See details of the results of the 1912 election. In some states, the splintered *Republicans* who had strayed from their stated principles and political base came in at fourth place, behind Eugene Debs' Socialists.
Posted on 04/02/2006 6:47:06 AM PDT by kellynla
LOL....Agree....Such a snow job shouldn't create so much heat for our nations security.......too many sell outs on this issue of criminal activity swept under the rug of racism and re-election .
Stay safe Ya'll !
Don't forget that the radio host gets a nice warm sounding $1,500 microphone.
You get the el cheapo Ma Bell mouthpiece. ;-)
Me too. Four years of it during my late teens and early twenties was enough for me to learn that lesson for life.
And as a newspaperman who went to journalism school on the GI bill after that first season in hell, one of three veterans in a J-school class of 122, I also recall the very deserved contempt that Baltimore journalist and editor H.L. Menckin had for those of the newspaper world who were so delighted to hear their voices spread to the masses over radio, the other mass communications medium of his day: Crooners, he called 'em. And too, Clare Boothe Luce reminded us that the Democrats are the crooners of catastrophe.
See details of the results of the 1912 election. In some states, the splintered *Republicans* who had strayed from their stated principles and political base came in at fourth place, behind Eugene Debs' Socialists.
The first American *Civil War* [actually a war of secession and indeperndence for several states] is not the most likely model for what's coming. The 5-month-long Finnish Civil War of 1918 offers several much more likely comparative scenarios, aside from its brevity. And at that, about 30,000 Finns perished, less than a quarter of them on the battlefield, [11K battlefield deaths, per recent study] the rest in summary executions and in detention camps. These deaths amounted to about 1 percent of the total population of Finland.
You are invited to figure the cost of a domestic campaign costing the lives of one to three per cent of the American population, 281,421,906 per the April 2000 U.S. Census figures...plus fifteen or twenty million Mexicans and OTMs.
To paraphrase the Finns: So many Mexicans! Where WILL we bury them all....
*more here*. and *here*.
I would say potentially even more. It is no secret that people like Warren Beatty, Katie Couric, Madelaine Albright, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were all adamantly against George Bush's reelection. But despite their all powerful CFR connections, they weren't able to overcome the influence of Freepers like Buckhead, TankerKC and Interesting Times (who had a whole lot to do with the Swift Vet ads). Their impact helped put Bush back in office, which has had more impact on subsequent US policy than almost all the CFR members combined.
"FR's influence is a drop in the bucket as compared to CFR members WHO ARE GENERALS, ACTIVE POLITICIANS, AND FORMER PRESIDENTS. They influence policy."
Of course they do. But generals, active politicians and former presidents influence policy whether they are members of CFR or not. Whether Bill Clinton is a member of CFR is irrelevent toward his ability to influence US policy. And what you refuse to acknowledge is that CFR does not create policy. It just doesn't. That is an undeniable fact.
"IOW, they ARE an "elitist" organization. And Katie Couric has WHAT qualification again? "Talking Head"? OR PhD in "International Relations"?"
No, they are an organization comprised of "policymakers, journalists, students, and interested citizens." Some of whom you happen to have heard of, but most of whom you haven't. And how many times are we going to have to reconfirm that Katie Couric meets the criteria for membership?
"Oh -- the military members? Make it simple for us simpletons. Since you know so many CFRers, why not just reveal to us WHY they've joined CFR? Have they told you? Please cite some examples if you they have."
It is simple. Most of the reasons are the same as why anybody joins any organization. It puts them in contact with people who share their interest in a particular topic. In this case, foreign relations. The guy I mentioned earlier, (Doug Murray) retired as the head of the Political Science department at the Air Force Academy. Political Science is his passion. He was offered an invitation to join, and accepted. Pretty complicated isn't it?
"The non-endorsement of "any policy" would indeed be the "official" policy when all it takes is whispering policy "suggestions" in some Senator's ear."
Why do you think someone like William F. Buckley would need to belong to CFR in order to whisper in some Senator's ear? There is no logic to almost any of your arguments. You just kind of throw out accusations without offering any support or substance.
"Since this thread began as an immigration thread, why in your opinion do you think the borders haven't been sealed?"
Because it is impossible. No border has ever been sealed. Ever. That is a factual reality that some people just can't absorb.
Your "point" is a lie. The CFR made no such recommendation. A member of CFR did, but that does not imply CFR endorsement BECAUSE THE CFR DOES NOT ENDORSE POLICY. It allows its widely diverse membership to speak their own opinions like any truly free and nonpartisan organization does. If you can't lie without making a point than your argument has zero merit.
And since you wouldn't provide a link to your source, I had to go find it myself. Here it is.... Preserving Open Borders in the Post-September 11 World And here is the context from which you excerpted your portion of one sentence...
"For validating the legal identity and purpose of international travelers, off-the-shelf technologies could be readily embraced to move away from easily forgeable paper-based documents such as traditional visas or passports. In their stead, countries should be embracing universal biometric travel identification cards that include electronic scanning of fingerprints, eye retina or iris information. These ATM-style cards would be issued by consulates and passport offices and presented at the originating and connecting points of an individual’s international travel itinerary."
So tell me again what is illegal about that? Better yet, tell me why you think finding a better solution to forgeable paper passports and visas is a bad idea. And for the life of me, I can't figure out how that idea gives countries like China a "little slice of sovereign territory in Kansas".
I would gladly settle for one as relatively non-porous as that between North and South Korea. There are damned few picnickers, cigarette smugglers or economic refugees crossing the minefields and impact areas thereabouts.
Actually, North Korean special forces infiltrate South Korea on a very regular basis. And I won't even touch whether or not the South Koreans return the favor. And the Korean border is only 154 miles long. It is one of the most heavily guarded and patrolled borders in world history. And remains unsealed. If we want to get anything even close to what they have along our 1700 mile southern border, you better be ready to sell the house, because everything you own will be converted to Federal tax money. And the border still won't be sealed.
But to run away from an open invitation and spam FreeRepublic with a bunch of bogus claims is cowardice. You lose. You look like an idiot. And I have no idea why someone with your background is afraid to engage without first demanding your "enemy" only fight according to your rules.
President Bush is a transnationalist. So are the majority of Republicans. America has been on this road for a long time--at least starting since WW2.
I do not hold much hope of reversing course. The future--50 to 100 years from now--looks dark for the concept of nationalism and America as a traditional state.
For any politician to get anywhere, it seems he must bow down and pay homage to the shrine of transnationalism. We have already hooked up our economy on the gravy train. It would take a massive revolution at this point to get America off the road that leads to the NWO.
But it is okay for Tony to set the rules instead of engaging in a debate here on FreeRepublic?
You look like an idiot. And I have no idea...
Well, someone looks like an idiot. I'm just not picking Travis McGee for that role.
I read that only 25% of the population revolted against the crown and created the United States.
Comemierde, cabron. Mamamela.
It was probably fewer during the Valley Forge days, wouldn't you say? I think of Gideon's 300, or Leonidas at the gates of Thermopylae.
Tony isn't running around spamming FR threads with bogus claims. He hasn't been suspended for doing same. He's following the rules that already exist. Not trying to rewrite someone else's rules to suit his own needs and compensate for his own limitations.
But he did come to this forum requesting Travis to debate elsewhere, did he not? What is wrong with continuing here on Free Republic?
Ummm, Thackney, I believe we were discussing who looks like an idiot....
Travis, at least that is more original than "Bite me".
Read Travis' last post. That is his idea of Free Republic debate.
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.