It's a shame Republitards are wasting so much money on a losing Presidential nominee

Instead of being pro-ductive, Republitards will choose to be
unproductive, retrograding, repetitive, regurgitating sloths their
outdated backwards thinking ideology tells them to be.

They simply rename the old ideas and call them new.
As far as I'm concerned they should all be put on a FBI and Homeland
Security terrorist watch list.

No matter who the nominee is, no matter the rhetoric, they will lose.
It's really that simple.
America has had quite enough of them and don't wish to be Al-Quieda
like and go back to the days of Mohammad or 1776.
But they're ignorant of progress and don't know anything else.

Too bad they couldn't spend more time being productive citizens
instead of the giant criminal blob stains they really are.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2011/08/04/communist-party-usa-endorses-obama-democrats-for-2012/

Communist Party USA Endorses Obama & Democrats for 2012

Posted on August 4, 2011 by Dr. Eowyn | 22 Comments

Aaron Klein of WorldNetDaily reports, August 3, 2011, that the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) is endorsing Barack Obama for the 2012 election.

In an article last week at People's Weekly World, the official newspaper of the CPUSA, despite being disappointed with "some aspects" of the Obama administration's domestic and foreign policy, Sam Webb, chairman of the Communist Party USA, threw his support behind Obama's re-election bid.

CPUSA Chairman Sam Webb

Webb said that for communists there are major differences between Democrats and Republicans. He urged his supporters to continue to back the Democrats, explaining: "Neither party is anti-capitalist, but they aren't identical either. Differences exist at the levels of policy and social composition. And despite the many frustrations of the past two years, the election of Barack Obama was historic and gave space to struggle for a people's agenda."

CPUSA Executive Vice Chair Jarvis Tyner

Now that the news of CPUSA's endorsement of Obama is out, the party likely will do a repeat of what it did in 2008.

CPUSA posted an article on its official website on Dec. 30, 2007, stating that "Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election." But when WND reported the news in November 2008, CPUSA scrubbed its website of references that it "actively supported" Obama's candidacy.

So I went on CPUSA's website to verify WND's information.

I found a report, "Fighting For Our Future," which Chairman Webb gave at a meeting of the National Committee of the Communist Party on June 26, 2011. Webb said:

"Socialism isn't yet embraced by large sections of the American people…. In these circumstances, the role of the left is to step up our efforts to energize, broaden, deepen, and, above all, unite the movement against the draconian plans of the Republican right…. Nothing is more important than the ideological and political strengthening of this movement….

It is obvious that there is a growing feeling of frustration and even anger among supporters of the Democratic Party with its performance over the past two years…. I am also disappointed with some aspects of the Obama administration's domestic and foreign policy. But I don't forget that this administration governs in a very hostile political environment in which the right is laboring overtime to wreck its initiatives at every step of the way….

But the main question from a strategic point of view is this: Does it make any difference, from the standpoint of the class and democratic struggles, which party gains political ascendency?

In our view, the differences between the two parties of capitalism are of consequence…. Neither party is anti-capitalist, but they aren't identical either. Differences exist at the levels of policy and social composition. Despite the many frustrations of the past two years, the election of Barack Obama was historic and gave space to struggle for a people's agenda….

The 2012 elections have begun…. No other struggle now or in the foreseeable future has the same possibility to effect a change in the political balance of forces in a progressive direction…. While millions understandably feel dissatisfied with the Democratic Party…it is the only viable alternative to the Republican Party at this moment."

Joelle Fishman

I also found on the CPUSA website this article, "2010 Election Results: Time to Organize," by Joelle Fishman, Chair of the Connecticut Communist Party USA :

"Obama's most important statement during his national tour was, '2008 wasn't just about electing a President, it was about building a movement.' ….

Our Party was in the thick of the battle of 2010. We contributed and we learned a lot. We have found an openness to our ideas and our participation. We have deepened our relationships with other organizations and activists.

We have brought new members into our Party even during the campaign…. Therefore, we should be optimistic and confident about growing more in the months ahead. However, this does not happen spontaneously, there must be a plan…."

It's official:

A vote for Obama in 2012 is a vote for the Communist Party USA.

See also my post of May 17, 2010, "Communist Party USA Sues Dems for Theft of Party Platform."

 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Ron Paul Won Nevada Caucus – And Nevada Voters Lost

Ron Paul Won Nevada Caucus – And Nevada Voters Lost
Posted on February 6, 2012 by Kathleen Gee

While you were busy enjoying your bread and circuses yesterday, operatives from the Nevada GOP–aided and abetted by all four cable "news" networks–were busily manipulating the results of the Nevada Caucuses, handing another undeserved victory to Mittens "It's My Turn, Peasants" Romneycare.

You probably aren't aware of this, because the TeeVee told you that Mitt Romney won, nothing to see here, move along now, after a mere 5% of the vote had been counted.

But what the TeeVee didn't tell you–for about an entire day–is that the Nevada GOP refused to release the results from Clark County, Nevada's most populous county and the home of 60% of Nevada's registered voters. In fact, as of this writing, more than 30 hours after the last caucus closed, the Nevada Caucuses are still not decided. (Well, not in the "lawfully and transparently counting the votes to see who got the most" sense. They've already been decided in the "we count the votes, and we already decided in advance that Mittens was going to win" sense.)

Here's some coverage of the "special caucus" that Newt's billionaire casino magnate backer bought for him. It was the last caucus that took place, and is in Clark County, where 60% of all Nevada voters are located. Later that night, CNN also aired the live counting of the votes at that caucus. In the video below, CNN joins the event at the point where the candidates' supporters were giving stump speeches. Over two dozen caucus voters spoke on Ron Paul's behalf, in an audience that was expected to be largely Seventh-Day Adventists and Orthodox Jews. Romney, Gingrich and Santorum only inspired two or three supporters to speak on their behalf, according to one witness who voted at the caucus.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WSAou-xugus

Here are the results, counted and announced live on CNN:

Ron Paul: 183
Mittens Romney: 61
Newt Gingrich: 57
Rick Santorum: 16

It's remarkable that the total is so high, given the fact that the caucus organizers forced those who wanted to vote to sign a "religious declaration" affidavit before giving them a ballot, likely in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

Even with religious discrimination the results favored Ron Paul, as the Paul campaign expected, based on their internal polling. (At some point in the past two weeks, I read that the Paul campaign had identified over 20,000 definite Ron Paul voters in advance of the caucuses. I'll post a source if I can find it.)

Ron Paul's vote totals have more than doubled in every primary or caucus so far over his 2008 totals, and since he has had a massive organization in Nevada for four years, and Nevada is a libertarian state, he was expected to either win or tie for first place.  And in the ONE large Clark County caucus where the votes were counted in public, on live television, Ron Paul won by a landslide, as was expected.

Apparently, that was bad news for those in the Cocktail Party GOP in Nevada.

Miraculously, "irregularities" were quickly found that required the party operatives to sequester themselves in a smoke-filled room and "recount" the votes from Clark County (until they get the totals they had decided upon in advance?)

At 3:10 a.m. Monday, nearly 10% of the votes have still not been reported. At this point, Ron Paul is listed in third place with only 5,901 votes -- fewer votes than he received in 2008, when he placed second to Mitt Romney in the Nevada caucuses.

And just as miraculously, the chairwoman of the GOP in Nevada resigned effective 12:01 Sunday morning, in a move she claimed was pre-planned and had nothing whatsoever to do with the voter fraud the Nevada GOP was apparently undertaking.

Here's an hour-by-hour account of how the Cocktail Party GOP in Nevada–with in collusion with the Democrat-controlled media–stole the election from Ron Paul and gave it to Mittens Romneycare.

Here's a shorter version of events of the caucus voting and counting.

Move along, peasants. Nothing to see here. Turn up the surround sound and pass the hot wings.

© 2012, Kathleen Gee. All rights reserved.


Read more http://hillbuzz.org/ron-paul-won-nevada-caucus-and-nevada-voters-lost-64120


http://hillbuzz.org/ron-paul-won-nevada-caucus-and-nevada-voters-lost-64120

Video: Newt Speaks at CPAC 2012

Video: Newt Speaks at CPAC 2012

 

 

http://www.newt.org/news/livestream-newt-speaks-cpac-2012

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Small Government, Big Military Incompatible

Small Government, Big Military Incompatible
February 6, 2012
Dominick T. Armentano
Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers

Political conservatives routinely assert that they favor substantial reductions in government spending, lower tax rates and more individual responsibility. Fine. Yet most talking-head conservatives go ballistic when anyone suggests that U.S. military spending should be reduced or that the nation no longer can afford to be the world's policeman.

I maintain small-government conservatism and big-government military spending are inherently contradictory. Simply put, maintaining and expanding a substantial U.S. military presence throughout the world for 60 years has proved incredibly expensive and has inevitably "grown" the size of government. Major wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq (not to mention extensive bombing and missile attacks in Yugoslavia and Libya) have all have been associated with significant increases in government spending and an unsustainable national debt.

The Department of Defense spends more than $700 billion annually (fiscal 2010), about 20 percent of federal spending. Even that number substantially understates total taxpayer burdens. Some military spending is hidden in other agencies, such as the Department of Energy and the National Security Agency, while substantial "off budget" spending is provided by so-called "supplemental appropriations." As an example, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq alone have cost U.S. taxpayers an additional $3 trillion in "supplemental" dollars and increased debt and interest payments. To provide some perspective, that war cost would have fully funded all Social Security benefits for more than four years.

Aside from the raw cost, much of our military spending is questionable. As an infamous example, the U.S. embassy in Iraq ("Fortress Baghdad"), which covers 104 acres and includes machine gun emplacements, six apartment buildings, a gym, a swimming pool and assorted commercial shops, cost U.S. taxpayers a staggering three quarters of a billion dollars to construct, let alone maintain. Would anyone care to justify that expense or explain how it contributes to domestic security?

U.S. troops on foreign bases and in foreign wars ("international security") absorb an increasing share of all military spending. Less than half of DOD appropriations are associated with defense of the homeland. For instance, the DOD admits to having 716 U.S. military bases on foreign soil in 38 countries. The real numbers are closer to 1,000, since official numbers omit secret bases and espionage bases in war zones such as Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, there are more than 300,000 U.S. troops based in 177 countries and 11 territories. Incredibly, almost six decades after the end of World War II and the Korean War, there are more than 25,000 U.S. military personnel still stationed in South Korea, more than 35,000 in Japan and almost 54,000 in Germany.

The larger policy question is whether the cost of foreign policy contributes on balance to our safety and security. About 36,000 U.S. soldiers were lost in the (undeclared) Korean War; the armistice signed in 1953 divided Korea in the same place it was divided before the war. A staggering 58,000 soldiers (many of them draftees) lost their lives in Vietnam; what conceivable benefit to U.S. security was derived from that massive misadventure? Finally, 6,300 brave U.S. soldiers (men and women) have paid the ultimate price in Iraq and Afghanistan; yet whether that sacrifice abroad has made the nation safer at home is problematic.

It's time for fiscal conservatives to face reality: Our interventionist foreign policy has contributed to our near-bankruptcy. We have a $16 trillion national debt, tax revenue that covers only 60 percent of current expenditures, and an inability to pay our bills without massive borrowing or Federal Reserve money inflation.

Bluntly put, our federal government is broken. Can and should we fund legitimate domestic defense? Of course. But should we continue to pay for so-called "wars of opportunity," the subsidization of our prosperous European allies, or nation building in Africa or in the Middle East? No way.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=3248

Taxpayer Alert: Obama’s Budget Gives $800 Million Taxpayer Dollars to Aid “Arab Spring”

New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog Taxpayer Alert: Obama's Budget Gives $800 Million Taxpayer Dollars to Aid "Arab Spring" by Scotty Starnes Obama doesn't care. It's not his money he's throwing at groups who hate Americans and democracy. The Muslim Brotherhood will enjoy the $800 million dollar gift from Obama. (Reuters) - The White House announced plans on Monday to help "Arab Spring" countries swept by revolutions with more than $800 million in economic aid, while maintaining U.S. military aid to Egypt. In his annual budget message to Congress, President Barack Obama asked that military aid to Egypt be kept at the level of recent years -- $1.3 billion -- despite a crisis triggered by an Egyptian probe targeting American democracy activists. The proposals are part of Obama's budget request for fiscal year 2013, which begins October 1. His requests need the approval of Congress, where some lawmakers want to cut overseas spending to address U.S. budget shortfalls and are particularly angry at Egypt. Obama proposed $51.6 billion in funding for the U.S. State Department and foreign aid overall, when $8.2 billion in assistance to war zones is included. The "core budget" for the category would increase by 1.6 percent, officials said. Most of the economic aid for the Arab Spring countries -- $770 million -- would go to establish a new "Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund," the president said in his budget plan. Continue reading>>> Scotty Starnes | February 13, 2012 at 3:26 PM | Tags: $800 million, Arab Spring, Egypt, Middle East and North Africa Incentive Fund, Muslim Brotherhood, Obama's 2013 budget, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-6C1 Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/taxpayer-alert-obamas-budget-gives-800-million-taxpayer-dollars-to-aid-arab-spring/ Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Obama’s Economic Adviser: “We Need a GLOBAL MINIMUM TAX”

New post on Scotty Starnes's Blog Obama's Economic Adviser: "We Need a GLOBAL MINIMUM TAX" by Scotty Starnes What the hell is a "global minimum tax" that Obama's economic adviser Gene Sperling is talking about? Sounds like a New World Order slip. From the Weekly Standard: Gene Sperling, director of the White House's national economic council, said today at an official meeting that "we need a global minimum tax." "He supports corporate tax reform that would reduce expenditures and loopholes, lower rates for people investing and creating jobs in the U.S., due so further for manufacturing, and that we need to, as we have the Buffett Rule and the individual tax reform, we need a global minimum tax so that people have the assurance that nobody is escaping doing their fair share as part of a race to the bottom or having our tax code actually subsidized and facilitate people moving their funds to tax havens," Sperling said. Continue reading>>> Scotty Starnes | February 13, 2012 at 3:13 PM | Tags: Gene Sperling, Global Minimum Tax, new world order, Obama's economic adviser, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-6BY Comment    See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://scottystarnes.wordpress.com/2012/02/13/obamas-economic-adviser-we-need-a-global-minimum-tax/ Thanks for flying with WordPress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Dan Savage suicide watch over!

Dan Savage suicide watch over!

Fans of Keenan Hollahan, aka "Dan Savage," the author of the Savage Love sex advice column, have been concerned about an apparent suicide attempt, lost in the news coverage of Whitney Houston's tragic death.  Mr. Hollahan has been committed to the psychiatric ward of Seattle Children's Hospital for the past 24 hours, despondent over the fact that his life work, the creation of a definition of "Santorum" as a particular discharge from sexual activity, has been ignored this election season, after a few year's of popularity as a slang term.

Hollahan's husband, Terry Miller said "for the past two weeks the mainstream media have discussed the Santorum surge without any irony.  Dan has been drinking caramel Appletinis non-stop and finally drove our Prius into a recycling center, screaming that he wanted to be re-incarnated as a gay penguin so he would be a continent away from American politics."  Savage had been in a catatonic state since the EMTs found him thrown from the car into a bin of sorted recyclables.

At 2:30 eastern time today Savage was said to have become more aware, when Rush Limbaugh, on his nationally syndicated radio program, told a caller that "Santorum has conservatism throughout his bodily fluids."  Doctors say if his condition continues to improve he may be released in time to get his column out by Thursday.

1. News for santorum surge

   Globe and Mail
   1. Poll: Santorum surges past Romney, both Republicans trail Obama

      
      

      Chicago Tribune‎ - 1 hour ago

      Santorum's margin among white evangelical Republican voters was almost the same, 41% to 23%. A major factor driving the Santorum surge is that an increasing ...

      5858 related articles
   2. Poll: Santorum surges past Romney; both Republicans trail Obama
      

      Kansas.com‎ - 3 related articles
   3. Santorum Reports Surge in Campaign Donations
      

      Boise Weekly‎ - 4 related articles

2. Santorum surges into the lead - Public Policy Polling

   www.publicpolicypolling.com/.../santorum-surges-into-the-lead.html

   2 days ago – Riding a wave of momentum from his trio of victories...

3. Rick Santorum Surge Means New Strategy For Mitt Romney In 2012 ...

   www.huffingtonpost.com/.../rick-santorum-mitt-romney_n_1270187...

   2 days ago – WASHINGTON — Staggered by Rick Santorum's surge, Mitt Romney is trying to reset his presidential campaign by defining himself as a strict ...

4. Articles: OK Rush: You Own Santorum Surge

   www.americanthinker.com/.../ok_rush_you_own_santorum_surge.ht...

   5 hours ago – A strong case could be made that Rick Santorum owes much of the credit for his recent surge to Rush Limbaugh -- whether Rush wants that ...

5. Santorum Surges: Fr Longenecker Asks 'What is a Santorum ...

   www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=44747

   6 hours ago – GREENVILLE, SC (Catholic Online) - As Rick Santorum surges in popularity people may be scratching their heads about his Catholic faith.

6. Poll: Santorum surges past Romney, both Republicans trail Obama ...

   www.latimes.com/.../la-pn-poll-santorum-surges-past-romney-both-...

   2 hours ago – President Obama for the first time has opened a sizable lead over his most likely Republican opponents, thanks to growing support among ...

7. A Santorum Surge? Or, A Statistical Blip?

   https://plus.google.com

   ‎

   Doug Mataconis · Feb 11, 2012 · Public A Santorum Surge? Or, A Statistical Blip? Disqus Like Dislike Login Add New Comment Image                         Sort by popular now                                Sort by best rating                                Sort by newest first                                Sort by oldest first                   Showing 0 comments M Subscribe by email S RSS Trackback URL  Pradheep Shanker - Well, it is as real as the Bachmann/Trump/Perry/Cain/Newt surges.

8. Santorum's surge means new strategy for Romney

   https://plus.google.com

   ‎	Stephen Guy Hardin · Feb 11, 2012 · Public Santorum's surge means new strategy for Romney CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL COMMENTARY AND NEWS

9. Fox News Poll: Santorum Surges Nationally After Three-state Sweep ...

   www.foxnews.com/.../fox-news-poll-santorum-surges-nationally-afte...

   3 days ago – Rick Santorum has surged nationally in the race for the 2012 Republican nomination after his three-state sweep this week, while Mitt Romney ...

10. New Poll: Santorum Surges in Georgia, Too - By Maggie Gallagher ...

    www.nationalreview.com/.../new-poll-santorum-surges-georgia-too-...

    2 hours ago – Maggie Gallagher writes on NRO: Gingrich, the favorite son, is still ahead, but suddenly only by 9 points over an improving Santorum (35 ...

11. Mitt Romney Still on Shaky Ground as Rick Santorum Surges in ...

    www.ibtimes.com/.../mitt-romney-shaky-grounds-santorum-surges-n...

    1 day ago – Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won the Maine Republican caucus vote and the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) ...

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.