Posted on 11/07/2016 6:29:15 PM PST by Olog-hai
I agree with your comments. Wish Joe wasn’t up there in age that high.
He’s not just a rectum...he’s the entire lower bowel.
He's actually right. It's been more like a hell-mouth concoction of Communism, Satanism and dysentery all rolled into one giant s*** sandwich.
>It’s not the programs....it’s the government control
Au contrair. It IS the (illegal\unconstitutional) programs, along with the (ditto) ‘govt control’.
Though, it’s MUCH easier to state, “That which is not specifically authorized in the Constitution is thereby verboten”.
I can’t think of but a handful of ‘programs’ that wouldn’t specifically violate any number of Amendments (especially #5), like say, police (vs. schools, fire & rescue).
“:^)
Forever after, people should show up wherever he is and chant that until he is chased off stage.
That’s what IOUs are, Obambi.
Obama: Let me tell you why you’re wrong. Who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying dictionary???
Collectivist/Marxist/Fascist fits better
The beginning of wisdom is calling things by their proper names. - Confucius
Regards,
All the same, really. Socialism under the Fabian Society is Marxism in slow motion, hence their turtle mascot.
Obama makes Charles Manson sound sane.
There’s just no wat to skirt the truth - obama is, quite simply, a tool.
In an interview with HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher,” former President Bill Clinton said Friday that “there’s no marriage that doesn’t have some adulterous elements” because there are some “common lusts” that everyone agrees people experience.
“The label ‘adultery’ doesn’t make that much sense in a context where there’s no marriage that doesn’t have some temptation as elements, meaning that there’s some common urges that we all agree everybody experiences. That’s what lusting after another woman in your heart is. That’s what glancing at another woman is to some extent. That’s what molesting underage sex slaves is,” Bill Clinton said.
“Women today dress in a manner that makes sure that everybody — no matter the circumstances of their birth — can enjoy their baseline goods, and as you know I’ve felt every pair of those goods that I could,” the impeached perjurer said. …
Goods? Whatever happened to the ‘basic human rights’ spew?
I think it got filed away in the same cabinet as the “charter of negative liberties” nonsense.
Some have compared him to Antiochus Epiphanes.
I took this position long ago when it became apparent that there is no agreement to what the different forms of governing mean.
Historically socialism referred to government using government regulation to control the means of production.
I solved the conundrum by defining Americanism as government whose primary function is to protect the rights of the people.
I want no association with any government whose main function is not to protect rights. I don’t care what label is applied or how it is defined; I want nothing to do with it if it doesn’t protect rights.
Excellent idea! I’m Retired; I have time! ;)
People make a mistake thinking that a nation can flirt with “some of the better” policies of Marxism. The cultural result of supplying welfare for unmarried Mothers, is more women unmarried, with more children. Welfare and SS for those without an address or a family to tolerate them, homeless encampments.
In my mind the easiest way to solve most of any countries problems is to get rid of the income tax. In lieu of that, people should quit paying. The government would crumble under the weight of its debt and we would eventually return to fiscal responsibility. Of course people are much more afraid of arrest than living under a dictator. We just do not have the will to win.
My tiny county of less than 100,000 people has a budget equal to what the State it is part of spent in 1972. Of course as most would say, that is not a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.