has had Czars

* And finally, Obama has consistently refused to approve the release of his actual birth certificate, college transcripts and his medical records.
~Flat out lies again. Actually, he did provide a birth certificate - on live TV. He also posted a copy of it on the internet.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/bi ... ficate.asp

Now, please, stop posting your anti-Obama hate on this website. I am getting sick of defending him... then again, it's fun to watch the crazies come crawling out of the wood work every time you post... you know what, just keep doing what you are doing.



The citizens have never elected a president in America, ever. The electoral collage does that, in case you don't remember.

The framers of our Constitution did that because they didn't like the idea of mob-rule, because they wanted a Republic, not a democracy. In a democracy, it is a vote between a pack of wolves and a lamb over what is for dinner.



First of all, the UN? Lol, those chumps have no power - when is the last time the accomplished anything important? Oh right, never.

Second, just because there are "allot of people" that believe in something, doesn't make it true. "Allot of people" believe that men came from monkeys while others believe that magical men in the clouds made a man from clay and a woman from his rib. Humans tend to believe rather silly things - so it doesn't really matter if "allot of people" believe in anything.



Sarah Palin? SARAH PALIN!?

She is the LEAST qualified person to ever be that close to the presidency - she was a governor for, what, a year? Oh, and then she quit because of ethics complaints that kept getting filed. Oh, and need I remind you she is a complete moron?

Then again, she can see Russia from her house...



I actually agree with you; America just wasn't ready for a black President.

As for the jobs aspect - well, think about it. He has allot to do at once (a war in the middle-east, recession, North Korea, national debt, health care, Guantanamo) and is making progress. The Senate has started debate, the stock market is on the rise, job loses are slowing, NYC trials for the 9/11 suspects are starting - he just has allot on his plate. I think for as unready he was for this job, he is doing OK.



Ok, that first video is... odd. I would have never guessed - but that only proves that those who are in power tend to stay in power. The rich get richer, and the powerful grow in power. It really isn't that shocking, just... odd.

The second one is... kind of obvious. I really wouldn't call it a corporation... more of a bureaucracy, but yeah, I see where that one was coming from.

The third one... well its in the same light as the first one. Nothing in it that really shocks me, it's just sort of odd. Also, that whole "required to register biological property" part? Yeah, the FBI has been trying to do that for years, but even if they could, the supreme court would rule it unconstitutional and it would be repealed. After that, the law would be struck down - at least, it should... Anyway, do you have any sources for that one? I actually have a hard time believing that they were talking about "biological property" in the early 1900s.





Please, take a break from being crazy and listen to yourself for a second. A military coup? This is not a third world country, this is the USA - but ignoring the... slight fear it puts in me to think that there are people who are this scared of Obama, let me address the article.

#1 - I agree on that part

#2 - They do realize that we have done this before, right? Remember Amtrak?

#3 - Ok... I don't see why this should matter though, America kinda sucks right now anyway. Torture, seriously?

#4 - ..and they also can see, if they look, that their economies are also reliant on ours. It is this whole "interconnected" economy that has their heads spinning, right?

#5 - Wait... what? Are they talking about Guantanamo - if they want to drown brown people, they can do it on their own time - I don't want my tax dollars paying for it.

#6 - We have the largest military budget in the world - our military budget is larger than the combined budget of the rest of the world's nations. They can shut their mouths right now about how our strength is "sagging."

#7 - How is this Obama's fault?

#8 - Military... honor? Whatever, so the government sanctioned murderers aren't getting the respect they think they deserve. That may be the hippie in me talking, but I just don't see why this is a reason to overthrow the government.

Ok, now it asks me what they should do. Well, they should give the president sound advice on how they think he should proceed. How on Earth would a coup help in any way? If anything, our enemies would see our unstable government and use it as an opening to attack us. Leave it to such a biased publication to give us only two options - ignore the crazy liberal or overthrow the government.

There is no Obama problem - he is as capable as Bush ever was. Granted, I do think that McCain would have been better on the war front, but Obama has yet to do anything stupid. He has been listening to the generals, and he has been making rational decisions so far.



Shut. Your. Mouth. This is what the Nobel Committee Chairman, Thorbjørn Jagland said:

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. We are not awarding the prize for what may happen in the future, but for what he has done in the previous year. We would hope this will enhance what he is trying to do."

On top of that, how about you just sit back and feel proud to be American for a second? Our President won the Nobel Peace Prize - this is a good day for America. The very idea that the prize is undeserved is an insult to both the spirit of the Nobel Piece Prize and an insult to America.

You crazy right-wingers talk about liberals being un-american, but then you cheer when we lose the Olympic bid and you boo when our President wins the Nobel. I don't even care what you have to say anymore... but I will read on.



Ok... you just made all of that up, didn't you? Also, Teddy was a good man, don't taint his name with your slime.



You need to understand something. The people in New Orleans - allot of them had no where else to go. They had no money, and their house was worth close to nothing (they live in a bad retail area) so they CAN'T leave. They aren't idiots, and I hate you for even suggesting that they are.

I went down there last summer to help clean up - that's right, they are still cleaning up - and I learned allot about their culture. I asked a guy down there what he would do if everyone in New Orleans got moved away, this is what he said:

"Mama lives in New Orleans, Grandpa lives in New Orleans, all the cousins live in New Orleans, and the family has been in New Orleans for generations - ain't no governmn't gonna take me away from my home. I grew up in New Orleans, and damnit I wana die in New Orleans."

------------------------------------

When I started this post, it was 11:30 - it is now 2:30 (that's AM folks), and I am wrapping this bad boy up.

In summation - you people scare the crap out of me.

P.S. Please, everyone, run a spell check before putting your crap on the internet - it is embarrassing to see how badly our public education system has failed.

This shows how stupid some people are, all the money the crying liberals had the government spend just to save the democrat voting block that is in that district .
all the homes were destroyed many times since the 1900's as stated, at any one of these times the people who lived there were given money and temporary relocation.

It was the ignorant people who are a pimple on the ass of progress who let the liberal and organization like Acorn move them back into an area of low life's who prey on the weak.
it is the street gangs that ran and still run the area My son in laws brother came up from there to stay with family After Katrina he said it was an act of God same as Sodom, the only difference is like lot he is not looking back.

you should reread your statement these are all the reasons to take the hand up they were given and get out only an idiot would have gone back.
and pretty much the rest of your argument was crap too, you seem to be one of those people who went to a liberal meeting and checked your brain at the door were they washed it and gave it back when you left.

emphasis on the truth
I was going to go line by line but I don't have the time to waste on some one so far gone, here is a link that points out most liberal lies.go there with an open mind and try to prove them wrong, the more you try the more the truth will shine and there may still be hope for you .

http://www.boycottliberalism.com/Toptenlies.htm



the prize is a joke and they proved how big a joke it is first Al Gore and then Obama
Hacked Emails Have just shown how big a joke it was to give it to Gore For faulty made up one sided science.
the prize has no credibility any more it has become tainted like all once great non profits that become greedy and lose their way.
the real joke is liberals

Ok, since I have more time to burn, I guess I will take a look at this website.

Quote:

1. Count Every Vote- This was the mantra of the Al Gore campaign after the 2000 presidential election, when they were hand counting votes in 3 highly Democratic counties, while at the same time trying to disqualify military votes. In effect they were trying to change the rules of the election after the election had taken place, which violated federal election law. A liberal Florida Supreme Court ruled in the favor of the Gore Campaign until the U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to it. To this very day, liberals actually believe George Bush stole the election.

Ok, what does this prove, exactly? I remember republican senator Coleman doing the exact same thing during his election - except he was only counting republican counties and ignoring the more liberal ones.

This is a classic last resort many politicians resort to when they are losing - they try to make it look like they are being bullied and ignored - it helps them get elected the next time they run. Also, don't most people agree that any time the president wins without popular vote, they stole the election?

Quote:

2. There is a vast right wing conspiracy- There is a far right wing in the Republican Party, but it is a small fringe element. However, there is a far left wing in this country and it is a large part of the main stream of the Democratic party. Remember when Hillary Clinton went on the Today Show and responded to the allegation of an affair between her husband (President Clinton) and an intern (Monica Lewinsky) as untrue and blamed it on a Right Wing Conspiracy? Over the past ten years Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Mario Cuomo, Richard Gephardt and Jesse Jackson have been the loudest and most influential voices in the Democratic party. Are any of these people Moderates? Also please note, there is a liberal bias in the media. You might make the argument that there is a vast left wing conspiracy.

Once again, what does this prove? The republicans talk about the left wing conspiracy all the time, blaming poor polling and unfavorable news on the "liberal media" but seem to forget that the media simply reflects the opinions of its demographic - news papers tend to be more conservative than internet articles. This is because more liberals use the internet while more conservatives read news papers.

The only "conspiracy" is that media vendors try to make the most money for their articles. Also, lets not forget how Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Lindsey Graham ... I could go on all day. The point is, the loudest people on both sides do not represent the whole of both sides.

There is no conspiracy on either side - all there is, is money.

Quote:

3. This is a tax break for the rich- This is class warfare at it's finest. If a person earning $40,000 a year gets a 10% tax reduction and a person earning $1,000,000 per year gets a 1% tax reduction- the person earning $1,000,000 will get a much greater tax break. Tom Daschle and Richard Gephardt once stood next to a car in front of the Capital Building holding up a muffler. They made a statement that a proposed George Bush tax cut would allow the rich to buy a new car and the average American to buy a muffler. This is a strategy Democrats use on every Republican proposed tax cut. They stop everyone from getting a reduction in their taxes by using class warfare. Please note, tax reductions are not an entitlement program.

Look at this table and tell me that there was no tax break for the rich. I got this data from -
from http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_bracke ... ted_States

Quote:

4. There is no liberal bias in the media- For close to 50 years the news in America was controlled by ABC, NBC and CBS. In the last 20 years CNN came on to the scene. This is pretty much comparable to the BBC in Europe and AL Jazzera in the Arab world today. It was in the last 6 years when Fox News and other cable news networks were born to give a more balanced approach to news analysis. However, if you look at the major networks today, they are still run by the left. Tim Russert, the President of NBC News, at one time worked for Mario Cuomo. The top players at ABC News are Peter Jennings, George Stephanopolous, Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts- hardly conservatives. Lets not forget the statement the President of ABC News made after September 11th. CBS News has Dan Rather and Bob Schieffer- more non-conservatives. All you have to say about CNN is that it was created by Ted Turner. In print media there is the Los Angeles Times in California, The New York Times in New York and The Atlanta Journal Constitution in Georgia. These have been the major newspapers in our most populous cities for many years and their reporting has a liberal bias.

I already sort of addressed this. You see, TV is based on ratings - whatever goes on TV is on TV because it will get watched. The "liberal media" only exists because they have a "liberal audience" - so don't blame CNN for being liberal, blame the Nielsen families for being liberal.

Also, notice how they don't list news papers as a form of media.

Quote:

5. Republicans want to cut school lunch programs- This was the attack leveled by Democrats against the Republicans during a budget battle in 1995. Democrats proposed a double digit increase in funding for school lunch programs, while Republican proposed a more modest increase. To put this in perspective, you must ask this question. How many people get a double digit increase in their pay each year? Democrats called the Republican proposal a cut and charged they wanted to starve children, because the proposal was less than what Democrats proposed. Please note, the Republican proposal called for an increase in funding. The media printed the story, never challenging it, even though it was not true. This became famous for when does an increase become a cut- only in Washington DC.

Have we already forgotten "ketchup is a vegetable" Reagan? He tried to convince America that ketchup was a vegetable so he could replace expensive canned vegetables on the school lunch menu with ketchup sandwiches. If that doesn't scream "cut school lunch programs" I don't know what does.

Quote:

6. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky- We all know the truth here. There is nothing to be added- except that it was not a vast right wing conspiracy.

"I did not have sexual relations with that man in Denver." Isn't it funny how republicans forget about their own scandals, but are so quick to remember Clinton's?

At least Clinton isn't a homosexual.

Quote:

7. Republicans are mean spirited and want to throw the poor out on the street- This was a charge leveled by Democrats against Republicans when they proposed time limits for receiving welfare. Polls show that the majority of Americans believe in time restrictions for welfare recipients. Republicans know that to escape poverty it takes education, hard work and discipline. The greatness of this country rests in its freedom and that within one generation a person can rise from poverty to obtain great wealth. Allowing endless dependency on an entitlement program has trapped many in poverty. Why would Democrats want to keep anyone dependent on an entitlement program like welfare? How many people on welfare vote Republican?

Welfare does need reform, I agree with this one. However, does he realize that 12 out of the top 25 states that have the largest amount of people on welfare voted for John McCain?

Here is the welfare data
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_we ... recipients

and map for comparison
http://politicalmaps.org/wp-content/upl ... 252007.jpg

Quote:

8. I support the military- It has been well documented that when it comes to voting for military funding- liberals would much rather spend money on social programs. First you must understand their rational. Approximately 10% of the population in the United States is poor, which is about 30 million Americans. There are approximately one million Americans serving in the military. If only 1 in 5 of the poor vote, that equals about six million votes as compared to one million votes from the military. There are two relevant questions here. What percent of the poor vote Republican? How close was the 2000 Presidential Election? This leads directly to the answer of why would liberals rather appropriate money to social programs than to the defense of our country. Please note, the defense of our country is a primary, if not the primary responsibility of our government. If we don't protect the country, we may not have a country or our freedom.

Look at this chart


-and tell me that we need more money into our military programs.

Quote:

9. Privatizing social security is risky. Contribute $300 a month to Social Security and you may get $1,800 a month when you retire. Sound like a good deal? There was a story about Dick Gephardt's mother living on Social Security and having numerous checks she had written returned for insufficient funds. Gephardt politicized the event by stating that this was an example of why Social Security should not be privatized, because if it were not for Social Security his mother would have been much worse off. Please note that the S & P 500 has returned more than 10% over it's lifetime. Therefore- if you invested $300 a month in an S & P 500 mutual fund for 40 years at the end of that time (enter these numbers into any compound interest calculator) you would have approximately 2 million dollars (Please note that these are conservative numbers). This means you could withdraw almost $200,000 or 10 percent a year and never exhaust your money. Break that down and it is $20, 000 a month. Social Security does not sound so good any longer. Please be advised that the key to obtaining wealth is systematically investing for the long term. There is no quick sure fire scheme to getting rich. If Gephardt's mother had been investing in mutual funds her entire life instead of Social Security- she would have been much better off at the present. Also, please be advised that privatizing Social Security helps the poor the more than anyone. The rich invest money in 401K plans. The poor, the clerk at a convenience store or a customer service representative doesn't have excess funds to invest and so their only investment vehicle is Security Security, which in reality is just a bond fund.

Remember that recession thingy we are in right now? Well, people who invested their retirement money into the stock market have seen decades of money just disappear. Social Security acted as a sort of safety net for them.

However, I agree that Social Security needs to be reformed - with the baby boomers reaching retirement, we need to start looking for alternatives to this program. However, the lower class and middle class need this program or a program like it; the poor should not be punished for being unable to make enough money to retire.

Social Security protects our senior citizens from a variety of risks and ensures that they have a basic floor of income in old age and enables many people who struggle all their lives for money to look forward to a decent standard of living and dignity when they finally retire.

It is a crime to think about taking that away from them.

Quote:

10. Trickle down economics does not work- Money in the hands of people stimulates the economy, whether they are rich or poor. The problem- how to you put money in the hands of the poor? Transfer of more wealth from the rich to the poor each year? This would only create greater dependency on entitlements and give lessen the incentive to achieve. Give the poor greater tax cuts? You can only cut the taxes for the poor by so much, because they don't pay much in taxes. When Tom Daschle said that the result of a proposed Bush tax cut would mean that a rich person would be able to buy a new car, without realizing it, he proved the theory of Trickle Down Economics. The person selling that car would generate income that he would otherwise not have had. Please note that if that person sells enough cars, he will gain wealth. If tax rates in this county were at 75% what would happen to the economy? The answer is that no one would have money to spend on anything except housing and food. The result would be that businesses everywhere would fail, because no one would have money to buy clothes, electronics, entertainment, repairs for their homes or cars, go on vacation..... If they did buy such things, they would have to go in to debt to do so. How would this help the working class or the poor? Please note the average taxpayer, pays roughly 50% of their income in taxes. After the attack on September 11th, Hillary Clinton said, "come to New York and spend money." She knew if people stopped coming to New York and spending money, businesses would fail and the economy in New York would suffer a great downturn, which would hurt the average working family. This is interesting considering that liberals are for tax hikes and against tax cuts. The only thing that helps the working class is a strong economy. It gives the average worker more freedom and more bargaining power. When the financial sector was booming from 1987 through 1989, workers were getting bonuses, overtime and stock options. When the financial sector suffered a downturn in 1990, it trickled down. There were no more bonuses, overtime, stock options and their were layoffs.

Trickle down economics are a joke. The rich are already rich - they don't need more money to spend.

The working class are the consumer class, not the wealthy. The wealthy make up less that 6% of the economy - how do you expect so few people to support the rest? I agree that tax cuts are not the answer, but trickle down economics are just rewards for companies who lobby for it.

Instead of giving money to the rich to help them get richer, how about we do something to improve the quality of living for all citizens?



You treat me like I have some disease - like I am a hopeless fool who can't understand the world I live in. Both liberalism and conservatism are stupid; they allow someone to form an opinion without having to think on their own - like a religion.

I don't have time to refute the other 23 points this site makes, so I will end on this. Instead of mindlessly following whatever the conservative movement thinks (I can't tell anymore - it has gotten to crazy), how about you educate yourself on both sides of the argument and form an opinion with your own brain. Also, let us not forget who the real hate-america crowd is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifpnK6Uwyqw

The left can't win an election to save their life, that is why they wait till they are elected to show their true colors.
They only win with word games but people are catching on to them.
If they did not abuse the poor and minority voters they would not even have a voting block, they prey on the ignorant and the brainwash who are living on the public dole.
they use Organization like Acorn to do their dirty work, to them people are expendable place the blame and move on with the Agenda.
Obama has showed this time and time again.
He said judge me by the people around me and every time their true colors comes out they fall on their sword.
This group of commie liberals have taken all the worst of WWII and forged it into a Agenda they merged the Japaneses kamikaze with the Nazi storm troopers and put heir Obama at the helm.

Impeaching Obama will be hard until the 2010 elections. If the Republicans or Independents capture the House and the Senate back, then Impeachment will be possible.

we need to Impeach congress, and elect all new people for any one who has been there for more then two terms.
But that could be too late to save our grand children from a life of slavery to the taxman.

You do realize that the Bush administration awarded more than $40 million to national affiliates of ACORN?

Also, ACORN is not actually that heavily tied to the Democrats, but to the Working Families Party, a third party that split away from the Democrats because they thought the Democrats were too conservative. It was this party connection that kept ACORN in the seat of power, and made it difficult to cut away from them.

However, I will ask you something.

What, exactly, did ACORN do? Can you actually answer that question yourself without looking it up or linking to it?

I am actually curious as to what you people think they did - after all, if they are evil enough to round people up and kill them in gas chambers, scattering the ashes of their slain across the country - surely they must have done something so unspeakable that you wouldn't need to look it up.

Right?

P.S. By the way, Hitler was conservative

ACORN is very closely tied in with SEIU. All anyone has to do is look at Obama's ties with SEIU to see his ties with ACORN. Glenn Beck has done several shows on both of these groups and how intertwined they are. As for ACORN itself, there is a lengthy list of no-no's.

From voter registration fraud, to paying for votes leading to indictment in at least 14 states many by Democrat Attorneys General, to the videos which led to their Congressional de-funding.

ACORN is a group bent on socialism and Marxism. Case closed. There is more than enough video and anecdotal evidence to support these claims. Please don't take this argument any further because you cannot win and are simply demonstrating your ignorance to the issue. You will make me and a lot of others waste a lot of time refuting you with evidence that has already been made clear.

The gang at ACORN are thieves. It's just that simple. They operate under their own rules and play their own game and they and any/all organizations like them whether on the right or the left should be weeded out, exposed and shut down!

When agents of your organization offer freely and openly to support child prostitution, tax fraud, tax evasion, and mortgage fraud just to name a few things then clearly there is something wrong with your people! When you then come out and defend your people then there is something clearly wrong with your organization!