We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, July 21. 2018
Self Control: The Overlooked Key to Wealth and Health
Texas Dad Delivers His Own Daughter In A Chick-Fil-A Bathroom
That's a real guy. Catching a baby is not rocket science, but they come out as slippery and squirmy as a trout.
Ireland Could Be Visited By Great White Sharks Due To ‘Climate Change’ Or Something
Guess what? Great Whites live everywhere
Trudeau's tough climate polices face a mounting backlash
Baltimore Restaurants Banned From Including Sodas, Sugary Drinks On Kids’ Menus
No fruit juices either, I hope
NYC's war against Air B&B
Dozens of fake charities scammed donations for veterans then pocketed the cash: FTC
TED Speaker: ‘Pedophilia is an Unchangeable Sexual Orientation, Just Like… Heterosexuality’
That could be true
The next phase in America’s War on Poverty
Is the “Mainstream” Media the Enemy of the People?
Dershowitz: Trump Critics 'Going Over the Top' With Treason Cries
Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.”
Your tax dollars at work: Manhattan Madam Subpoenaed by Robert Mueller
John Brennan, Obama's CIA director, admits egging on the FBI's probe of Trump and Russia
Good Scott Adams podcast: How the White House is Executing a Brutally Effective High Ground Persuasion Play
Trump embarrasses Hillary on Russia with video tweet
What Are Democrats Running On?
KEITH ELLISON DEMANDS AMAZON CENSOR THE DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER
Hungary Quits UN Migration Pact, Calls it a ‘Threat to the World’
Get Over It—Israel Is the Jewish State
US report finds only 20,000 Palestinian refugees in the world
Tracked: Jul 22, 09:37
Tracked: Jul 22, 09:49
Tracked: Jul 22, 09:52
Tracked: Jul 22, 10:07
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Bird Dog: Great Whites live everywhere
Great White Shark Habitat
Zak, what is your point? That you can look up something on the web? That our good host Bird dog is a liar, because a map ypu found somewhere on the internet shows sharks don't swim around in the arctic and antarctic ice? That you are getting up early to be paid doubletime to troll for globalworming, hillary and obama on weekends? (we know, your advice is "freely given")
jaybird: what is your point? That you can look up something on the web? That our good host Bird dog is a liar, because a map ypu found somewhere on the internet shows sharks don't swim around in the arctic and antarctic ice?
We're quite certain that Bird Dog wasn't lying, but he was apparently mistaken, or at least didn't provide a complete answer. Great Whites only swim in waters that are about 12°C or warmer. They are not normally found in Irish waters, but may very well migrate north if the waters there warm sufficiently.
Our point was directly relevant to the post. We assume that if it was worth his time to post on the subject, then it invites relevant comments on that subject.
jaybird: (we know, your advice is "freely given")
Trump embarrasses Hillary on Russia with video tweet
Excellent example of a Trumpism.
The Clinton video is from 2010, when Dmitry Medvedev was president of Russia, who was engaged in an extensive modernization program. The U.S. was hoping to solidify Russia's role as a responsible member of the international community. Since then, under Putin, Russia has devolved into a kleptocracy, annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine, and engaged in a widespread campaign of cyberwarfare against open democracies including against the U.S.
Zak, your loyalty to hillary is so predictably pathological, you have no credibility.
Other people can look up random things in Wikipedia - Tandemocracy:
"The Putin-Medvedev tandemocracy is the joint leadership of Russia between 2008 and 2012 when Vladimir Putin, who was constitutionally barred from serving a third consecutive term as President of Russia, assumed the role of Prime Minister under President Dmitry Medvedev..... Putin was re-elected President in the 2012 election and Medvedev became his Prime Minister.....Commentators, analysts and some politicians concurred in 2008 and early 2009 that the transfer of presidential powers that took place on May 7, 2008, was in name only and Putin continued to retain the number one position in Russia's effective power hierarchy, with Dmitry Medvedev being a figurehead or "Russia’s notional president"."
jaybird: The Putin-Medvedev tandemocracy is the joint leadership of Russia between 2008 and 2012 when Vladimir Putin, who was constitutionally barred from serving a third consecutive term as President of Russia, assumed the role of Prime Minister under President Dmitry Medvedev
Yes, but that doesn't change the basic point that Clinton's remarks were before the annexation of Crimea, the invasion of eastern Ukraine, and cyberwarfare against open democracies, including the U.S. After these aggressions, Clinton became an adversary to Putin's Russia, and as retribution they initiated cyberattacks against her campaign.
The context changed.
The context changed.
Then she received the 150 million "contribution" from the Russians.
You're gonna lose this one too.-
The context changed:
If that f*cking bastard wins..., we all hang from nooses!
^ The propaganda arm of the CS-SR(s) speaks anew.
The close timing of the DNC announcement and Guccifer 2.0’s publication of the Trump report, as well as reports of “Russian fingerprints” in those documents, created a strong link between Guccifer 2.0 and the Russian hackers who allegedly stole DNC files. Over a year later, the Associated Press tells us that this first narrative was wrong, contradicting the DNC’s claims as well as much of the early legacy press reports on the issue. Must we concurrently accept the narrative that Russians hacked the DNC if claims that they had done so were not only based on flimsy evidence but have now been contradicted completely?
As far as documented evidence of election interference goes, one does not have to stray far from the actors in the Russian hacking saga to discover that the DNC and establishment Democrats were, instead of victims of meddling, the perpetrators of such abuse of the American Democratic process. In 2017 the NYC Board of Elections admitted that it had illegally purged hundreds of thousands of Democratic voters from the election roles, preventing them from voting in the 2016 Democratic primaries. This abuse of power represents just one in a constellation of legitimate examples of abuse that took place at the hands of corporatized Democrats in order to unfairly and illegally ensure a Clinton nomination.
Clintons remarks were before the annexation of the Crimea and the invasion of the Ukraine.....but long after the CIA invasion of the Ukraine and the threat of NATO in Georgia and the Ukraine. The warmonger Uniparty stirred that shitpile up...now they complain about the stench.
Zachriel: Clintons remarks were before the annexation of the Crimea and the invasion of the Ukraine
indyjonesouthere: but long after the CIA invasion of the Ukraine and the threat of NATO in Georgia and the Ukraine. The warmonger Uniparty stirred that shitpile up
When Georgia attempted to regain control of South Ossetia, a northern region of Georgia, Russia militarily intervened. And the U.S. did side with the democratic aspirations of the Ukrainians. Essentially, Russia considers these countries to be in their sphere of influence, and reject American attempts to intervene. That's one reason why the Obama Administration did not provide lethal aid to Ukraine, the fear being that it would likely lead to more violence, when a political solution is probably the only way to resolve the issue.
You are making valid points. The U.S. often intervenes and makes situations worse. However, while these disputes are intra-national, the annexation of Crimea is a direct violation of international law by forcibly redrawing borders. This puts Russia outside the international system regardless of any complaints they may have about other issues. It also colors any interpretation of their other interventions. Russia is an aggressor.
The annexation is no such thing. It was Khrushchev that turned it over to the Ukraine for administration as that is where there land connection occurs as it is a peninsula. Since it has been annexed once again, the Russians have built a bridge to it. The history of Russia ruling the Crimea is a long one and attempts to change that will result in continued warring along Ukraine's border to the Black Sea. The Ukraine could lose a territorial strip bordering the Black Sea if they and Nato are dumb enough to keep pushing. If Erdogan of Turkey ( a dysfunctional NATO ally) gets stupid about controlling access to the black sea he is likely to find the strait widened by nuclear weapons and Istanbul delisted as a current city.
indyjonesouthere: Since it has been annexed once again, the Russians have built a bridge to it.
And they did it by force, in violation of THE fundamental tenet of international law: Borders are not to be changed except through peaceful means. Meanwhile, Russia invaded eastern Ukraine, so don't pretend they aren't the aggressor.
Russia did nothing Hillary and Obama didn't do in Libya. When Russia unilaterally allowed the Ukraine to administer the Crimea it negated that right when the Ukraine left the USSR. When the Ukraine resisted then Russia went after them. The Crimea will go nowhere else as it is a national security issue to the Russians. Along with the neocons you can piss in the wind about it but that's as far as you will get.
indyjonesouthere: Russia did nothing Hillary and Obama didn't do in Libya.
Huh? There was the potential of a massive slaughter of civilians in Libya. The invasion of Ukraine caused widespread civilian deaths.
indyjonesouthere: When Russia unilaterally allowed the Ukraine to administer the Crimea it negated that right when the Ukraine left the USSR.
Russia agreed to Ukraine's borders in the Balavezha Accords, Alma-Ata Protocol, and the Budapest Memorandum.
Libya was all about running guns to ISIS. Accords, protocols, and memorandum....sounds just like UN politics with the arabs of Palestine and the Israelis.
indyjonesouthere: Libya was all about running guns to ISIS.
Uh, no. While some weapons provided to insurgent groups may have been diverted, "Libya was all about running guns to ISIS" is false.
Zak, your peerless leader hillary was secretary of state under obama, from 2009 to 2013, while you claim your buddy medvedev was the benign ruler of russia. So, your argument is that it was OK for hillary and the DNC to let the russians pilfer their email servers and classified communications, because medvedev was hillary's buddy? Medvedev was also such a good guy that he was interested in hillary's yoga exercises, which she wanted to share with him and wikileaks!!!
The uranium one bribes to hillary culminated in 2010. According to your argument, hillary sold Uranium One to her good buddy medvedev in exchange for $140 MILLION bribe, because medvedev was such a good guy, and certainly not putin!! Great argument, space cadet.
jaybird: your peerless leader hillary was secretary of state under obama, from 2009 to 2013, while you claim your buddy medvedev was the benign ruler of russia.
We made no such claim. However, there were indications that Russia was attempting to modernize in order to limit their reliance on mineral resources. However, investment required for modernization requires ending the kleptocracy, which Russia's oligarchy is impeding. Any nation is a confluence of many different political forces, and eventually change will occur.
jaybird: The uranium one bribes to hillary culminated in 2010.
There's no evidence to support the accusation. Unlike Trump, the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation have open books.
this is a truly bizarre denial...are you claiming that "bill" didn't get payments for "speaking" from the russians to grease the scam, and that the clinton crime family "foundation" didn't get over a hundred million dollars from the uranium one scandal? THat the "open books" clinton crime family tried to hide the bribes as coming from canada so they would not have to be reported in the US? Are you claiming that the FBI didn't have reports that this was a bribery scam, which evidence was shut down until congress got it released?
jaybird: are you claiming that "bill" didn't get payments for "speaking" from the russians
Not $140 million. Clinton got paid $500,000, which was the going rate for celebrities in his tier. Reagan received $2,000,000 for two speeches, and that was in 1980s dollars. George Clooney has received as much as $600,000, and he's just an actor.
jaybird: the clinton crime family "foundation"
Again, there is no evidence that the Clintons monetarily profited from the Clinton Foundation. The Clintons and the Clinton Foundation have open books.
jaybird: THat the "open books" clinton crime family tried to hide the bribes as coming from canada so they would not have to be reported in the US?
Canada has different reporting rules. Take that up with Canada. In any case, there is no evidence that the Clintons monetarily profited from the Clinton Foundation.
pretty weak, Zak. There is no evidence except for the $140 million dollars. And the crooked ("treasonous" is a word used by hillary supporters recently) uranium one approval. And the FBI informant evidence of bribery. And the clinton crime family "foundation" being run and owned by the clintons, paying massive overhead salaries to clinton political hangers on and political machine, and even wedding expenses. Don't you think the "foundation" even likely has stolen White House furniture?
Wait, I'll give you their answer:
Again, there's no evidence to support those accusations.
jaybird: There is no evidence except for the $140 million dollars.
Except the bulk of the $140 million was donated by someone who no longer had a stake in Uranium One, the Uranium One mines in the U.S. had negligible strategic significance, uranium part of the global energy market, there is no evidence that Clinton was involved in the Uranium One decision, and there is no evidence that donating money to the Clinton Foundation enriched the Clintons monetarily. Other than that, you have an iron-clad case.
jaybird: And the clinton crime family "foundation" being run and owned by the clintons, paying massive overhead salaries to clinton political hangers on and political machine
The salaries of the principals of the Clinton Foundation are within industry norms. Again, there is no evidence that the Clintons profited monetarily from the Clinton Foundation. There is, however, evidence that millions of lives were saved through the efforts of the Clinton Foundation on HIV/AIDS and malaria. Charity Watch gives the foundation an “A” rating, based on its financial efficiency, accountability, governance and fundraising costs.
Bruce Lindsay, Director $361,000
Chelsea Clinton, Director $0
Donna Shalala, President & CEO, $0
Total executive payroll, $3.5 million for 13 employees
(See page 43 of 2016 return)
(Notably, you ignored the contrary opinions expressed in the article you cited.)
Zak, even more bizarre. You must be claiming that your idol hillary had no idea whatsoever that putin was involved with medvedev in russia. So she could trust her buddy medvedev to not check out her classified yoga email exercises, and that the millions of dollar bribe to sell uranium to russia was for a good cause.
Also, hillary probably didn't know that obama told medvedev to tell putin that he (obama" would have "more flexibility" after his re-election. If hillary had known that, she would have known that obama knew that obama thought that medvedev was just a messenger boy to putin, saying "i'lll tell him".
jaybird: You must be claiming that your idol hillary had no idea whatsoever that putin was involved with medvedev in russia.
We made no such claim.
jaybird: obama told medvedev to tell putin that he (obama" would have "more flexibility" after his re-election.
Putin was president-elect at the time. That they worked in conjunction was not a secret. In any case, that is immaterial to the larger point. Must we repeat it again? Really?
Ahem, Clinton's remarks were before the annexation of Crimea, the invasion of eastern Ukraine, and cyberwarfare against open democracies, including the U.S. After these aggressions, Clinton became an adversary to Putin's Russia, and as retribution they initiated cyberattacks against her campaign.
[B]Zzzz:[b] In any case, that is immaterial to the larger point.
Boom! There it is, kiddiez, y'all just admitted to losing the main argument by dismissing relevant points as immaterial.
Trump embarrasses Hillary on Russia with video tweet
Just noticed. Trump is retweeting a video from Russian state television, Channel One.
More "conclusive evidence" Trump colluded with Putin, hey kiddiez?
If that f*cking bastard wins, ... we all hang from nooses !!!
I always get a kick out of leftists - who spent the entire Cold War openly cheering for the Soviet Union - now suddenly have the vapors when it comes to Russia.
jimg: I always get a kick out of leftists - who spent the entire Cold War openly cheering for the Soviet Union - now suddenly have the vapors when it comes to Russia.
We never cheered for the Soviet Union, which system was stultified and insular and could not withstand contact with liberal society.
The lefties have been cheering for Russia since the Harry Hopkins days and through the Che days of the Russian missile crisis. You must be a 15 yr old bot to not have seen or heard of that. Russia has only become embarrassing to the lefties since the Russians ran out of steam after Reagan's term. Now your ANTIFA (communist) dysfunctionals are parading around in pussyhats and masks once again threatening those who don't buy into your "democratic socialism". Just as the NY Times didn't have the cohones to report on the holodomor it does seem that the current lefty media can not report on current crop of lying ass democratic socialists of the DNC.
indyjonesouthere: The lefties have been cheering for Russia since the Harry Hopkins days and through the Che days of the Russian missile crisis.
Overgeneralization. The political left is a highly disparate grouping, a grouping with a wide range of views. The left is generally defined as those advocating for social or economic equality. That can mean anyone from communists advocating a utopian vision of perfect equality to those who simply support social security programs for the poor and disabled.
This is similar to overgeneralizations about the political right, another disparate grouping, defined as those advocating a hierarchical society, which ranges from authoritarian white nationalists to those who simply support traditional institutions such as marriage and the military.
^ It said monotonically through it's 3" speaker, gigantic cyclopian monochromatic green eyeball flickering, while the sound of aging drives shrieked from a rack in the back of some derelict China Sea island data center, wires run out the window to an old Russian RTG long since forgotten by its maker.
Then the kiddiez proceed to overgeneralize the left ignoring completely the preceding statement of historic fact.
There is no generalization...the socialists love their utopian socialist order until they run out of everyone else's money. The American wealthy like the Mexican wealthy or any other socialist group of wealthy promote the socialism on the backs of the middle class while their money magically remains out of reach of the tax man. If you have been paying attention you did notice that the "democratic socialist" sicced the tax man on the tea party to harass them. Democratic socialist ALWAYS use their big government to threaten, harass, and incarcerate those who do not get in step and shut up. IRS, BLM, DOJ,CIA, FBI, EPA are all enlisted to support and enshrine the administrative socialist state and they are ALL armed. It's in European government and north American government and you ignorantly call it over generalization. You promote utopian monstrosities right along with Bernie, Obama, Hillary, Merkel, and May and George Soros. The only thing any of you believe in is heaven on earth.
indyjonesouthere: There is no generalization...the socialists love their utopian socialist order until they run out of everyone else's money.
Of course it's an overgeneralization. Not everyone on the political left is a socialist.
indyjonesouthere: The American wealthy like the Mexican wealthy or any other socialist group of wealthy promote the socialism on the backs of the middle class while their money magically remains out of reach of the tax man.
Most of the wealthy in the U.S. are not socialists by any means.
The political left are micromanaging utopians content to kill anyone not adhering to the truths of socialism. They firmly believe in heaven on earth and will plant you in the earth if you are not a similar believer. There are too many examples in modern history to think otherwise. In this country you only need look at the left coast, Hawaii, and the northeast to see their incessant attempts to regulate and control everything.
indyjonesouthere: The political left are micromanaging utopians content to kill anyone not adhering to the truths of socialism.
Overgeneralizing makes for a no better argument than it did above.
What part of leftists (and rightism) is a spectrum of beliefs do you have trouble understanding?
You have advanced to the extreme left. The panicked attempts to remove Trump and the unceasing attempts by the SDS, weatherman and other Ayers thugs along with the current crop of antifa communists is evidence of where you are on the scale of totalitarian to anarchist. Even Comey is getting panicked over the extremes exhibited by the TDS lefties. And who runs the DNC? Two more minority extremists. The look on the MSM on election night was shock and awe. Hillary is unable to function since her rejection. How much evidence do you need? Lefties have been moving farther to authoritarianism since the 60's. You defend Sen Warren even though she "wears" the red mans suit to get a leg up on others.
indyjonesouthere: You have advanced to the extreme left.
Our ideological position is immaterial to your claim that "The political left are micromanaging utopians content to kill anyone not adhering to the truths of socialism" and other such hokum. In any case, as we consider markets and private property as essential to liberty and prosperity, we do not meet even your strained definition.
indyjonesouthere: And who runs the DNC? Two more minority extremists.
Now you're conflating the political left with the Democratic Party.
indyjonesouthere: Lefties have been moving farther to authoritarianism since the 60's.
Now you're conflating leftism with authoritarianism.
The political left is the democratic party...its been the party of the left since Harry Hopkins, and current members are the SDS and weatherman thugs of the 60's. Bill Ayers not familiar, he's tight with Obama. DSA are all situated in the Dem party. Even Comey the crook is getting nervous over the extremists in the party. Lefties are authoritarian...you need only observe the FDR administration. It is the Lefties under Wilson that began the administrative state in order to control and micromanage the citizen.
indyjonesouthere: The political left is the democratic party
Again, no. While the Democratic Party tends left, not everyone on the left is a supporter of the Democratic Party. Similarly, while the Republican Party tends right, not everyone on the right is a supporter of the Republican Party.
indyjonesouthere: its been the party of the left since Harry Hopkins
Hopkins died in 1946. The Democratic Party had a strong conservative wing until the 1980s. There were conservative Democrats until the 2010s.
indyjonesouthere: Lefties are authoritarian..
Not all leftists advocate for government solutions, and not all those who advocate for government solutions are on the left. There are authoritarians on the left and authoritarians on the right. There are libertarians on the left and libertarians on the right.
Left-wing politics supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy.
Right-wing politics hold that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal or desirable
It is crystal clear that the FBI is the deep state "KGB" and they are intent of getting rid of Trump. They hide behind policies by refusing to tell congress what they are doing which effectively covers up wrong doing. They are clearly extra-constitutional in their fishing expeditions, clearly exceeding what any of us think law enforcement and prosecution should be doing. They have even broken laws and defied their own policies to do absolutely nothing when it comes to investigating Clinton or other Democrats. This is a full scale effort by the Dems to overthrow a public election and the will of the people. Make no mistake the Dems are NOT "for the people" but they are for illegal aliens.
It means Rosenstein unleashed the most awesome powers of a special counsel to investigate an allegation that the key FBI officials, driving the investigation for 10 months beforehand, did not think was “there.”
The fact is that Russia interfered in the U.S. election, was attempting to penetrate the Trump campaign, and people in the Trump campaign lied about their contacts with Russian agents.
It is two days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named special counsel Robert Mueller to oversee an investigation into alleged collusion between Trump and the Russia campaign.
Mueller was charged with investigating "the Russian govenment's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election," and "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump."
We know Russia interfered with the U.S. election, and we know that people within the Trump campaign had contacts with Russian agents, then lied about it.
“There’s no big there there,” Strzok texted... Page, during a closed-door interview with lawmakers, confirmed in the most pained and contorted way that the message in fact referred to the quality of the Russia case, according to multiple eyewitnesses.
According to Fox News — way back in January — "New text messages allegedly reveal that controversial FBI official Peter Strzok was hesitant about joining Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation team because of his 'gut sense' there would be 'no big there there.'" In other words, it wasn't an informed decision, but one based on limited information available to Strzok at the time. One doesn't have to have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to initiate an investigation. In this case, there is very strong evidence of Russian interference in the U.S. election.
And we know the Clinton campaign had contacts with the Russians and lied about it.
See the Podesta group.
The FBI lied, kiddiez.
How does losing feel, kiddiez?
“pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation, just like… heterosexuality.”
You might find this site interesting.
I don't know if it's changeable or not. Does it matter a great deal? We're not going to serve up young people as tasty sex toys even if we conclude pedophiles are unalterable or even in some sense unblameable. They still have to be preventing from predation, forcibly if necessary.
We spend so much time trying to decide if things should be called a "disease" or not. Our real task is to figure out rules for living together that make people feel safe enough not to take the law into their own hands several times a day, just so their kids don't get raped or killed.
There is a constant drum beat that "the Russians interfered with the election". But what, exactly, did they do? Did they register dead people and vote for them like the Democrats do? Did they stack the vote on who the party would support as Hillary did to Bernie? Did they allow illegal immigrants to vote as the Democrats do? Did they fight tooth and nail any effort to make elections more secure by requiring voter ID and the Democrats do?
NO! They did none of these things. What did they do? did they hack the election? NO! Did they change any votes? NO! Did they do anything in 2016 that they did not do in 2012 and 2008? NO!
So, why do we use meaningless words like "interfere" when we can't even show any actual "interference"? If Hillary had won would we still be over the top on this fake news?
OneGuy: There is a constant drum beat that "the Russians interfered with the election". But what, exactly, did they do?
Russia government agents under direct orders from Putin illegally hacked into Clinton campaign emails, then timed the releases to cause maximum political damage to the Clinton campaign. They also used various means of propaganda, such as social media to target Catholics with fake news that the Pope had endorsed Trump, or targeted minorities to discourage voting.
Russia is reverse engineering open democracies, and are engaging in widespread and concerted cyberattacks against liberal societies. Gee whiz, they even turned off the lights in Kiev in order to destabilize the government. When you refuse to acknowledge the threat, when the President himself calls it fake news, it emboldens such actions in the future. Other governments are probably considering similar measures.
Zzzzz: Russia government agents under direct orders from Putin illegally hacked into Clinton campaign emails, blah, blah, blah ...
So far there is no conclusive evidence for your talking points.
The US is a Constitutional Republic. Democracy is George Soros speak.
annieoakley: The US is a Constitutional Republic.
Democracy and republicanism are not mutually exclusive. The U.S. is a republic because leaders are representative of the people, in particular, the head of state is not an inherited monarchy. The U.S. is a democracy because the people exercise power through elections, in particular, there is universal suffrage. The U.S. is a federal system because power is distributed between a central government and state or regional governments. Consequently, the U.S is a federal representative democracy.
It is a Constitutional Republic no matter how you try to spin your opinion.
annieoakley: It is a Constitutional Republic no matter how you try to spin your opinion.
The U.S. is a constitutional republic, but it is also a democracy. Greater democracy has been a trend in the U.S. since its inception, through Jacksonian Democracy, through the Civil War Amendments, direct election of the Senate, women's suffrage, and the Civil Rights movement. The U.S. now has what is called universal suffrage.
^ The US is a women's studies incubator predicated on the One Right, that being enshrined in Roe and reinforced by MSNBC on alternate Thursdays as well as in its officialized annual Rite of Governance - Bill of Rights, Section 184,216, Kennedy-Biden Clause - this a revival of sorts of the Righteous Nude Swimming Act of 1887, in which among other things pigs flew, the CS-SR(s) added monotonically through it's 3" speaker, gigantic cyclopian monochromatic green eyeball flickering, while the sound of aging drives shrieked from a rack in the back of some derelict China Sea island data center, wires run out the window to an old Russian RTG long since forgotten by its maker.
And so there we have it: Reality.
The "greater democracy" has been promoted through the living-breathing Constitution theory promoted by democratic socialists/communists since at least Woodrow Wilson. That's how we got our legalized fossilized administrative state and the IRS and the FED that feed the democratic socialist/communist state. When too few justices support the old sagging wretch we have socialist/communists ready to court pack and Bork the results. All in order to keep the taxes and debt rolling on to support utopia heaven on earth.
But the Clattering Soros-Schlansky Robot(s) has determined beyond doubt that the Founders wrote the Constitution anticipating the rise of Judge Ginsberg.
Therefore according to the strict principle of textualism the Republic is actually a pink rubber confederacy of latter day talking salad dressing. Constitutional!
indyjonesouthere: The "greater democracy" has been promoted through the living-breathing Constitution theory promoted by democratic socialists/communists since at least Woodrow Wilson.
You are throwing around words as mockery and insults rather than adhering to their actual meaning. Following your argument, it would seem virtually every American has been a leftist, including Eisenhower and Coolidge.
indyjonesouthere: That's how we got our legalized fossilized administrative state and the IRS
It's technically easy to get rid of the administrative state. Just pass the appropriate legislation. However, turns out people like their administrative state, so you may face some opposition. By the way, the IRS was founded under that known communist, Abraham Lincoln.
^ The CS-SR(s)'s Pedantic Bias Generator 5000 continued to bang away like some enormous deranged dot matrix instrument of torture, utterly and forever unencumbered by normal human perspective on a broad array of facts.
The living breathing Constitution is a well know belief of the socialist/communist lefties that attain judgeships whether on state or federal courts. That is why the right to "privacy" is only recognized with abortion. They deny all other rights to privacy. It is why religious freedom has been under fire since FDR's court. It is why the SCOTUS first said states (in this case California) had the right to legalize gay marriage but shortly after ruled that it was to be the law of the land. It is why "shall not be infringed" is not understood by judges. The current rulings on immigration by lower courts is a joke, period. Judges making these decisions are all a part of the heaven on earth utopians thinking they know best and not giving a damn about the limited powers of the Constitution. The pushback they will get is Congress removing judicial jurisdiction over future law.
indyjonesouthere: The living breathing Constitution is a well know belief of the socialist/communist lefties that attain judgeships whether on state or federal courts.
There are no, or very few, judges in the U.S. who are communists.
indyjonesouthere: They deny all other rights to privacy.
Generally, it is those on the left who protect the right to privacy in the private sphere.
indyjonesouthere: It is why the SCOTUS first said states (in this case California) had the right to legalize gay marriage but shortly after ruled that it was to be the law of the land.
Good example. The right to love whom you want, and what you do in the bedroom, is fundamental to privacy rights.
You do notice I have no financial privacy or medical privacy and that is because of SCOTUS. SCOTUS will rule states rights in a gay case when the state approves of gay marriage but will turn around and mandate all other states to do the same when those states do not approve. That is the definition of a living breathing Constitution. That judicial philosophy has been around since FDR. Marriage already had a definition of a man and a women. You changed the meaning of words to corrupt the meaning of marriage. I suspect people are sick and tired of extreme lefties redefining words and deeds and it appears it is showing up on the selection of judges to the court system. Get used to the courts moving the other way for another 70-80 years.
indyjonesouthere: You do notice I have no financial privacy or medical privacy
Sure you do. It's not unlimited though, and for that, it's mostly due to legislative not judicial action.
indyjonesouthere: SCOTUS will rule states rights in a gay case when the state approves of gay marriage but will turn around and mandate all other states to do the same when those states do not approve.
On the one hand, you decry the loss of privacy, but then complain when the courts protect the privacy of the bedroom.
The Constitution limits the government...not me. Through the IRS I have no right to financial privacy. They will even seize money from me with the benefit of a trial...they deem the money guilty. It would seem they are religious animists in an effort to make an inanimate object guilty. But then they do the same with guilty assault rifles. Nobody cares about the "privacy" of anyone's bedroom...only about the courts imagination of what constitutes marriage. Call it what you wish but it is not marriage, it is simply a thuggish effort to require others to observe their joint habitation.
indyjonesouthere: The Constitution limits the government...not me.
That is not correct. While the Constitution limits government, it does grant to government certain powers. That means the government can place limits on your individual autonomy. For instance, they can make you stop when the light is red.
indyjonesouthere: Through the IRS I have no right to financial privacy.
Your financial records are not open to the public, but the IRS has to right to look at them. In any case, the U.S. Constitution, which you apparently haven't read, gives the federal government the power to tax your income.
indyjonesouthere: Nobody cares about the "privacy" of anyone's bedroom
See Lawrence vs. Texas, Griswold v. Connecticut.
I wouldn't doubt that Russians were able to get to Hillary's emails and a lot of top secret government data she left laying around on her server. But there is no evidence that Russia leaked any of it. China too seems to have read everything that Hillary ever saw but they didn't release any of it either. Too bad, I'm sure it would be interesting.
It appears that the FBI really screwed up on this. They failed to investigate obviously for political reasons and the Hillary, Obama and the FBI put our nation at risk. The coverup is working though and it is unlikely we will ever know the full scope of Hillary's and Obama's treason/crimes.
OneGuy: I wouldn't doubt that Russians were able to get to Hillary's emails and a lot of top secret government data she left laying around on her server.
Possible, but there's been no evidence that it happened.
OneGuy: It appears that the FBI really screwed up on this. They failed to investigate
The FBI opened an investigation the Clinton email situation, including possible foreign intrusions, in July 2015. As part of their conclusion, they said "it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."
Thank you! Your denial of what we all know is true shows you up for what you are.
OneGuy: Your denial of what we all know is true shows you up for what you are.
What did we deny that "we all know is true"?
Kiev (Ukraine) wasn't paying its bills to Russia and got cut off just like the Flint Michigan residents weren't paying their water bills and got cut off. Germany may want to make a note about the cut off...but that requires rational leadership.
indyjonesouthere: Kiev (Ukraine) wasn't paying its bills to Russia and got cut off ...
So Russia annexed Crimea, and invaded eastern Ukraine.
See a preceding post about who has historical ties to the Crimea...it isn't the Ukraine. If you really want to get concerned you best pay attention to how China is gaining access and control of ports in other countries and have Chinese run the entire port keeping all the locals out.
indyjonesouthere: See a preceding post about who has historical ties to the Crimea...it isn't the Ukraine.
Under the fundamental tenet of international law, borders are not to be changed except through peaceful means. Meanwhile, Russia invaded eastern Ukraine, so don't pretend they aren't the aggressor.
Under the fundamental tenet of national security the Russians are not going to tolerate CIA and NATO threatening their borders or security in the Black Sea area. Trump understands that but it does seem neither the Bush or Obama team could keep their fingers out of that pie.
indyjonesouthere: Under the fundamental tenet of national security the Russians are not going to tolerate CIA and NATO threatening their borders or security in the Black Sea area.
While international law recognizes the right to self-defence, that doesn't justify aggression. Ukraine was not a threat to Russia. Russia annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine. They lied about it because they knew it was against international law.
We will note that you justify Russian aggression.
Regards pedophilia talk. This was a TEDx NOT a Ted talk. The latter are more credible
Is the MSM the enemy of the people? Many of us think so, and we call them "the enemedia". My Magic 8-Ball says "Signs Point To YES" and "Boy, Howdy, You KNOW It's So".
What are Democrats Running On? EMPTY.
How many Palestinian "refugees" are there? All those born after the Arabs attacked in '48 are children of refugees but are not refugees themselves.
“We shouldn’t increase the sufferings of pedophiles by excluding them, by blaming and mocking them,” Heine said. “By doing that, WE increase their isolation and WE increase the chance of child sexual abuse.”
Oh, those poor put upon pedophiles. This is the reason people loathe pedophiles.
If that f*cking bastard wins, ...we all hang from nooses!
It's time for Trump to declassify the FISA documents and commence the building of scaffolds. Gonna need a lot of rope.