The heresy of heresies was common sense.

StoptheMadness1 said:
I see what you are saying, CSM.

However, the CFR is a real group (who's president Richard Haass recently called for the abolishment of national sovereignty), the Bilderberg Group is a real, secretive and extremely powerful organization, the Bohemian Grove is a real place where elites from across the globe gather, Globalism is real and growing (an ideal by which many government leaders follow), Eisenhower gave us a stern warning about the Military Industrial Complex (which is now more powerful than ever) and leaders have been calling for a New World Order for quite some time, with one of the most recent calls being from Gary Hart soon after 9/11.

I think this is worthy of investigation, are these conspiracy theories or facts?


There is no question that some of these groups bear watching and that there are places where the rich and powerful gather. I also have no doubt that there are those who would advocate a one world government. However, I am not convinced they have the means to execute such a grandiose scheme.

As for the military industrial complex, while there is no doubt that the "complex" has definite economic impact, I can confidently say (having been part of that "complex all my adult life) that it is absolutely NOT what you and others imply.

I would not consider Gary Hart a "leader" and that last statement somewhat validates my point. Gary Hart was soundly rejected by the citizens of this country despite his position. The average American citizen is not stupid and they do a pretty good job of spotting the crackpots and labelling them as such. The exception appears to be college professors and other "intelligentia" who in turn pass on their perverted views on to their students. It is only once those student s get out into the real world that they slowly realize how crazy those professors were.
 
What y'all seem to forget is that Dubbyuh's taxcuts disproportionately benefit the wealthiest 1% of Americans, Dubbyuh's "base". As a result of Dubbyuh's tacuts, state taxes have been on the rise, as have fees charged at all levels of government. And let's not forget the public education system. Primary and secondary schools across the country are being forced to cut their programs to the bone, and the fees for extracurricular activities are, in many cases, out of reach of even comfortably middle-class families, never mind those in lower income brackets. As for public colleges, they are being forced to raise tuition rates to the point where a college education may once more be a priviledge available only to the wealthy.

Condi went to see a Broadway play...Chertoff was attending a bird flu conference...Brownie was bitching about his shirts...Cheney was nowhere to be found...Dubbyuh was busy playing air guitar. As for the buses, it's kind of hard to roll them out when there aren't any bus drivers. 'Nuff said about Hurricane Katrina.
 
Bullypulpit said:
What y'all seem to forget is that Dubbyuh's taxcuts disproportionately benefit the wealthiest 1% of Americans, Dubbyuh's "base".

That's illogical, Bully. Consider instead the glorious possibility that Bush's "base" are conservatives, who - as such - do not consider the wealthiest 1% of Americans inherently evil.

Bullypulpit said:
As a result of Dubbyuh's tacuts, state taxes have been on the rise, as have fees charged at all levels of government.

:link:

Bullypulpit said:
And let's not forget the public education system. Primary and secondary schools across the country are being forced to cut their programs to the bone, and the fees for extracurricular activities are, in many cases, out of reach of even comfortably middle-class families, never mind those in lower income brackets.

:link:

Bullypulpit said:
As for public colleges, they are being forced to raise tuition rates to the point where a college education may once more be a priviledge available only to the wealthy.

:link:

Bullypulpit said:
Condi went to see a Broadway play...Chertoff was attending a bird flu conference...Brownie was bitching about his shirts...Cheney was nowhere to be found...Dubbyuh was busy playing air guitar. As for the buses, it's kind of hard to roll them out when there aren't any bus drivers. 'Nuff said about Hurricane Katrina.

The federal government is not the first line of defense in the event of a natural disaster - the state government is. This is such a fundamental tenet of our way of life that the federal government is actually forbidden to act UNLESS AND UNTIL ASKED TO DO SO. It is a well-documented fact that the Louisiana Democrat political machine stalled in requesting federal aid because it was concerned about its political image.

Moreover, the extent of the suffering in New Orleans stands as nothing more than a searing indictment of thirty years of the entitlement mentality - one of the cornerstones of liberalism. And - speaking of cornerstones - the entire apparatus of Democrat lunacy should always be remembered for the fact that they sought to politicize this tragedy from the first moment - instinctively; REFLEXIVELY. The truth is not in them.

'Nuff said about Hurricane Katrina.
 
Madacapa said:
This reply will be brief, because I am in a hurry. You sound like someone who believes in God, so I would have to assume that He (or She) is not on the side of the GOP. In my opinion, their leadership is out of touch with the will of the people, and they are completely corrupt.

Whether you like it or not, the Democrats represent what the MAJORITY of Americans believes: pro choice, pro death penalty, pro civil unions for gays, anti-Iraq War, etc. The Republicans represent that the MINORITY of Americans believe. Yes, in some areas they are the clear majority, but overall they are the MINORITY.

More later... :rock:

You know I can't help but conclude you are living in a fantasy world.

It doesn't matter if God is on our side, what matters is that we are on His.

a majority of Americans do not support abortion. If they did then Democrats wouldnt be so afraid of Roe v. Wade being overturned. They know that if they do people will vote against abortion. Even if a majority of Americans were in favor of it at one time, that time has long since past. Ironically because those in favor of abortion use it. When you kill your offspring it seriously shrinks replacement population for your political views.

Democrats aren't pro death Penalty so I don't see why you seem to think they are in tune with how americans feel.

A majority of Americans are not for any sort of gay unions getting official sanctions. Heck, even a majority of Californians aren't in favor of it. I cant believe you can even imagine that a majority of Americans are in favor of it when we have had direct votes by atleast half the states already all striking it down! Hence, the only logical conclusion is you are not in touch with reality.

Most Americans arent against the Iraq war. Most Americans understand why it was necessary. The Presidential Election of 2004 made that pretty darn clear. And you are going to see Democrats losing again in 2006 unless something dramatic changes.

Face it, you are clearly not coming to grips with what Americans want.
 
Madacapa said:
I am going to be laughing all the way to the bank, as they say, in 2006 and 2008. That map is going to change. Its going to be mostly blue. The Democrats will retake the Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008. That is a fact and you Red's cannot change that. Its time for a change...

:dance:

Whether its time for change isn't the point.

The point is what kind of change is it time for?

Do we want to go back to the liberal neo-communist policies that brough us 911, the Clinton recession, and a decade of living in illusion.

Or do we want to go forward to a more secure border, a stronger fight against terror, and a return to more modest government.

President Bush has been alright in a transition to a new world, now we need someone who can build on the good things the President has done and do eve more.
 
Bullypulpit said:
What y'all seem to forget is that Dubbyuh's taxcuts disproportionately benefit the wealthiest 1% of Americans, Dubbyuh's "base". As a result of Dubbyuh's tacuts, state taxes have been on the rise, as have fees charged at all levels of government. And let's not forget the public education system. Primary and secondary schools across the country are being forced to cut their programs to the bone, and the fees for extracurricular activities are, in many cases, out of reach of even comfortably middle-class families, never mind those in lower income brackets. As for public colleges, they are being forced to raise tuition rates to the point where a college education may once more be a priviledge available only to the wealthy.

Condi went to see a Broadway play...Chertoff was attending a bird flu conference...Brownie was bitching about his shirts...Cheney was nowhere to be found...Dubbyuh was busy playing air guitar. As for the buses, it's kind of hard to roll them out when there aren't any bus drivers. 'Nuff said about Hurricane Katrina.

Why is it people always whine about governing giving their money back?

I mean the tax cuts have given us a super strong economy. The economy is at full employment and growing. Thanks to the fact that people have had more money in their pockets. So why is this bad?

Also, federal and state governments have separate budgets. tax cuts in the federal government in no way cause state governments to raise taxes. Electing Democrats causes state governments to raise taxes. For example: New Jersey.
 
Dr Grump said:

Come on, man - ask me a tough one, will you? Found this within thirty seconds; it is a matter of public record.

Hurricane Katrina and Political Correctness

"Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans," the Washington Post reported. No, said the Governor, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law. Governor Blanco also failed to use more than a hundred school buses parked near the Superdome to transport stranded citizens who didn't have the means to obey earlier evacuation orders. And the buses were rendered useless by rising flood waters after the levees broke. Governor Blanco even dawdled over invoking a multi-state mutual aid compact for assistance until the day after the levees broke.

Dick Morris rightly blames not only Senator Mary "I'll punch the President" Landrieu, but also former Senator John Breaux, for leaving New Orleans so vunerable to a category 4 hurricane like Katrina: "Where was Sen. Mary Landrieu demanding aid? If this swing-state senator, whose father was a mayor of New Orleans, had made clear to her party's leadership and to the White House that her legislative course would be determined by their response to this critical need for a new levee, she could have exerted the pull needed to get the project under way. "Likewise, ex-Sen. John Breaux -- who was probably the single most influential senator during the Clinton years. In the '90s, he could have weighed in successfully and gotten the capital support his state needed. "Breaux and Landrieu have always been among the handful of swing votes in the Senate. Where were they? They have a bit of explaining to do as well."

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_pcwatch_archive.html
 
Dr Grump said:
Whoops! My bad. I should have been more clear. Have you got a credible link. Cheers...

There are certain matters of public record that are just not spoken of in NYT circles. Sorry.
 
Dr Grump said:
So you don't have said link? OK....

So, I manufactured these events out of whole cloth because you don't like my link? This HAPPENED, Dr. Grump. Even your beloved Washington Post concedes that:

"Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans," the Washington Post reported.
 
musicman said:
There are certain matters of public record that are just not spoken of in NYT circles. Sorry.

Perhaps I can help. Your source isn't accurate.

Friday, Aug 26 2005 - 3 Days Prior to Katrina's Louisiana Landfall

Hurricane Katrina strikes Florida between Hallandale Beach and North Miami Beach as a Category 1 hurricane with 80 mph winds. Eleven people die from hurricane-related causes.

—"A chronology of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath," Associated Press, 3 Sep 2005.

The storm heads into the Gulf of Mexico and by 10:30 am CDT is reported to be "rapidly strengthening."

—"Hurricane Katrina Special Advisory Number 13 ," National Hurricane Center, 26 Aug 2005.

Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco declares a State of Emergency in Louisiana.

—"Governor Blanco Declares State of Emergency," Louisiana Governor's Office, 26 Aug 2005.

Saturday, Aug 27 2005 - 2 Days Prior

Blanco asks President Bush to declare a State of Emergency for the state of Louisiana due to Hurricane Katrina. Bush does so, authorizing the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA "to coordinate all disaster relief efforts…" and freeing up federal money for the state.

—"Governor Blanco asks President to Declare an Emergency for the State of Louisiana due to Hurricane Katrina," Louisiana Governor's Office , 27 Aug 2005.


http://www.factcheck.org/article348.html

There's blame to go around where Katrina is concerned. No reason to blame people for things they didn't do. :)
 
musicman said:
So, I manufactured these events out of whole cloth because you don't like my link? This HAPPENED, Dr. Grump. Even your beloved Washington Post concedes that:

"Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans," the Washington Post reported.


<center><h1><a href=http://www.thinkprogress.org/katrina-timeline>Hurricane Katrina Timeline</a></h1></center>
 
Don't take my word for it, folks. From that right-wing propaganda machine, The Washington Post, itself:

WhiteHouse Shifts Blame to State and Local Officials

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law. Some officials in the state suspected a political motive behind the request. "Quite frankly, if they'd been able to pull off taking it away from the locals, they then could have blamed everything on the locals," said the source, who does not have the authority to speak publicly.
 
musicman said:
Don't take my word for it, folks. From that right-wing propaganda machine, The Washington Post, itself:

WhiteHouse Shifts Blame to State and Local Officials

Behind the scenes, a power struggle emerged, as federal officials tried to wrest authority from Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D). Shortly before midnight Friday, the Bush administration sent her a proposed legal memorandum asking her to request a federal takeover of the evacuation of New Orleans, a source within the state's emergency operations center said Saturday.

The administration sought unified control over all local police and state National Guard units reporting to the governor. Louisiana officials rejected the request after talks throughout the night, concerned that such a move would be comparable to a federal declaration of martial law. Some officials in the state suspected a political motive behind the request. "Quite frankly, if they'd been able to pull off taking it away from the locals, they then could have blamed everything on the locals," said the source, who does not have the authority to speak publicly.

Your quote doesn't indicate the date of the article, but factcheck is non-partisan and actually leans conservative. It has also put together facts as they emerged, so periodically amended the timeline.

Given an article in any newspaper and a run-down from factcheck, I'd go with factcheck (just like Dick Cheney said to during the debates last election go-round).

Gotta run....have a good morning.

Laterz! :bye1:
 
jillian said:
Your quote doesn't indicate the date of the article

I'll see if I can find that for you.

jillian said:
...but factcheck is non-partisan and actually leans conservative

And WaPo clearly does NOT. Yet, their article - meant to be a swipe at Bush - damns the Louisiana Democrat political machine in precisely the terms I stated earlier; to wit - they were huddled up, discussing political ramifications all night, while a good chunk of N.O. was getting ready to be wiped off the map.

jillian said:
It has also put together facts as they emerged, so periodically amended the timeline.

And I'm sure it's quite accurate - just not complete.

jillian said:
Gotta run....have a good morning.

You, too! Thanks for the discussion!
 
musicman said:
I'll see if I can find that for you.

Thank you.

And WaPo clearly does NOT. Yet, their article - meant to be a swipe at Bush - damns the Louisiana Democrat political machine in precisely the terms I stated earlier; to wit - they were huddled up, discussing political ramifications all night, while a good chunk of N.O. was getting ready to be wiped off the map.

Except that based upon the timeline, that doesn't seem to be the case at all. I think there was plenty of blame to go around. But I also think that FEMA failed miserably, regardless of efforts to focus on the locals. You know, it always strikes me as funny when two people read something and are able to see things so differently. To me, it seemed as if the WaPo was trying to pass along the blame to the State. lol...

Eye of the beholder and all that, I guess. ;)

And I'm sure it's quite accurate - just not complete.

I'm sure it was what was believed to be the case at the time. Sometimes we just get more info after the fact.

You, too! Thanks for the discussion!

Pleasure.
 
jillian said:
Thank you.

No problem.

Washington Post - 09/04/05

jillian said:
Except that based upon the timeline, that doesn't seem to be the case at all. I think there was plenty of blame to go around...
I'm sure it was what was believed to be the case at the time. Sometimes we just get more info after the fact.

All the new info in the world can't make that meeting "unhappen". The primary concern of the Louisiana Democrat nerve center was its political image; the President was thinking about saving lives.

jillian said:
...when two people read something and are able to see things so differently. To me, it seemed as if the WaPo was trying to pass along the blame to the State. lol...

You're...familiar with WaPo, aren't you - its proclivities - its sympathies - its....shall we say - gentle leftward tilt?

Pleasure.

:beer:
 
If you want to talk about having no common sense, look at the Dems:

- Alito distortions
- Framing terrorism surveillance as "domestic spying"
- Opposing the Patriot Act
- Saying Bush lied about Iraq when they made many of the same claims about WMD and the threat Iraq posed.

I could go on and on.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top