Democrats: Let's Ban Profits!

[Chucktshoes]

Let's just hope we don't have another McCarthy come around.

For all of the self serving aggrandizement and heavy handedness, McCarthy turned out to be right. The US government during the 40's and early 50's was riddled with communist sympathizes and spies, most especially Roosevelt's White House and the State Department.

[Oh Shoot]

LOL

So socialism and/or communism is a-ok with you? Just trying to clarify your position.

Well, our system of government does indeed allow it to be destroyed over time also.

De Toqueville was right, the people have been bribed with their own money for so long that now even those who don't contribute anything demand a disproportional share of everything. And get it.

Letting the people vote for president and senators at all wasn't the overall brightest idea, since the country was never conceived as a pure democracy. Majority rule on issue by issue would have had most everyone in chains long ago.

And giving women the vote was the eventual coup de grâce, just sayin....

- OS

Edited September 8, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest ThePunisher]

Let's just hope we don't have another McCarthy come around.

Why not? Let's start again beginning with the Hollywood blacklist like in the late '40's early '50's. Bunch of Hollywood commie sympathizers that hate America. Then fumigate all the commie trash out D.C. especially the WH.

[quietguy]

Giving the women the vote didn't help much either, just sayin....

- OS

While I am not for limiting the right to vote based on gender, race, religious beliefs, etc, I do think that you stumbled upon one of the critical issues behind the decline of our republic (or representative democacy, if that your chosen definition for our system of government). We get all tied up in the right to vote, but what about the responsibility for casting a vote? I am not suggesting that we go back to the days of landholding white males (which is a demographic that I would qualify for), but I do think that we should better define the right to vote, and for whom it applies.

Our freedoms aren't free, and our rights don't come without responsibilities. When we expend the right to vote to those who do not understand or appreciate the heavy burden that comes with it, we are destined to fail. Millions of men and women have given their lives to ensure that we have these rights, the least that we can do is take their service and sacrifice seriously.

I think that the fairest criteria for which to define a voter would be based on a civics test. When you factor in the fact that we spend tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per child for a public school education (which historically, the sole purpose of a public education system to prepare students to participate in our republic) I just don't think that it is asking too much for that voter to understand the difference between their state representative and their senators at the federal level.

BTW, I know that my capitalization is far from correct. That is intentional.

Edited September 8, 2012 by quietguy

[TMF]

Easy equation. If government assistance is your primary means of income you are not permitted to vote due to conflict of interest. The advantage right now is that the majority of welfare sucking low-life do-nothing ambition-less pieces of sub-human leeches don't vote. That is changing though as the Democrat platform is constantly scaring the leeches by telling them the Repubs are going to turn it all off. The leeches and the bleeding hearts are the ones running it all into the ground. While the bleeding hearts have the right to vote, the leeches shouldn't. They are not citizens, they are dependants.

[waynesan]

Yup!

And what's more funny about this is Van Jones checking the interviewer before he speaks. I bet he has to take a pop quiz of outlets not to speak to before every public outing because he is so tired of his Commie plans being exposed.

I have, on my bookshelf next to all the radical propaganda I've collected, the Van Jones Storm manual. Yes, his commie manual Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement.

Storm pdf: http://media.glennbe...RMSummation.pdf

More on Van Jones: http://www.discovert....asp?indid=2406 and http://keywiki.org/index.php/Van_Jones

A large majority of the Democrats leading the sheeple are not you're mother or fathers era Dems. They're full blown Socialists and Communists hiding in the democratic party using the Saul Alinksy tactics to progress their agenda.

If you really study these politicians and their organizations, you can find who are members of what groups, etc.

There is a lot of info on these two sites for starters:

http://keywiki.org/index.php/Main_Page

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/

I had been pulling as many videos off youtube as I could of these assclowns exposing themselves admitting, meeting with, receiving awards from, etc., socialist and communist party organizations because folks have attacked youtube and keep getting all the videos taken down for copyright or other reasons.

The one I've ben searching for over the last few months is of Richard Trumka (AFL-CIO) sitting in front of the mic blabbing and said: "I didn't get in to the union business for workers rights, I got in to it for the progressive agenda." I think that is pretty close to exactly what he said, but that got pulled off youtube so fast I never got to copy it.

http://keywiki.org/index.php/Richard_Trumka

http://www.discovert....asp?indid=1630

http://keywiki.org/blog/?p=1911

Anyway, ever find these clowns exposing themselves on video or recording, please save it to a disc and back it up twice. Before long, they'll have all proof of their real ajendas and socialist/communist affiliations pulled from the internet.

JonC, what a great website the discovenet is! Just spent over an hour reading through some of the articles and no doubt will be spending many more. Thanks for linking to them here.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Easy equation. If government assistance is your primary means of income you are not permitted to vote due to conflict of interest. The advantage right now is that the majority of welfare sucking low-life do-nothing ambition-less pieces of sub-human leeches don't vote. That is changing though as the Democrat platform is constantly scaring the leeches by telling them the Repubs are going to turn it all off. The leeches and the bleeding hearts are the ones running it all into the ground. While the bleeding hearts have the right to vote, the leeches shouldn't. They are not citizens, they are dependants.

I'm trying to make sure you weren't being sarcastic, because I agree with you again, TMF

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, our system of government does indeed allow it to be destroyed over time also.

De Toqueville was right, the people have been bribed with their own money for so long that now even those who don't contribute anything demand a disproportional share of everything. And get it.

Letting the people vote for president and senators at all wasn't the overall brightest idea, since the country was never conceived as a pure democracy. Majority rule on issue by issue would have had most everyone in chains long ago.

And giving women the vote was the eventual coup de grâce, just sayin....

- OS

Yeh, I could embrace the idea of the Republic getting back to a Republic, more so than this system

we've allowed. It might take some of the money out of politics. The Senate back in the hands of the state and

not popular elections would be nice. It would build on the states rights, once again. This mob rule thing

we created is very dangerous.

Edited September 8, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[BigK]

If we can't agree as a country that presenting ID to vote is the least we can do to prevent voter fraud,

we'll never agree that requiring a basic knowledge of the government that you got from your "free" public education

will prevent poor voting decisions.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

We'll never agree with pols who want to do the "no ID" thing, so they need to be flushed out of the system.

When someone uses criminal process to benefit their political side, there is no leap to take to understand

what their goals are, and it ain't in our country's best interests.

If these people are allowed to get away with this, what's the point to an election?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

They want to ban profits? I'd just as soon ban Democrats.

[BigK]

We'll never agree with pols who want to do the "no ID" thing, so they need to be flushed out of the system.

When someone uses criminal process to benefit their political side, there is no leap to take to understand

what their goals are, and it ain't in our country's best interests.

If these people are allowed to get away with this, what's the point to an election?

makes me wonder how close Bush vs Gore would've really been if everyone who voted had to show ID.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

We would probably get a surprise,

and I'm sure of the slant. I doubt it

would have been nearly as close.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnC]

JonC, what a great website the discovenet is! Just spent over an hour reading through some of the articles and no doubt will be spending many more. Thanks for linking to them here.

Thanks. Hope everyone takes the time to read up on a few folks or groups listed in there.

[TMF]

I'm trying to make sure you weren't being sarcastic, because I agree with you again, TMF

I'm conservative at the core, I'm just a social liberal, if you could even call it that. Nothing gets me riled up more than societies leeches. I got no problem with folks who are on hard times, but I regard those who are professionally on welfare as such low forms of life they shouldn't even be considered second-class citizens.

[Will Carry]

Holy Cow Batman! I cannot believe it! I am at a loss for words.

[BigK]

If profits are all about greed, then I'm all for it. In fact, greed is as good a motivator for innovation and convenience as we have in this country.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I'm conservative at the core, I'm just a social liberal, if you could even call it that. Nothing gets me riled up more than societies leeches. I got no problem with folks who are on hard times, but I regard those who are professionally on welfare as such low forms of life they shouldn't even be considered second-class citizens.

I figured that out a while back. Just messin witcha!

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Profits aren't at all about greed. Profits are a reflection of achievement and productivity. You have to have profit

to create wealth. Greed is what happens when someone who is jealous of your profit and wealth wants yours

without earning it.

Please don't confuse the two. They aren't related except by those who wish to muddy definitions for their own greedy,

jealous use of the word.