Hey, Sen. Edwards. What do you call 1000 lawyers at the bottom of the lake? ......
A good start!

But they missed you.

 hippiechick wrote: 
It is the D's and the LDSM who keep giving this crap about O's birth certificate the light of day.  They could ignore it like so many other things that they ignore so well, like the will of the people and this would fade away.  It is only kept in the highlight of things because it is used to discredit groups with legitimate concerns and points of view by associating the birthers to their complaints in an effort to discredit everyone on the opposing side.

 Argonaut wrote: 
"Tell me the truth, you aren't really out here for the "hunting", are you?"
  ~ The Bear ~

 hippiechick wrote: 

Well, politically, I believe we've heard the last of Sen. Edwards. Good riddance to him *and any like him*.

 musik_knut wrote: 
You're right. I put JE's name in on edit. He threw these people, who were completely devoted to him, under a garbage truck and went back and forth several times. As disgusting as they come.

 hippiechick wrote: 

Andrew Young of Sen. Edward's group? Almost anything said in a negative light about Sen. Edward's will pass the first smell test with me. What a deceiving worm. We are talking about the same Young? Or do I have names jumbled up?

 musik_knut wrote: 
Boy, ain't that the truth! I was listening to the Andrew Youngs this morning on Oprah. There is a man (John Edwards) who manipulated the truthfor his own gain.

 hippiechick wrote: 

In some ways, yes, in others, no. First, folks are entitled to believe what they will, no matter the underlying madness behind it *madness as most would see it*. Second, many elected officials are masters of lies. Many elected officials no longer know truth from lie...and that is part of the reason we're in such a mess.

 musik_knut wrote: 
Doesn't it concern you that so many elected officials, people who should be reasonable, believe this ridiculous lie?

 hippiechick wrote: 

Exactly. As I said, that nonsense will continue on and on and...of course to not be a citizen, Mr. Obama, while still taking in his first breaths, would have had to have those around him conspire to produce newspaper notices of his birth in Hawaii and...well, just a bunch of nutcases who are never going to stop with their silliness.

 musik_knut wrote: 
Well, apparently not.

 hippiechick wrote: 

That tired lament, a claim that was put to bed sometime back, will continue in the same looney manner 9/11 truthers continue their claims...

Arizona Goes 'Birther'? Nearly Half Of State Legislators Want To See Obama's Birth Certificate Before 2012 Run

 kurtster wrote: 

 owchlaw wrote: 
That's almost right.

 Argonaut wrote: 
Got yer undies in a bunch ?  If context matters (around here it rarely does anymore, but wtf), then you need to really do some backscrolling to understand the context of my question.  It was posed last year or several pages ago or something like that.  Merely asking someone why they found it offensive to hear Obama being called a Socialist.  I do not in any way advocate or support Socialism as a way of living in these United States.  The same for Facism.  Or any form of extremism for that matter.

From what I can see has happened, Bush set the table for Obama to belly up to and continue.  Bush initiated the TARP Fund which most importantly gave the Treasury brand new unlimited powers to intervene and interfer in the economy.  Bush also helped initiate the Patriot Act which gave the Federal Government a brand new set of powers to interfer and intervene in everday life here in the States and in citizens daily life in the name of Security.  Obama has basically nationalized the banking system, taken over the Auto Industry, and with his blessings, Rep. Frank gave Freddie and Fannie a blank check to oversee its ownership of half of the housing stock in this country.  In essence, the government owns half of the houses in America.  That is taking over businesses and private property in my book.  Seems to be taking over production, distribution and financing in this country.  That's most of your definition of Socialism.  And now he wants to nationalize Health Care.  Looks like a duck to me.

Want to label me ?  Call me a Constuctionist as in the Constitution.  That's how I see myself.  I have a narrow view of what the Constitution allows and provides for.  Settled law is that, yet I object to further weakening of the Constitution in the name of Security and Economic policies.  Want to engage me on those terms ?  Step right up and take your best swing, I can handle it.

 jadewahoo wrote: 
I beg to differ with you, Argonaut.  Socialism is an economic system whereby the means of production is publically owned and the ends are privately owned.  Communism is public ownership of both.  To suggest they are one in the same is incorrect.  Implementation of pure socialism, pure communism or pure capitalism is simply not possible.  All economic systems are hybrid to some degree.  Aspects of our traditional capitalistic system have always, by necessity, had socialistic features (police, fire, public utilities, etc.).  Likewise, the economic systems of China and the Soviet Union, often described as "communist" have had some capitalistic components.   You also confuse political systems (dictatorship and fascism) with economic theory.  Fascism doesn't always go hand in hand with socialism or communism.  Largely capitalistic systems can exist with fascim (see GW Bush administration 2000-2008).

 Coaxial wrote:
 
Um yeah. "If idiots are a dime a dozen, I wanna find the guy who's supplying the dimes."

 hippiechick wrote: 

Is there just a long line of these idiots waiting to step forward and be stamped MORON?

 Argonaut wrote:Argonaut

Fascist NeoCon worlwide...

As an avowed Fascist, you are certainly posting in the right forum thread.