Tuesday, November 6, 2012

God has not failed us, but man has....

Ohio goes to Obama- Ohio has fraud issues. Romney must not concede the election. So much voter fraud with broken machines voting for Obama, and this proves it.

Romney has NOT conceded and Ohio is not finished counting.......

MOVING ON......

I am sitting here, and couldn't go to sleep and now I am utterly shocked and disgusted with this nation, with the people who voted against righteousness and chose immorality. I feel, literally, sick to my stomach, it's in knots.

I grieve for this nation and my boys future. Those who voted for Obama will reap what they have sown for choosing a man that despises Israel, who despises pre-born babies and embraces socialism and communism and All immorality. Who wants every American under bondage.

Say goodbye to our 1st and 2nd amendment rights. Say goodbye to freedom of religion and say goodbye to a Christian nation under God.

In light of this, I hope you all have prepared for some very hard times. Stock up on food, water, guns, ammo, gold/silver, and other emergency supplies if you haven't already.

Obama is not my President, if you voted for him, you keep him. I will pray for a Revolution! I will pray for The King to come. Thy Kingdom come, shifting is upon us! Jesus is the rock we stand on. The people will have their king, the Remnant will rise!

What happened to this once great country and its morals and values? It saddens me to think how our nation will be now that Obama and his evils will have another 4 years to intertwine themselves into our system. Good luck Americans.

I am trying to understand exactly what the Democrats are cheering FOR. High unemployment? Higher taxes? More expensive healthcare with worse quality? More international ridicule? Higher gas prices? Lower dollar value? What? WTH are you happy about, exactly?

Good night my fellow patriots. May God keep us and Israel under His mighty protection. Because we are going to need it!

66 comments:

Ducky's here said...

Minnesota, Maryland and Maine vote to support gay marriage.

It just gets worse, Leticia.

Ducky's here said...

WTH are you happy about, exactly?


-----
That you and the rest of the fringe right are going to take your bottled water and dried provisions and hit the fallout shelters along with Glenn Beck and the gun loons.

It's over. The country is sick of you.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Leticia. You're a total fucking nut, I'm glad you're not in my church.

The Local Malcontent said...

I am stunned, just stunned @IdiotVoters. We're all socialists now, you see. Poor Israel.

(oh, the art at my blog was "Fingers Crossed")

Always On Watch said...

It's surreal, Leticia.

But, apparently, Obama and his policies and his sociological position are what the majority of the American people want.

I wonder what we'll be saying four years from now?

Magpie said...

Men in the Republican party failed, Leticia.

They do that a lot. Failed on 9/11, invaded a country that had nothing to do with it, left bodies to rot in the street after Katrina, and drove the economy off a cliff.

Fielded a bunch of nuts in the primaries for this election and let it come down to Romney, who has the soul of a fountain pen on a mortgage default notice.

Let some pro-rape idiots shoot their mouths off at how they should thank God for being violated.

The narrow little America you want is going away, and a better day is dawning.

Election is over. America won.

Silverfiddle said...

We voted for progressivism, and Obama and the Pelosicrats are going to give it to us good and hard.

Jersey McJones said...

Leticia, take a deep breath, relax, clear your head...

Nothing is going to change all that much, and this was assured by this election, and I get the distinct feeling that's what a small majority of voters were shooting for.

The House remains Red, the Senate remains Blue-ish, the White House is the same. We've just been through two years of this and the world didn't end. It's not going to end now.

If anything, the economy will continue to rebound, and now will gather all the more steam as the Baby Boomers finally start retiring. That's 76 million people retiring at a rate of 10,000 a day. They possess most of the nations wealth, and as they retire they will divest and that wealth will begin it's inevitable spread down to the rest of us.

No political party or president made that happen or could stop it. That's just life.

And life goes on.

Take it easy, Leticia.

Or, if you want, try moving to Somalia. They have all the small government and religious fanaticism you could ever want.

JMJ

Most Rev. Gregori said...

My biggest prayer right now is that all of the leftist morons like the ones that left their ignorant comments on this blog, will dislocate their useless arms while patting themselves on the back.

America is finished. You leftist perverts have sodomized America, corrupted our children, at least the ones you haven't murdered in the womb. You have Bull Shited every one with your false sense of caring, when all the while your only concern was for your selves and what you could take from America not what you could give.

Look in the mirror, stare long and hard and let it sink in that you are the ones that destroyed the greatest country in history. May God have mercy on your souls because I won't.

cube said...

It's going to take me some time to find the words to comment about this debacle beyond saying that there are more of them than there are of us.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jersey: They possess most of the nations wealth, and as they retire they will divest and that wealth will begin it's inevitable spread down to the rest of us.

Wrong. They do possess much wealth, and we are transferring more to them from the working age people via social security and medicare.

Darth Bacon said...

Hey Obimmer, stop slapping yourself on the back and trim on the TV and watch the people all over New York and Long Island who are suffering . This is Your Katrina.

Anonymous said...

Funny How a Reverend can't even make a stupid hateful post without using 'sodomize.'

The GOP lost becasue they are comprised if lunatic haters and dividers who will believe any crap Fox News throws out. They have rendered themselves totally irrelevant to contemporary American society.

Jersey McJones said...

Silver,

You have a point, but remember, eventually we die.

We don't always die suddenly. Often we slowly die over a period of years. It's expensive. It may be the biggest chunk of the final divestment of the Baby Boomers.

So, if you are a capitalist and a patriot, then you should think, "hmmm... maybe the market (and my soul) is dictating we need more doctors and scientists and STEM teachers... hmmm..."

But of course, you are against spending on education, or any involvement in the welfare (and future, and competitiveness, and innovation) of the state by the federal government, other than law and order, and war. Lots a' war.

The Baby Boomers are retiring, guys and gals, no matter how you wish it wasn't so. It's time we step up and take the reins. It is, in fact, the time. We don't have a choice.

When we understand how the economy works, we realize, as Americans, we can easily navigate it, no matter who the president or whatever of the two parties (Laurel and Hardy come to mind) is in power.

JMJ

Ducky's here said...

@Grigori -- May God have mercy on your souls because I won't.

----
Who cares.

Just what standing do you have to judge anyone even on this side of the grave?

Stick to fixating on ay sex.

Leticia said...

Ducky, you can say what you please and call me and other conservative loons, but I know that we stand on the truth and it is you and your fellow cronies who have the blinders on.

I trust in a God mightier than your president and I put my trust on Him and Him alone.

Anon, I am VERY GLAD you are NOT in my church, because apparently, you are not being taught the Word of God if you voted for unrighteousness, meaning Obama. You can embrace the sins of this world, but I will not. So you keep going to you church and keep drinking that kool-aid.

MK, this nation, or rather, Christians and conservatives are in mourning because we have our eyes wide open and know what the future holds with Obama in charge again.

AOW, It's sad really. They Obama supporters are so proud and arrogant with their success that it will come back and haunt them watch and see it unfold.

Magpie, I disagree. I don't think this is what our founders aka forefather's would have wanted for our nation.

Silver, yes and we are all going to feel that pain even his supporters.

Jersey, first of all thank you for being kind and not being vile like that moron "anonymous." I don't think there is any place that is totally free from government control. Bummer... Scotty, beam me up!! :)

Abouna, God bless you, you never pull any punches and you state the truth and I love that about you. You are never afraid to tell the truth no matter what.

Cube, sadly, this turned out to be true. Because those so-called, "Christians" that I know personally, voted for Obama. And are sitting proud.

Darth B, he doesn't give a rats-rear-end if people are starving and thirsty, he got what he wanted and the MSM did a great job covering it up. Just like Benghazi. We still want answers on that!



Magpie said...

"Magpie, I disagree. I don't think this is what our founders aka forefather's would have wanted for our nation."

They wanted it to be enlightened and to prosper, Leticia.

It will prosper. It will remain great.

Magpie said...

“May God have mercy on your souls because I won't.”

What do you mean?
Do you have equal power to God when it comes to people's souls? Is that what you are saying?

You wouldn’t know anything about God, mercy or Christ if he pulled down your pants and spanked you, you moron.

It was an election. Millions freely voted for what they wanted. You’re just having a sick little tantrum because it’s not what you want.

dmarks said...

Buck up, Leticia. There's now an even larger group of men and women in the US House of Representatives who keep the public interest in mind when they act, and they will help block the excesses of "ObamaCo 2.0"
----------

Magpie said: "It was an election. Millions freely voted for what they wanted. You’re just having a sick little tantrum because it’s not what you want"

You should have seen the moaning of the sore losers in Nov. 2000. What you have seen here has nothing on that.

jez said...

"Abouna, God bless you, you never pull any punches..."

All well and good for a shock jock, not appropriate for a reverend.

Liberalmann said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Liberalmann said...

No, the progressives came out in full force to shun the haters, the extremists, the tea baggers, the racists, the misogynists, the vote suppressors, the liars, the obstructionists, the angry white morons, the bombastic rhetoric, those who tried to buy the election with their billions and those who tried to suppress the vote with IDs or long lines.

The GOP lost because they are comprised of lunatic haters and dividers who will believe any crap Fox News throws out. They have rendered themselves totally irrelevant to contemporary American society. And as long as there are morons out there who will continue with the idiotic rhetoric of 'socialism' or 'communism' and birther bullshit, they will continue to go the way of T-Rex.

christian soldier said...

Agree with your take --

As to the Ds and the Rs - there has been little difference for years--

Carol-CS

Anonymous said...

I noticed that the only people who are not blamed here are themselves.

That is the problem with fringe extremists, it is everyone's fault but themselves and that they just must be right, even God is on their side.

It is good to be strong about one's views but when everyone else tells you that your wrong, in the end there is a message in there.

The analysis is clear enough as is the logical conclussion.

The conservative movement in America has gone to far to the right and as one person said, they were to involved in people's lives and their bedrooms and not really interested in understanding what the people think.

The failed conservative challange this time around was because they tried to listen to the noisy, argumentative and unfortunately dominant far-right minority than what the actual public wanted.

That is sad because the economics was correct, the argument about the economy was an issue that people wanted. The people are suffering and a good message should have won the election, but it failed because Americans though upset and angry (48 per cent did not vote for Obama), they still showed that they had enough confidence in his message, that they believed he understood their problems and that the GOP did not understand women, race and immigration.

The blame is the view that the white male population choses the President, that the evengelical view somehow MUST overide what the people think. That the view by the Tea-party movement that it should be their view "or else" is somehow more democratic than the actual vote.

In otherwords, many conservatives and those that control the GOP at present have forgotten the first three words of "we the people".

Damien Charles

Right Wing Theocrat said...

Sad day for your country Leticia, i share your pain. Teach your sons to survive and to fight. There's hardship and pain ahead.

Silverfiddle said...

@ Jersey: So, if you are a capitalist and a patriot, then you should think, @ "hmmm... maybe the market (and my soul) is dictating we need more doctors and scientists and STEM teachers... hmmm..."

But of course, you are against spending on education, or any involvement in the welfare (and future, and competitiveness, and innovation) of the state by the federal government, other than law and order, and war. Lots a' war.


Like all liberal blather, this sounds good if you don't think about it.

Government is handing out money for worthless degrees while colleges build swimming pools and other club med type facilities.

Your comment also presupposes that nobody could go to school without government money. Balderdash!

Taking the government money out of it would bring education prices back down where normal working people could afford it without hocking the house.

Malcolm Bondon said...

If we could survive 8 years of Bush, you guys will manage to muddle through with 8 of President Obama. If people on the right want to view a vote for President Obama as a vote against righteousness, immorality, etc., have at it. I find it funny how many conservatives have done a 180 when it comes to Romney. Leticia, I recall you telling me earlier this year you didn't want him as the nominee. What changed? Romney is the same lying, flip-flopping empty vessel he was back then. Although I'm obviously glad he lost, I will say his concession speech was classy.

dmarks said: "You should have seen the moaning of the sore losers in Nov. 2000. What you have seen here has nothing on that."

Considering the fact that Gore won the popular vote and the decisive state for who won the electoral college just happened to be run by the brother of the GOP candidate, I'd say the moaning liberals did back then was justified.

Although we were upset by the outcome of the 2000 election, I don't think it's comparable to the freak out we're seeing on the right. I work with a guy who feels those who voted for the president are guilty of treason and should be hanged. We can all have our differences, but that's way over the line. He even admitted to going out yesterday to stock up on guns and ammo! Although I think that type of reaction is black helicopter-like, at least it's good for the economy.

Liberalmann said...

Hey, let the loony right keep their crazy bombast and shallow, bigoted views. It will guarantee even more Democratic wins in the future. I see the Dems holding the WH until 2020, at least.

Leticia said...

Malcolm, you are correct I was not supporting Romney, my I was rooting for Herman Cain, and when he dropped out, it was Rick Santorum and then he dropped out, well, I wasn't given much choice. But, no, he was definitely NOT my first choice. But since he represented my party, I decided to back him 100%. He is a Mormon and you already know how I feel about cults, but he was more of a "Christian" than Obama. I chose 1 of the lesser two evils, if that makes any sense.

Lib, if it happens it happens. My God is still greater and no matter if you believe in Him or not, He is the great "I AM." And that's all I need.

dmarks said...

Malcolm said: "Considering the fact that Gore won the popular vote and the decisive state for who won the electoral college just happened to be run by the brother of the GOP candidate, I'd say the moaning liberals did back then was justified."

Only in the former case. In the latter, not at all, and those who moaned about that showed they hated the rule of law, the Constitution, and the Florida voters.

GWBush won count after count. It was the will of the people there. As for Jeb's influence, his influence was precisely one vote out of the millions in the state.

No, those in this fringe are as bad as the GOP Birthers.

dmarks said...

Leticia said: "Malcolm, you are correct I was not supporting Romney, my I was rooting for Herman Cain"

Shaw Kenawe, a popular blogger among some here, presented a liberal's view on her blog that Cain should not have run because he was black. She, a liberal, strongly agreed.

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

Also Leticia said: " He is a Mormon and you already know how I feel about cults, but he was more of a "Christian" than Obama."

Well, both of them are professed Christians. I do not know enough about the personal life of either to judge them in this way.

dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...

Magpie said: "... Failed on 9/11, invaded a country that had nothing to do with it..."

Number one, we did invade Afghanistan, the country that hosted and completely supported the bombers.

Number two, we retaliated against the terrorist regime in Iraq, which had attacked us many times and was engaged in other large aggression. Saddam did not cause 9-11... but no one said it did. However, after 9-11, it made absolutely no sense to let terrorists keep attacking us with no consequences.

The people who fought back and stopped the terrorists were quite successful, and not a failure.

"... and drove the economy off a cliff."

The Dems did this. The GOP's failing is in not trying hard enough to stop it.

dmarks said...

Damien said: "That is the problem with fringe extremists"

But there aren't any here at all.

"The conservative movement in America has gone to far to the right"

Yet, that has not happened at all. There's been no shift. In fact, the movement readily nominated a more-centrist Republican this last time. The movement represents mainstream, very popular ideas. However, many on the hard left do claim this. It has become a matter of them repeating a baseless claim so much that those with careless minds assume it is true. One that has no basis in fact.

As for the "bedroom" claim, realize that the liberal/leftist candidate, Barack Obama, campaigned on keeping gay marriage illegal the last time. It was only in the last year or so that he changed his mind. The Republicans, who still oppose it, have not moved anywhere on this issue. Just one example of how "moving to the far right" is a purely baseless claim.

Were you aware that of the 4 major national areas in which people voted last November, conservatives and Republicans advanced strongly in two of them? It's not a rejected movement. It's an embraced one.

And I am sorry I have issued a dissenting opinion on this blog, Damien. One that government officials might not approve of. And as per your earlier post, that means I should be numbered and registered as a dangerous blogger in advance of the government rounding me up and "disappearing" me. Your idea.

Liberalmann said...

The right wing viewed this election as a critical opportunity to delegitimize progressive economic policies, return to the trickle down economics that they put in place during the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and abandon the social contract implicit in the New Deal. They failed.

Just four years ago, trickle-down economics suffered a devastating failure. After eight years of promising that tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulating financial markets would bring economic growth and prosperity for everyone, the financial system collapsed and the Bush Administration chalked up the worst record producing private sector jobs in 60 years -- zero net private sector jobs over his entire term.

Obama will now have the opportunity to demonstrate palpably that progressive economic policies are far superior to the trickle down theories that so recently wrecked the economy.

The Great Recession was not just a run of the mill business cycle downturn. Economies take years to recover from recessions that result from catastrophic financial market meltdowns.

Obama's policies, not only prevented a slide into a second Great Depression, they also resulted in a gradual sustained recovery -- 32 months of private sector job growth. But it's been a long slog.

Now, unless the Republican leaders who still control the House precipitate another impasse like the debt-ceiling crisis last year -- the recovery will almost certainly accelerate.

The odds are good that the economic narrative that ultimately won the day in this election will provide future electorates with indisputable proof of the superiority of progressive economic policies by 2012 and 2016.

One of the most painful and misleading political consequences of a Romney election would have been hearing the pundits go on about the "Romney Miracle" as the economy continued to improve in the next two years as a result of the foundation laid by President Obama.

Now that won't happen -- just the opposite.

In fact, the economic choice facing the country was even more extreme than whether or not to return to "trickle-down" economics. In many respects the election became a referendum on the entire progressive political project. The Romney- Ryan budget was a frontal assault on the social contract implicit in the New Deal. In practice, the voters rejected this proposal.

Liberalmann said...

The right wing viewed this election as a critical opportunity to delegitimize progressive economic policies, return to the trickle down economics that they put in place during the Reagan and Bush Administrations, and abandon the social contract implicit in the New Deal. They failed.

Just four years ago, trickle-down economics suffered a devastating failure. After eight years of promising that tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulating financial markets would bring economic growth and prosperity for everyone, the financial system collapsed and the Bush Administration chalked up the worst record producing private sector jobs in 60 years -- zero net private sector jobs over his entire term.

Obama will now have the opportunity to demonstrate palpably that progressive economic policies are far superior to the trickle down theories that so recently wrecked the economy.

The Great Recession was not just a run of the mill business cycle downturn. Economies take years to recover from recessions that result from catastrophic financial market meltdowns.

Obama's policies, not only prevented a slide into a second Great Depression, they also resulted in a gradual sustained recovery -- 32 months of private sector job growth. But it's been a long slog.

Now, unless the Republican leaders who still control the House precipitate another impasse like the debt-ceiling crisis last year -- the recovery will almost certainly accelerate.

The odds are good that the economic narrative that ultimately won the day in this election will provide future electorates with indisputable proof of the superiority of progressive economic policies by 2012 and 2016.

One of the most painful and misleading political consequences of a Romney election would have been hearing the pundits go on about the "Romney Miracle" as the economy continued to improve in the next two years as a result of the foundation laid by President Obama.

Now that won't happen -- just the opposite.

In fact, the economic choice facing the country was even more extreme than whether or not to return to "trickle-down" economics. In many respects the election became a referendum on the entire progressive political project. The Romney- Ryan budget was a frontal assault on the social contract implicit in the New Deal. In practice, the voters rejected this proposal.

dmarks said...

In the above comment, Liberalmann lied and presented the typings of columnist Robert Creamer as his own.

What next, Lib? Did you write the Gettysburg Address too?

Not only did he do this, he spammed it.

As for the column, the writer defends fascist economics (government control). Thankfully. the Republicans in the House will be able to to prevent the command-and-control economics from doing a lot of damage.

dmarks said...

One whopper by Creamer needs to be addressed:

"The Romney- Ryan budget was a frontal assault on the social contract implicit in the New Deal. In practice, the voters rejected this proposal."

The Ryan budget was put forth by Ryan in the GOP-led House. The voters strongly endorsed this, by sending more Republicans to the House.

And it was not an assault on anything: the Ryan plan called for increases in social spending.

Right Wing Theocrat said...

"If we could survive 8 years of Bush, you guys will manage to muddle through with 8 of President Obama."

Off course everyone will muddle through, I'm sure poor Conservatives will fare better than poor liberals.

But that's not the point. Maybe your children will get it, I doubt it though, they'll be told that it's our fault anyway. Either because of shame or being simply too stupid to know otherwise.

Perhaps it's best that way, why tell them what was squandered and betrayed, why tell them it used to be better, why fill their brains with dreams that you won't let them have.

Liberalmann said...

No surprises here, lol!


The ten best (and worst) educated states and how they voted...

http://www.happyplace.com/19076/election-infographic-shows-most-educated-states-voted-for-obama

Liberalmann said...

dmarks said..."In the above comment, Liberalmann lied and presented the typings of columnist Robert Creamer as his own.

What next, Lib? Did you write the Gettysburg Address too?"
...

Jump in my shit if you want, goober. Facts are still facts.

Anonymous said...

dmarks,

not my idea at all, so I assume it is yours, or alternatively you continue to make it up since your now a proven liar.

it is the fringe right and most definitely there is a push to the far-right in America. There is a huge difference over a period since the late 1980s with the evangelical right pushing their version of politics and social norms. Before that they voted with their views in mind but the big difference is now they "demand" and complain if it is not accepted. Additionally, as a movement (ie the Tea Party) they will also attempt to block any processes regardless if the majority disagree with them. That is called the "spoiler mentality" which is very new in America. We also have unseen levels of character smeering against your Commander-in-Chief such as the "birther" element and that "he is a Muslim" or a "Communist/Marxist" of which is not only rediculous but makes the right look stupid in the eyes of the rest of the world. Simply put, the rest of America is laughing at the Conservative movement in America as being something akin to a circus of clowns.

You may be nominating a so-called moderate, but that is to draw voters (and it did not really work), what you still get is a minority of whining ratbag spoilers whom still have some push.

You need to get real when it comes to representing the entire population and not just the angry white crowd.

Damien Charles

ps, never did see your evidence.... that always is the weak point to a BS'er.

Ducky's here said...


"Republicans: Always wrong but never in doubt."

dmarks said...

Liberalmann said: "Jump in my shit if you want, goober. Facts are still facts."

Which would be relevant if you presented any.

dmarks said...

Damien lied: "not my idea at all, so I assume it is yours, or alternatively you continue to make it up since your now a proven liar."

You presented the idea of registering bloggers so the government could control them. A view that was like it was cribbed from Kim Jong Il or Fuhrer Hugo Chavez. A rather outrageous wish. I guess I could understand if you are embarassed that you did so. But there is no need for you to lie when I accurately describe your own views. No, I am not a proven liar at all. But you are a proven fascist who hates the idea of open discourse and dissent against the rulers.

"It is the fringe right and most definitely there is a push to the far-right in America."

The far right has no presence int the political discourse in America. The far left is far betteer represented. Obama had as a major man in his administration a man named Van Jones, a proud Maoist. The Republicans don't do the same: they shun the Nazis, KKK and other figures of the fringe and far right. There is simply no evidence of what you claim.

"Additionally, as a movement (ie the Tea Party) they will also attempt to block any processes regardless if the majority disagree with them."

The Tea Party is not a far/fringe movement at all. They are principled and mainstream.

"That is called the "spoiler mentality" which is very new in America."

Not at all. They simply believe that it is not a good idea to support destructive policies just because some people want them.

"We also have unseen levels of character smeering against your Commander-in-Chief..."

You aren't in the US, and thus speak so ignorantly of matters here. The smearing of Obama is nothing worse than what happened before to President Bush. Far from "unseen", it has been seen before again and again.

".... such as the "birther" element and that "he is a Muslim""

Consider the fact that the "he is a Muslim" idea was first pushed famously by the left, Hillary Clinton, not anyone on the right.

"Simply put, the rest of America is laughing at the Conservative movement in America as being something akin to a circus of clowns."

So? This is no different from how the liberal movement is laughed at.

"You may be nominating a so-called moderate, but that is to draw voters (and it did not really work)"

It did. Romney got roughly 50% of the vote. He certainly drew voters, while Obama drew slightly more.

"what you still get is a minority of whining ratbag spoilers whom still have some push"

No, what you are describing are principled politicians who have the public interest in mind, and won't "cave" and give in to bad public policy just because some favor it.

"You need to get real when it comes to representing the entire population and not just the angry white crowd."

What a racist you are! As a foreigner so ignorant of America, you are apparently unaware that the Republicans made strong gains in two of the major national fields of elected office.

"ps, never did see your evidence.... that always is the weak point to a BS'er."

The evidence was in your comments when you demanded that the rulers in a country control bloggers. Have you rescinded this? Backed off from fascism?

dmarks said...

Back to the lies Liberalmann presented as truth: "Obama's policies, not only prevented a slide into a second Great Depression, they also resulted in a gradual sustained recovery"

Fact check: Obama's polices kept the slide going. They increased unemployment by 20%.

Anonymous said...

dmarks,

you are a fool and caught out so you simply have to make it up.

Go ahead, quote what I said, but you cannot and thus you make it up.

Pants on fire!

I said that there should be controls on collective hate and that those who publish demands for violance and intimidation should be held accountable. I said that blogs should be "offered" registration so that unregistered blogs can be considered without control can be untrusted as their content cannot be verified.

If you remember (obviously you do but wish to avoid) the item was based on the subject of death threats which obviously you think is justififed.

dmarks, you are a complete sham.

you obviously love to have blogs push trash, make death threats and call for violence against minorities and those that do not think in the skewered way you do. You absolutely hate accountability and responsibility and believe that laws against smeer, lible and propriety have no place in society.

No, your not a far-right whinge, your actually an anarchist and wannabe fascist. More than that, your a hack and laughably so.

Damien Charles

Anonymous said...

the Tea Party is mainstream??? Now that is a laughable statement.

Let us see what the Tea Party has actually pushed. Anti-gay - the people of America rejected that. Pro-life to the furthest level - again the people have rejected that. No accepted or begrudgingly accepted candidates that are not of their 'ilk and in many cases chose to not participate. What have we seen today for instance - as everyone else points out that it is the Conservative failure to represent (and I use those words again) "the people", they denounced the accepted candidate Mitt Romney as being weak and not good enough. So they cannot even take any responsibility.

What we see here, in total, is that they are two things. They are neither representative of the people and they are incapable of accepting the term "democracy".

Mainstream - what a dork.

Damien Charles

Anonymous said...

dmarks

now your trying to use the 'racist' slur? That is a huge sign of desparate.

"Angry white males" is a term used now by a number of mainstream pundits and journalists as well as a few well respected academics. I guess they are all racists, right?

Since you obviously do not know, it refers to the fact that the only group that the GOP did well in this election was the white male group, of which they are strongly conservative and willing to complain - thus the "angry" concept.

Yes they are unhappy, high unemployment, prospects of a tax-hike and a conservative leadership that tells them that it is the fault of those damn Democrat socialists. They may or may not be right, but that is the demographic.

Face it dmarks, the Republicans are out of touch and they need to do an overhaul, that is all, nothing more and nothing less. They need to represent the one thing that also you seem to forget and wish to constantly deny (endlessly), the people.

Try and weazle and squirm as much as you like, but until you recognise that they (and you) need to go through some sobering changes in your thinking, you are out of touch.

Damien Charles

dmarks said...

"I said that there should be controls on collective hate"

By "collective hate" you mean meainstream positions that you happen to dislike. Sorry, in a free, non-fascist society, there is no such "control".

"I said that blogs should be "offered" registration so that unregistered blogs can be considered without control can be untrusted as their content cannot be verified."

Offered... yeah right. Why not just butt out and let the people talk freely? That is one nasty fascist demand that you make, for government to "verify" blog content.

"dmarks, you are a complete sham."

If by sham you mean a person who calls you out on your extreme demands to crush free speech, then yes, call me one.

Damien, you and I know very well that your demands will stifle dissent and do nothing about death threats and planning of terrorism. The real bad guys won't register their blogs and submit to government.

And you are hardly one to be trusted for characterizing anything politically. Especially when you flat-out lie and call responsible, very popular, and mainstream movements "far right"

It wasn't necessary for me to link back to your first comment demanding to crush bloggers. You have repeated it here.

"If you remember (obviously you do but wish to avoid) the item was based on the subject of death threats which obviously you think is justififed."

Death threats are ILLEGAL. Did you know that?

"you obviously love to have blogs push trash"

So speaks an arrogant fascist who wants anything he doesn't consider "trash" to be censored, and the writers of this offending material rounded up by the government.

"... make death threats and call for violence against minorities"

Aside from the problem that you lump in the vague "trash" with death threats, there is the problem of your racism which comes to light here. Why mention minorities? I've seen plenty of racial hate and violence directerd against members of racial majorities. Since you have exempted them, you strongly imply it is OK and acceptable to make death threats against people unless they are a minority.

"...and those that do not think in the skewered way you do."

1) There is nothing skewered about my thinking. I'm not the faacist: you are.

2) Unlike you, I respect freedom of dissent on blogs. Even if some think that the opinions are skewered or "trash".

"You absolutely hate accountability and responsibility"

Those are your euphemisms for demanding that free speech be crushed.

"and believe that laws against smeer, lible and propriety have no place in society."

Lord save us from the boob who rants about smears and libel and can't spell either one of them.

"No, your not a far-right whinge, your actually an anarchist and wannabe fascist."

Not in the least. I support the principles of freedom protected in all free nations. You are presenting a case more in line with North Korea and China. China has strong laws against impropriety on the Internet. I bet you love that.

"More than that, your a [insert mindless insult] and laughably so."

Now you have gotten to the level of a playground taunter, calling me poopy-pants.

[continued]

dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
dmarks said...

The Tea Party is mainstream, despite your "foreign person who has little knowledge of American politics" summary of them. The voters like to choose them again and again. Opinion polls place support for them around 30%-40%, which is huge. The polls that really matter, the elections, show much higher approval. That's mainstream.

Your description of them on the issues is laughably ignorant. Even on the gay marriage one. The Tea Party "platform" on gay marriage in 2010 was the same as that of the progressive President, Barack Obama.

"Face it dmarks, the Republicans are out of touch and they need to do an overhaul"

How can I face a situation there is absolutely no evidence of? In the Presidential election, the Republican candidate and the Democrat got roughly 50-50. And that's not very roughly. They were very close. The fact is that all Mitt Romney would have had to do is just one thing slightly differently, and he would have won the election.

Only in the Senate races, just one of the four national voting areas, were there strong Democratic gains.

As for them not representing "the people", they clearly represent "the people" as much as the Democrats. The votes that increase Republican governors and national legislators in the House also shows this.

As for the question of racism, excuse me for being accurate with words. Racism itself is a sign of desperation. Doing what I am doing and accurately pointing out racism is not desperate, not at all.

I'm sorry for expressing my mild, mainstream opinions which are in line with civilized standards of human rights, Damien. Even though you think they are "Trash" and want the government to torture me in prison for expressing them.

You are one scary goon. Your "voluntary" registration thing is a smokescreen for your demand that the freedom to dissent from the ruling elites in a nation is something that should be licensed, a privilege granted by those on high. Not the basic human right that it really is.

The "pants on fire" are yours.

Anonymous said...

dmarks,

ie, you have no proof, you have yet to provide a quote/link and thus you are a liar.

Unless you do so, you will be pranded the liar you are and I will no longer waste my time on this thread unless you do so.

Somehow I suspect it will not happen....

Damien Charles

Magpie said...

We once had an equivalent to the Tea Party here in Australia. They also did quite well at first with the uneducated and the parochial.
But then the mainstream conservative party distanced themselves from them, instead of pandering to them, instead of letting them take over.
Those mainstream conservatives then won the election.

The Tea Party helped win this for Obama. They are a freak-show on wheels. There is nothing mainstream about candidates who campaign against masturbation, or who think evolution is a hoax, or who infer that centres of learning are possessed by Satan. Or... if that IS mainstream... then you're in worse trouble than you think.

dmarks said...

Damien: I don't need to link to your older comment demanding government control of bloggers, which proves you are the liar. You have put for this outrageous idea to chill dissent again in the comments here. You have been proven to be the liar for repeatedly denying that you have such views.

The best solution would be for you to support the basic human right of dissent and back off of your demand. Then maybe those reading this might let it slie that you have these "made in Beijing" views and keep lying about them.

dmarks said...

Magpie said: "We once had an equivalent to the Tea Party here in Australia."

I don't know anything at all about this group in Australia. You don't know anything about this group in the US. But, unlike you, I am not making wild false claims about something I know so little about.

"They also did quite well at first with the uneducated and the parochial."

Which is further proof of your ignorance of the Tea Party, especially in comparing them to this very different group in Australia.

From the New York Times:, a liberal/left/Democratic leaning publication.

"Tea Party .... more well-educated than the general public... according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.(from 2010)

"The Tea Party helped win this for Obama. They are a freak-show on wheels."

Let's again refer to the New York Times: "[The Tea Party movement] began in 2009 in protest of the bank bailout and economic stimulus package. "

Magpie said: "There is nothing mainstream about candidates who campaign against masturbation.... evolution ..." Satan."

While some in the Tea Party hold these views, they are in the minority enough, and the views are 'off the radar' and not even on the consensus Tea Party agenda... proving you completely wrong. More evidence of your distance from a subject compounding your ignorance of it.

The above is the national view from the New York Times. Anecdotally, I have attended two "Tea Party" rallies. Have you? I doubt it. There were dozens of signs being waved. Most involved the "good government" cause of auditing the Fed. Or demanding that we stop giving handouts to corporations (something the Tea Party opposes, and the leftist Democrats support). Or demanding that we stop increasing the national debt.

There were no signs about Satan and masturbation, sorry. Nor has the New York Times chosen to list these as many of the main Tea Party issues.

"Or... if that IS mainstream... then you're in worse trouble than you think."

The fact that ideas like auditing the Fed, stopping corporate welfare, and responsibly reducing the debt are mainstream means a lot less trouble for this nation.

If you want to look at a real "freak show", look at the Occupy movement. Voters shun it, unlike the Tea Party. Antisemitism is mainstream in the Occupy movement, which is why the the Nazi Party has joined this movement. And one of their main leaders is a man who is proud to want to bring the ideals of Chairman Mao and Pol Pot to the US. That's the real "freak show".

Malcolm Bondon said...

Leticia: I would like to have seen what would happen if Cain or Santorum had been the nominee because I don't think either of them had a real chance at winning. If Cain had been the nom, we would have seen that blacks don't just vote based on skin color. If Santorum had gotten the nod and lost, it would have put the bed the right-wing talking point that they lost because their candidate wasn't conservative enough.

Is your crack about Romney being more "Christian" than President Obama another implication that the president is a Muslim? I thought we settled that once and for all.

dmarks: If what happened in 2000 also happened in 2008 or 2012 only with President Obama coming out on top, the right would be singing a totally different tune. Especially if the deciding state was Illinois! As for your comments about Jeb Bush, you know a governor can exert influence beyond just their vote.

Also, you said that Shaw Kenawe agreed with someone that Cain should not have run because he was black. Can you provide the link to that blog post to back up your claim?

Finally, there's no evidence Hillary Clinton pushed the "Obama is a Muslim" meme.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2007/01/19/right-wing-media-figures-claim-clinton-behind-o/137794

Even if she did, she's not anymore. Sadly, some people still haven't gotten the memo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4RvI83Ys1k

Right Wing Theocrat: I'll be just fine. If the economy continues to improve the way some predict, it'll be interesting to see how you right-wingers twist yourselves in knots trying to avoid giving President Obama any credit.

dmarks said...

As for giving Obama credit, we are still in the unemployment hole he dug us. How long before we return to the unemployment level Bush left him?

As for Hillary making the Obama = Muslim thing big, I remember when this happened and was reported in the mainstream media. The leftist opinion page you linked to to 'refute' this provides opinion, not fact. I don't ever link to Limbaugh or Beck as a source, but you have no qualms about using the leftist equivalents of them. The Hillary campaign also bashed Obama for being black.

As. For Shaws bigotry against Cain, it is buried in her sight. I will dig for it.

dmarks said...

Malcolm said: "As for your comments about Jeb Bush, you know a governor can exert influence beyond just their vote."

Well, yes you are right. A popular governor can influence people by campaigning for someone also and speaking out in favor of someone. All Constitutionally protected activities.

As for your Illinois example, it is unlikely since Illinois is strongly Blue. But if the Romney camp was attempting to lie its way to a victory as Gore tried 2000 using ballot tampering and ignoring the votes on the ballots, I would oppose it just as strongly.

Leticia said...

And the debate continues!

dmarks said...

Malcolm: Been looking through Shaw's posts for the one about Cain. Unless she deleted it, it's there alright.

Shaw's just about the most bigoted person in these blogs. When Bobby Jindal made a famous speech, she bashed him for being colored and having no place on the national stage due to that. When Rahm Emanuel bashed the mentally disabled as f***ing retards, she went to an extreme of saying that it is great to call the mentally disabled f***ing retards, and love ones of the mentally disabled do this all the time.

And of course her repeated bashing of Herman Cain for his skin color.

It's an extreme. Not many others do this. I can't imagine you being such a bigot at all. But truth be told Ducky here in this blog bashes gays as "homos" and Jersey thinks it is great to call them "fa**ots".

Political correctness is one thing. Using and defending the most vile hate speech is another.

Malcolm Bondon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Malcolm Bondon said...

dmarks: The unemployment hole he dug us?! We were losing about 750,000 jobs per month just before and after President Obama's inauguration. No objective person would blame him for this. In case you didn't know, there has been a net job growth under his presidency. It's not a huge amount, but it's better than a net loss!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/27/data-job-growth-obama_n_1919533.html

By the way, I only used Illinois as my example because it's President Obama's home state. Because 2000 came down to Florida (which was run by Jeb at the time), I think it's a fair analogy.

Regarding Hillary promoting the "Obama is a Muslim" meme, is the following an example of what you were talking about?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/03/clinton-says-ob/

Her "as far as I know" comment was wishy washy at best. However, I wouldn't call this "making a big thing" out of it.

The "leftist opinion page"?! What, you can't bring yourself to type Media Matters?! :-) Comparing them to the likes of Limbaugh and Beck is a prime example of false equivalency. Although you don't link to them, you have provided shaky backup in the past. Remember when you tried to debunk a post I wrote on 1/14/12 about Rachel Maddow? In case you don't, let me refresh your memory. You claimed the number of federal employees getting rich off the public dime is soaring under the Obama administration and included the following link as proof:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/14/number-of-federal-public-servants-earning-more-than-100000-nearly-doubles/

The only problem is, the link you provided referred to Canadian federal employees not American ones! Did President Obama become the Prime Minister of Canada and nobody told me?! When I pointed out your error, you deleted your comments. Funny, but I never heard back from you on that post. Even though you deleted your comments, I decided to keep the email notification I received for old time's sake (and a good laugh).

I have never seen any evidence of Shaw being bigoted. If her post about Cain is still there, why don't you link to it?! The same goes for the one in which she disparaged the mentally disabled. If you're going to make damaging claims like that against somebody, I shouldn't have to go digging to find them! Whenever I refer to a post/comment by someone else, I'll either quote them or link to it. Expecting the same from you is not asking a lot. If you can't, you should stop with the Shaw bashing. Especially since she doesn't even read this blog! As for Ducky and Jersey bashing gays, don't tell me what they said... show me.

dmarks said...

Malcolm, thanks for pointing out that I had not properly corrected the link I had mistakenly made about Canada overpay, that should have been about the situation in the US. here is just one reference to how the rich get richer under Obama at direct taxpayer expense.

There, one issue settled.

Pertaining to another issue, Jersey's homophobia, check out his review of Atlas Shrugged where he bashes a character for being a diminutive homosexual:

""Roark" is a whiny little faggot who lacks the maturity and serenity to deal with life"

From Rational Nation

Ducky likes to bash gay people as "homos" on this blog, and others. Click here to find one example, at Western Hero:

"Exactly, like the scary Muslims and the nasty homos."

At least he doesn't have a nasty epithet he uses against Muslims!

By telling you what they said earlier, I showed you. As with all of these, I am accurately pointing things out.

The Shaw ones are a lot harder to find, but I have been digging. If it were easy to find, I would have linked quickly. I resent your false implication that she never said anything like this. I don't describe these things incorrectly, see the links (which were easy to find) on Ducky and JMJ.

"f you're going to make damaging claims like that against somebody"

It was Shaw who made "damaging claims". Not me for accurately pointing them out. I will find 2 of the 3 bigoted comments from Shaw. The one in which she claimed that "F***ing retard" was a term of endearment might possibly be in an email account that I shut down, but I will make sure.

"The unemployment hole he dug us?"

Yes. Bush left Obama with lower unemployment than we have now.

"We were losing about 750,000 jobs per month just before and after President Obama's inauguration."

Obama has nothing to do with the "before". Bush has nothing to do with the "after". Stop trying to blame Bush for Obama's policies.

"No objective person would blame him for this."

Anyone would, it is a matter of who is on watch. Obama's election heightened the employment drop, due to Obama's threats of worker-hostile programs like "Obamacare", and further overtaxing companies, which encouraged them to fire people even before he was inaugurated.

Malcolm Bondon said...

dmarks: Thanks for finally backing up some of your claims. I looked at the comments by Jersey and Ducky. Regarding the former, he explained by saying:

"I meant "faggot" as the ol' term for "crybaby." Why would someone like me bash him for being supposedly gay?"

Although it's not a term I'd use to refer to a crybaby, I'll take Jersey at his word. In the past, I've seen Ducky speak in the voice of the stereotypical right-winger. I think that's what he did when he used the terms "scary Muslims" and "nasty homos". In the comments section of a post I wrote on 2/15/12 (see URL below), I did the same thing when I sarcastically referred to the president as a "socialist Kenyan Muslim". Do you really think I believe President Obama is a socialist Muslim from Kenya?!

http://diversityink.blogspot.com/2012/02/book-fox-news-doesnt-want-you-to-read.html

As for your claims against Shaw, I couldn't care less about you being resentful over my implication. If you didn't have a tendency to distort people's words, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Here are three examples of you distorting people's words that come to mind:

1. In a post Leticia wrote recently, you accused Bill Clinton of physically attacking Chris Wallace during an interview.

2. You said "Free George Zimmerman" was calling for a violent assault when he said the following on this blog:

"Time for Sharpton, Farrakhan, and the other racial debris to head to that great big watermelon patch in the sky."

3. You accused Joy Behar of caling for someone to commit arson when she said the following about Mitt Romney: "I mean, I’d like to see his house burn, one of his million houses burning down, who is he going to call, the Mormon fire patrol?"

By all means, keep looking for the comments Shaw supposedly made because I'm gonna stay on your ass until you come up with something.

I'm not blaming Bush for President Obama's policies. However, to a certain extent, any predecessor's policies will have an effect on the economy after they leave office. Just like Clinton said at the DNC, no president would have been able to fix the mess left by Bush in 4 years.