[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Empire Has Accidentally Caused The Rebirth Of Real Counterculture In The West

Workers install 'Alligator Alcatraz' sign for Florida immigration detention center

The Biggest Financial Collapse in China’s History Is Here, More Terrifying Than Evergrande!

Lightning

Cash Jordan NYC Courthouse EMPTIED... ICE Deports 'Entire Building

Trump Sparks Domestic Labor Renaissance: Native-Born Workers Surge To Record High As Foreign-Born Plunge

Mister Roberts (1965)

WE BROKE HIM!! [Early weekend BS/nonsense thread]

I'm going to send DOGE after Elon." -Trump

This is the America I grew up in. We need to bring it back

MD State Employee may get Arrested by Sheriff for reporting an Illegal Alien to ICE

RFK Jr: DTaP vaccine was found to have link to Autism

FBI Agents found that the Chinese manufactured fake driver’s licenses and shipped them to the U.S. to help Biden...

Love & Real Estate: China’s new romance scam

Huge Democrat shift against Israel stuns CNN

McCarthy Was Right. They Lied About Everything.

How Romans Built Domes

My 7 day suspension on X was lifted today.

They Just Revealed EVERYTHING... [Project 2029]

Trump ACCUSED Of MASS EXECUTING Illegals By DUMPING Them In The Ocean

The Siege (1998)

Trump Admin To BAN Pride Rainbow Crosswalks, DoT Orders ALL Distractions REMOVED

Elon Musk Backing Thomas Massie Against Trump-AIPAC Challenger

Skateboarding Dog

Israel's Plans for Jordan

Daily Vitamin D Supplementation Slows Cellular Aging:

Hepatitis E Virus in Pork

Hospital Executives Arrested After Nurse Convicted of Killing Seven Newborns, Trying to Kill Eight More

The Explosion of Jewish Fatigue Syndrome

Tucker Carlson: RFK Jr's Mission to End Skyrocketing Autism, Declassifying Kennedy Files


(s)Elections
See other (s)Elections Articles

Title: March of the Obamacons
Source: http://www.takimag.com/
URL Source: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/morning_links1/
Published: Mar 31, 2008
Author: Justin Raimondo
Post Date: 2008-03-31 15:04:14 by robin
Ping List: *Justin Raimondo*     Subscribe to *Justin Raimondo*
Keywords: None
Views: 2154
Comments: 170

March of the Obamacons—The New York Sun notes that the “surge” is working ... that is, the surge of support for Obama among antiwar Republicans. Lincoln Chafee, Douglas Kmiec, Susan Eisenhower, and, perhaps, Senator Chuck Hagel. As the Sun notes: “Asked yesterday on CNN whether he would endorse his party’s presumptive nominee, Mr. Hagel said he would base his support on the candidates’ positions on withdrawing from Iraq.” While neocon hacks of the Rush Limbaugh variety are calling out the thinning ranks of the GOP troops to switch parties for a day and support Hillary, antiwar Republicans are switching and supporting Obama all without prompting from anyone, and the numbers are impressive in Pennsylvania, where the upcoming Democratic primary is going to be decisive. As the Sun reports:

“Of the 140,000 Pennsylvania Republicans and independents who switched registration in the last year to Democrat, the majority are Obama voters, the director of the Franklin and Marshall College poll, G. Terry Madonna, said. Registration for the state’s closed April 22 primary ended March 24. ‘If 2 million people vote in Pennsylvania, which would be a huge number, I think Obama gets 85,000 to 90,000 switchers,’ Mr. Madonna said. ‘That’s 3 or 4 or 5%, which is a big deal.’”

The Ron Paul Republicans are making a difference, albeit, at this point, a purely negative one. Here’s a nice touch from the Sun piece:

“Another Pennsylvania Republican who supports Mr. Obama is retired Major General Walter Stewart, a township supervisor in Burks County who says he has given money both to an anti-Bush Texas Republican, Rep. Ron Paul, and Mr. Hagel, who he said was his first choice for president this election season.

“General Stewart said he was supporting Mr. Obama because he could not endorse a candidate who voted to authorize the war in Iraq, which he compared to King George’s decision to send the British army and Hessian mercenaries into New York Harbor in the Revolutionary War. In 2004, General Stewart said, he supported Mr. Kerry, the Democratic nominee, over Mr. Bush. ‘I think there is a general feeling in the military that this war in Iraq has been a catastrophe,’ he said.”

Gen. Stewart, meet Andy Bacevich ....

Click for Full Text!


Poster Comment: other topics at link Subscribe to *Justin Raimondo*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-84) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#85. To: ghostdogtxn (#78)

We don't get Ron Paul because we didn't earn him

BS on a stick. RP never, ever had a chance at being selected, and I suspect he knew that himself. I never forgive him for allowing Anderson Cooper to hush him up at his last public debate. Had he been a real revolutionary, he'd have flung one of his penny loafers at that CIA mole's head.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-03-31   17:34:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#86. To: aristeides (#84)

Ari...

YOU brought it up that somehow being a lawyer gave you some respect for the law that the unwashed masses did not have.

I read your posts Ari...

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   17:36:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: Cynicom (#83)

I clerked for a judge for two years, and never had a hint of a suspicion that my judge or any of the other judges on the court were being bribed.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   17:36:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#88. To: aristeides (#82)

I hope you never have personal reason to regret this attack.

And Obama will make all the nasty stuff disappear? Just because he says so? You're too old for such naivitee.

Jethro Tull  posted on  2008-03-31   17:36:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#89. To: Cynicom (#86)

YOU brought it up that somehow being a lawyer gave you some respect for the law that the unwashed masses did not have.

As I have now said to you repeatedly, my point was that, as a lawyer, I understandably care about the rule of law, and am therefore inclined to favor the candidate who calls for respecting the Constitution and restoring habeas corpus. Plenty of nonlawyers share that concern.

Some other people apparently do not.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   17:37:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#90. To: Jethro Tull (#85)

Had he been a real revolutionary, he'd have flung one of his penny loafers at that CIA mole's head.

Hear Hear...

A little revolution now and then is good for the unwashed masses, it is ONLY the self appointed elite that abhor revolutions.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   17:37:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#91. To: Jethro Tull (#88)

And Obama will make all the nasty stuff disappear?

Oh, so now it's nasty?

I guess that means you now admit we should take it seriously.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   17:38:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#92. To: Jethro Tull (#33)

if Obama is elected he'd make for the most left leaning president in this nations history. I couldn't ever be part of that legacy.

Thank you for the kind words, and I understand your concerns. But do consider, Europe and Scandinavia have survived liberal govts. OTOH, we won't survive a McCain Regime. We could recover from a liberal govt, but not from McCain.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

robin  posted on  2008-03-31   17:39:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#93. To: Jethro Tull (#85)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-31   17:40:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#94. To: aristeides (#89)

, as a lawyer, I understandably care about the rule of law,, as a lawyer, I understandably care about the rule of law,

Understandably?????

Do you think everyone else lacks this vital key to understanding the law???

Is there some magic formula that is advanced ONLY in law schools concerning the law???

ghost looks down his nose at white trash and now it seems you do also, that makes me feel bad. Law you may learned, but was there something else you are missing that Yale does not teach?

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   17:42:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#95. To: aristeides (#60)

But one thing I am clear on: Obama is the best of the three major candidates. He's the only one who speaks clearly about civil liberties, and he's also the one who seems most opposed to the war

I'm with you, though I'm uncertain whether or not I'll vote for Obama. I know I'll not vote for Hillary or McCain.

Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.

Zoroaster  posted on  2008-03-31   17:46:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#96. To: ghostdogtxn (#78)

You can be like FOH, a purist, and sit on a fence and condemn anyone who decides they should make a comparison of the 3 choices that remain, or you can swallow your bile and pick one of them or another.

There aren't 3 choices.

That's where you're either a liar or an ignoramus...the Founding Fathers and you have little in common.


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   17:49:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#97. To: robin (#92)

We could recover from a liberal govt, but not from McCain.

We are not going to survive this current government, the cancer is metastasizing, not as a liberal conservative cancer, not as a pub or dem, just a cancer that is past surgery.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   17:50:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#98. To: ghostdogtxn (#78)

But as for sitting on a high horse and calling everyone who isn't a purist a "sell out" or a "traitor" or a "quisling?"

At least you know what you are...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   17:50:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#99. To: ghostdogtxn (#80)

You don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

I sure got you Obamaphiles' number...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   17:50:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#100. To: All (#99)

100


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   17:50:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#101. To: Jethro Tull (#88) (Edited)

And Obama will make all the nasty stuff disappear? Just because he says so?

With all his talk of hope and change, I have a feeling that many people are going to be disappointed if Obama gets in...like more disappointed than people are with GW Bush right now.

Vitamin Z  posted on  2008-03-31   17:52:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#102. To: aristeides (#19)

you think mcCain can make that decision unilaterally? mcCain won't do anything, nor will clinton or obama, that he isn't instructed to do by his CFR masters. imo, if obama is the selection, then the PTB have in mind for him to do something (that clinton or mcCain couldn't) to advance their anti-america(n) plan.

christine  posted on  2008-03-31   17:52:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#103. To: FOH (#98) (Edited)

Founding Father material here on 4um is sadly lacking.

More of a "fifth column type".

Of course after the Revolution, a lot of the nay sayers ran off to Canada to hide.

They ran because they feared the Patriots would hang 'em.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   17:53:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#104. To: Cynicom (#103)

Freaking Tories and their Kings/Queens...elitist trash that should have been snuffed out lo those years ago.


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   17:58:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#105. To: christine (#102)

if obama is the selection, then the PTB have in mind for him to do something (that clinton or mcCain couldn't) to advance their anti-america(n) plan.

I totally agree! North American Soviet Union...here we come.

Live Free or Die (or, run away)


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   18:00:26 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#106. To: Cynicom (#103)

They ran because they feared the Patriots would hang 'em.

They still kiss the Queen's a** to this day...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   18:01:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#107. To: ghostdogtxn (#36)

and who dropped some live bombs on the deck of the USS Forestall that killed over 160 of his fellow sailors. That's not fair to McCain. He didn't "drop bombs" on the deck; he performed an illegal flare up of his engine and ignited the bombs on other airplanes. Fortunately, he was able to run away to safety while the rest of the Forrestal's crew battled the fire and lost their lives being recklessly heroic. I'm glad McCain had the good sense not to be a hero.

I stand corrected, I should have re-read the USS Forestall article before making my comment. Needless to say McCain is/was reckless, criminally reckless, whether it involved bombs or illegal flare up of his jet engine is of small matter. The end result is the same, 160 dead sailors. The SOB should have faced a general court-martial.

Talk about fairness. Among McCain's first acts after the "Dinks" let him go and he came home to America was to divorce his wife, a woman who stood faithfully by his side during his five years as a POW.

Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.

Zoroaster  posted on  2008-03-31   18:10:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#108. To: Zoroaster (#107)

Among McCain's first acts after the "Dinks" let him go and he came home to America was to divorce his wife, a woman who stood faithfully by his side during his five years as a POW.

That's the tip of that smelly ice berg..."SONGBIRD" is a schmuck's-schmuck.


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   18:15:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#109. To: Cynicom (#103)

You think we wouldn't join you if it came to that? Just b/c we want the lesser of 3 evils?

This is a delaying tactic, to hopefully (yes it's a gamble) gain time to alert more sheeple.

There is no gamble with McCain or Hillary - they are proven quantities.

Voting 3rd party is a nice statement, for what's worth, but it's not like that's all there is to be done.

I spoke with a guy from the 9/11 LA group; he doesn't even care what's going on with the voting right now. He's focused just on getting info on 9/11 out and all the knowledge about New World Order that goes with it.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

robin  posted on  2008-03-31   18:25:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#110. To: Cynicom (#103)

Of course after the Revolution, a lot of the nay sayers ran off to Canada to hide.

Whereas you guys don't even care enough about liberties, habeas corpus, aggressive war, and all the tyrannical acts of the Bush regime to have said anything on my Bob Barr thread.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   18:57:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#111. To: Jethro Tull (#79)

so why in the world should we take it seriously?

You're a cop, and you don't take the rule of law seriously?

What is wrong with this picture?

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   18:58:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#112. To: aristeides (#111)

What is wrong with this picture?

Nothing. Jethro faces reality and too many lawyers live in a make believe world of their own making, one that does not exist.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   18:59:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#113. To: robin (#109)

I don't think I'd want to join a revolution led by fascists.

I'm willing to form alliances of necessity, so I might be willing to join one that has fascists (or Communists, for that matter) taking part, but I would have to think more than twice about it.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   18:59:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#114. To: aristeides (#113)

He referred to the American Revolution, so that's what I was referring to also.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

robin  posted on  2008-03-31   19:01:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#115. To: Cynicom (#112)

So you too admit that you do not believe in the rule of law.

But not only that, you're unwilling to believe that other people might believe in it. So much so that you ascribe to them motives that really are make believe and really are of your own making, like "white guilt."

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   19:01:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#116. To: robin (#114)

Robin, peas in a pod????

Democrat CFR Candidates:

Barack Obama

Hillary Clinton

John Edwards

Chris Dodd

Bill Richardson

Republican CFR Candidates:

Mitt Romney

Rudy Giuliani

John McCain

Fred Thompson

Newt Gingrich

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   19:05:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#117. To: Cynicom (#116)

I notice Obama is not on your list, whereas Hillary and McCain are.

Nevertheless, you proclaim your intention is to pull the lever for Hillary in the primary, with the intent of helping to defeat Obama.

I guess you don't care who's in the CFR and who is not.

To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.

aristeides  posted on  2008-03-31   19:07:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#118. To: Cynicom (#116)

If there is a slight difference that leans toward peace, I'll take it to avoid McCain and his end of the world scenario.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

robin  posted on  2008-03-31   19:08:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#119. To: robin (#118)

, I'll take it to avoid McCain and his end of the world scenario.

McCain is a mad man waiting to get his fingers on the nuclear trigger.

Therefore I can understand you and others "accepting" Clinton/Obama.

People such as myself voting for lesser of evils are the reason we are where we are now.

I voted Perot as did 20 million Americans, the partisans voted the usual, so in my book they are more to blame than myself. Had more of them been Americans, we would never have had Clintons and Bush and certainly not madman McKooK.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-31   19:15:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#120. To: robin (#109)

You may have Christine fooled all this time, but that's about it...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   19:16:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#121. To: Zoroaster, aristeides, ghostdogtxn (#95)

I'm writing in Ron Paul. - ghostdogtxn

I'm not even sure I'm going to vote for Obama. - aristeides

I'm uncertain whether or not I'll vote for Obama. - Zoroaster

I may be mistaken, but my recollection is that each of you, at one time or another, has stated that Obama is the best candidate that has a chance to be on the ticket.

What gives?

What kind of vote is one that just enables you to say in future, if things go worse, "Well, don't blame me ... I voted for Paul, Buchanan, Perot, the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party."

How silly. What kind of comfort is that? What kind of logic is that? What does it do but effectively opt you out of participation in the process?

Worst of all your opting out can help assure the election of one which you fear or despise.

Stop the world, I wanna get off.

I cling to hope of a 50 state repudiation of the traitorous, neocon Plutocrat Party

iconoclast  posted on  2008-03-31   19:17:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#122. To: Cynicom (#119)

The best thing that can happen at this point is to keep awakening those willing to follow truth, suppress turnout for the CFR candidates and fight every North American Unioner we come across...IMO.

However, it appears that one NAUer or the other will get a landslide and claim a mandate for their evil...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   19:18:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#123. To: Cynicom (#119)

Had more of them been Americans, we would never have had Clintons and Bush and certainly not madman McKooK.

I understand your feelings/opinions on this vote. Hey, I remember someone berating me for not having voted for Anderson.

'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz

robin  posted on  2008-03-31   19:19:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#124. To: iconoclast (#121)

All of your spineless World Commie buddies abandoning ship there Traitorbot?


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   19:19:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#125. To: iconoclast (#121) (Edited)

Worst of all your opting out can help assure the election of one which you fear or despise.

If you 'fear' one of the CFR quislings, you should 'fear' all 3.

But then you aren't intellectually honest, you're a traitor-shill.

You're such a fraud, a complete joke and LOSER if you will...


What North American Union? STOP the North American Union!
~~~~~> Have you seen THIS yet? TIME IS RUNNING OUT!

FOH  posted on  2008-03-31   19:21:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (126 - 170) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]