Wednesday, June 15, 2011

PLEASE - Say it isn't so!!

2. Alec Baldwin Spurred by Weinergate Toward Mayoral Bid

Anthony Weiner’s implosion is causing Democrats to reconsider their options.

One individual who is taking a new look at the political landscape is none other than Alec Baldwin, who is considering a run for New York City mayor now that front-runner Weiner is likely out of the race.

A source close to the actor told The Daily that Baldwin said, “Hey, maybe this changes the race. The dynamics have shifted.”

When asked about the rumored candidacy, a Baldwin spokesperson said, “I wouldn't rule it out.”

Baldwin, a dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrat, has mulled his political possibilities for a while now.

He spoke about changing professions in 1997, telling New York magazine, “The men and women that run the world are in their 50s. It takes time to build that kind of thing. I’m 39.”

He has now reached the self-imposed age stipulation.

During a 2008 interview on “60 Minutes,” Baldwin indicated that when he was done acting he might venture into politics.

“There’s no age limit on running for office, to a degree… [It's] something I might do, one day,” he said.

In January 2011, the actor told CNN he was “very interested” in becoming a politician but would only run for office in New York City.

“I do believe that people want to believe that someone who deeply cares about the middle class … would like to seek public office,” he said.

Baldwin recently announced that the next season of “30 Rock” would be his last.

The sitcom’s next season happens to be in 2012, and production coincidentally wraps just in time for the New York mayoral elections.

Editor's Note:  

Rothschild's Federal Reserve & New North American Dollar Ready: Hostile Takeover With Aid Of Canadian Prime Pimpster Stephen Harper!




Rothschild's Federal Reserve & New North American Dollar Ready: Hostile Takeover With Aid Of Canadian Prime Pimpster Stephen Harper!

The privately owned Federal Reserve bankers, are already prepared for a hostile merger of Canada with the United States with the aid of ROTHSCHILD PUPPET Stephen Harper. The same bankers who orchestrated the United States Wall Street swindle ($12.5 trillion bailout the Federal Reserve bankers swindled from the American taxpayers through fraudulent credit mortgage derivatives- [...]

Read more of this post

Add a comment to this post


WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.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 CRONYISM: Two hundred of President Obama's biggest donors have won government jobs and advisory posts, as well as federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests.




OBAMA CRONYISM: Two hundred of President Obama's biggest donors have won government jobs and advisory posts, as well as federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests.

Obama is the biggest fraud America has ever seen. Obama is nothing more than a two-face, speak out of both sides of the mouth lying politician. Where will those idiots who supported this fraud stand on the issue of his cronyism?

By the way, these rewarding of jobs by Obama are paid for by YOU, the U.S. taxpayers.

More pay-to-play bribes from the Chicago Jesus.

From Politico:

Telecom executive Donald H. Gips raised a big bundle of cash to help finance his friend Barack Obama's run for the presidency.

Gips, a vice president of Colorado-based Level 3 Communications, delivered more than $500,000 in contributions for the Obama war chest, while two other company executives collected at least $150,000 more.

After the election, Gips was put in charge of hiring in the Obama White House, helping to place loyalists and fundraisers in many key positions. Then, in mid-2009, Obama named him ambassador to South Africa. Meanwhile, Level 3 Communications, in which Gips retained stock, received millions of dollars of government stimulus contracts for broadband projects in six states — though Gips said he had been "completely unaware" that the company had received the contracts.

More than two years after Obama took office vowing to banish "special interests" from his administration, nearly 200 of his biggest donors have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests or attended numerous elite White House meetings and social events, an investigation by iWatch News has found.

These "bundlers" raised at least $50,000 — and sometimes more than $500,000 — in campaign donations for Obama's campaign. Many of those in the "Class of 2008" are now being asked to bundle contributions for Obama's reelection, an effort that could cost $1 billion.

As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests. Kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted "the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests," who had "turned our government into a game only they can afford to play."

"We're here today to take it back," he said.

This bullshit coming from the guy who is raising close to a billion dollars to get reelected.

Here's what the investigation found...

• Overall, 184 of 556, or about one-third of Obama bundlers or their spouses joined the administration in some role. But the percentages are much higher for the big-dollar bundlers. Nearly 80 percent of those who collected more than $500,000 for Obama took "key administration posts," as defined by the White House. More than half the 24 ambassador nominees who were bundlers raised $500,000.

The big bundlers had broad access to the White House for meetings with top administration officials and glitzy social events. In all, campaign bundlers and their family members account for more than 3,000 White House meetings and visits. Half of them raised $200,000 or more.

Some Obama bundlers have ties to companies that stand to gain financially from the president's policy agenda, particularly in clean energy and telecommunications, and some already have done so. Level 3 Communications, for instance, snared $13.8 million in stimulus money.

As we all have come to learn, anything Senator Obama said was nothing but lies he sold to get elected.

Continue reading>>>

Add a comment to this post


WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.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.

PAKISTAN: Muslim judge rules that pedophilia is preferable to Christianity




PAKISTAN: Muslim judge rules that pedophilia is preferable to Christianity

barenakedislam | June 15, 2011 at 1:18 PM | Categories: Persecution of Christians | URL: http://wp.me/peHnV-vki

In Muslim-majority countries, especially Egypt and Pakistan, Christian girls are being kidnapped, raped, and forced to convert to Islam. The Blaze - A growing number of Christian (and even Hindu) girls are being raped and forced to marry and convert to Islam, according to Agenzia Fides (the information service of the Pontifical Mission Societies) via Continental News. Hundreds of [...]

Read more of this post

Add a comment to this post


WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Reach out to your own subscribers with WordPress.com.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.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.

A New Ice Age is coming...Global Warming Alarmist hardest hit




A New Ice Age is coming...Global Warming Alarmist hardest hit

This will sadden all those global warming alarmist who based their theories on fraudulent peer review studies pushed by fraudulent climate scientists.

The Register.co.uk reports:

What may be the science story of the century is breaking this evening, as heavyweight US solar physicists announce that the Sun appears to be headed into a lengthy spell of low activity, which could mean that the Earth – far from facing a global warming problem – is actually headed into a mini Ice Age.

Al Gore and Obama will be depressed.

The announcement made on 14 June (18:00 UK time) comes from scientists at the US National Solar Observatory (NSO) and US Air Force Research Laboratory. Three different analyses of the Sun's recent behaviour all indicate that a period of unusually low solar activity may be about to begin.

The Sun normally follows an 11-year cycle of activity. The current cycle, Cycle 24, is now supposed to be ramping up towards maximum strength. Increased numbers of sunspots and other indications ought to be happening: but in fact results so far are most disappointing. Scientists at the NSO now suspect, based on data showing decades-long trends leading to this point, that Cycle 25 may not happen at all.

This could have major implications for the Earth's climate. According to a statement issued by the NSO, announcing the research:

An immediate question is whether this slowdown presages a second Maunder Minimum, a 70-year period with virtually no sunspots [which occurred] during 1645-1715.As NASA notes:

Early records of sunspots indicate that the Sun went through a period of inactivity in the late 17th century. Very few sunspots were seen on the Sun from about 1645 to 1715. Although the observations were not as extensive as in later years, the Sun was in fact well observed during this time and this lack of sunspots is well documented. This period of solar inactivity also corresponds to a climatic period called the "Little Ice Age" when rivers that are normally ice-free froze and snow fields remained year-round at lower altitudes. There is evidence that the Sun has had similar periods of inactivity in the more distant past.

I predict that the same idiots who push man-made global warming will now push man-made global cooling. As we all know, lefties believe man controls weather, not nature or the moon and sun.

Add a comment to this post


WordPress

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress!
Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.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.

Saw this on the Jalopnik website today about Fiat and Chrysler

I think Fiat is absolutely right in what they say.  Be interesting to see what our POS president has to say about this one.


Fiat Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne said the Italian carmaker won't risk a credit-rating downgrade to gain full ownership of Chrysler Group LLC. "We can't jeopardize the rating of Fiat," Marchionne told reporters late yesterday in Gavi, Italy, at a presentation of the Freemont sport-utility vehicle. "The easiest route" is an initial public offering at Chrysler instead of an outright purchase of the stake Fiat doesn't currently own.

Re: Interesting - see the liberals heads explode from this one

The greenies and this current POS we have for a president are dedicated to shutting down the coal mines completely and destroying the companies. 

plainolamerican wrote:
when was the last time you saw the greenies complain about coal?  On Jun 14, 10:01 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:   
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/06/not-only-do-electric-vehicles-pr...     
   

FW: [CCCC-USA] Fw: Will you sell your house after 2012?

sir, i forward this to you fro verification purposes.  NO REPLY will be taken as an admission to the validity of the information.  IF this is true, i demand that you, as my representative, REMOVE THIS FROM THE LAW OF THE LAND.






sign me
daniel karl seigler, born in Fort Benning, Cussetta County, Georgia, son of
Clarance Roland O'Neil Seigler, born in Ozark, Dale County, Alabama, son of
Thomas Malcolm Seigler, born somewhere in Alabama



 


Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:06:54 -0700
From:
Subject: Fw: [CCCC-USA] Fw: Will you sell your house after 2012?
To: danielseigler@hotmail.com




----- Forwarded Message -----
From:
To: CCCC-USA <cccc-usa@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 6:07 AM
Subject: [CCCC-USA] Fw: Will you sell your house after 2012?
 

 
----- ?
 
jean zeigler
 


--
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
:

From: 
Subject: Fw: Fwd: Fwd: Will you sell your house after 2
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: 
 To:
 Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 19:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Fwd: Will you sell your house after 2012?




-----Original Message----- From: 
To: undisclosed recipients: 
 Sent: Sat, Jun 4, 2011 8:15 am
 Subject: Fw: Fwd: Fw: Fw: Fwd: Will you sell your house after 2012?
"Obama Care"----- How is the changy thing working for you????
 
If this guy is elected for another 4 years-------- we deserve what we get!!!!
sonny
 
 

Subject: Fwd: Will you sell your house after 2012?
 

 
Subject: Re: WILL YOU SELL YOUR HOUSE AFTER 2012
 
National Association of REALTORS is all over this and working to get it repealed, before it takes effect. But, I am very pleased we aren't the only ones who know about this ploy to steal billions from unsuspecting homeowners. How many REALTORS do you think will vote Demoncratic in 2012?
Damn few. We vote in almost every election, in greater numbers than average. That, I'm sure, will have some bearing on next year's election.
 
Michael W, REALTOR 
 
 
 
Subject: FW: WILL YOU SELL YOUR HOUSE AFTER 2012
Importance: High
 
 
Will you ever sell  your house after 2012?
 
Call your  Democratic Senator's Office to confirm this hidden fact about the ObamaCare  regulation.
 
Will you ever sell your house after 2012?
 
Did you know that if you sell your house  after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it?
 
That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home,  etc.
 
When did this happen?
 
It's in the health care bill.
 
Just thought you should know.
 
SALES TAX GOES INTO EFFECT 2013 (Part of HC Bill).
 
Why 2013?
 
Could it be to come to light AFTER the 2012 elections?
 
REAL ESTATE SALES TAX.
 
So, this is "change you can believe in"?
 
Under the new health care bill all real  estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax.
 
The bulk of these new taxes don't kick in until 2013 If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be  a $15,200 tax.
 
This bill is set to screw the retiring  generation who often downsize their homes.
 
Does this stuff make your November and 2012 vote more important?
 
Oh, you weren't aware this was in the obamacare bill?
 
Guess what, you aren't alone.
 
There are more than a few members of  Congress that aren't aware of it either
 
http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home< http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home>
 
I  hope you forward this to every single person in your address book. VOTERS NEED  TO KNOW. 
 
--Forwarded Message Attachment--
__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Please visit the ultimate resource for defending liberty.CLICK HERE:http://targetfreedom.com/AND  HERE:http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/This is the Most Extensive Collection of Freedom Videos Ever Compiled:http://targetfreedom.com/videos-to-watch/best-collection-of-freedom-videos/ Book about defending libertyhttp://americanistbookstore.com/  and here: http://www.amazon.com/shops/jperna12 Watch these videos:  Invisible Empire - full version NWO video An absolutely amazing expose' of the power brokers of the world: No criminal tyrant left behind. http://targetfreedom.com/books/invisible-empire/http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2010/04/invisible-empire.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTrJQpgf6sE Police State 4 The Rise of FEMA http://targetfreedom.com/american-concentration-camps/police-state-4/http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2010/04/police-state-4.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXBNRxUIZBM Camp FEMA: American Lockdown - FULL MOVIEhttp://targetfreedom.com/american-concentration-camps/camp-fema-american-lockdown-full-movie/http://targetfreedom.typepad.com/targetfreedom/2010/05/campfemaamericanlockdown-.htmlhttp://www.blip.tv/file/3661748  The Obama Deception HQ Full length version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw What is The Answer To The Greatest Question?Click here:http://americanistbookstore.com/books/answer-to-the-greatest-question/or here:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/097871461X?ie=UTF8&seller=A1AVPSERX4QF0E&sn=jperna12Click here to find out about Answer To The Greatest Question:http://americanistbookstore.com/books/answer-to-the-greatest-question/orhttp://reasonmustprevail.org/orhttp://1smartest.net/"The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke 1729-1797
.
__,_._,___

Re: Ann Coulter has a new book called: Demonic!

it's autobiographical!
--------------------------------

No its not.

Was, but isn't

--
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.

Re: Ann Coulter has a new book called: Demonic!

is it worth the read???? 

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Keith In Köln <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, she describes you and your ilk to the tee Stevie!  Pick up a copy,  you'll learn something about yourself.
 
Keith

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Stephen Stink <not4udude@yahoo.com> wrote:
yep...it's autobiographical! Doncha just love it?
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Bulima anyone?

--
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.

--
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.

--
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.

Re: Ann Coulter has a new book called: Demonic!

Actually, she describes you and your ilk to the tee Stevie!  Pick up a copy,  you'll learn something about yourself.
 
Keith

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Stephen Stink <not4udude@yahoo.com> wrote:
yep...it's autobiographical! Doncha just love it?
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Bulima anyone?

--
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.

--
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.

If This Be ‘Isolationism’. . .



"Yet, in reality, there is no such thing as "isolationism," and no such creature as an "isolationist": it is a fiction manufactured by the interventionist politicians of both parties to characterize any and all opposition to aggressive and unnecessary wars ,"

If This Be 'Isolationism'. . .
Then sign me up
by Justin Raimondo, June 15, 2011

The mainstream meme emerging from the CNN/Union Leader Republican presidential debate is apparently that everyone went easy on Romney, which makes him, somehow, the "front runner." Less noticed but more credible – and much more interesting – was what one post-debate analysis by Washington Post columnist Jackson Diehl expressed in the form of a question: "Will the GOP nominate a dove?" That was the title, no doubt the work of a relatively fair-minded editor, but Diehl's take is more ideological:

"Is the Republican party turning isolationist for 2012? No doubt it's too soon to know–but the responses of GOP presidential candidates to questions about Libya and Afghanistan in Monday night's debate were striking. None supported President Obama's decision to join NATO's military intervention against the regime of Moammar Gadhafi. 'There was no vital national interest," said Rep. Michelle Bachmann, summing up what appeared to be the prevailing view."

The term "Isolationism" was originally coined as an epithet, and the word certainly has about it a troglodytic air: one imagines a cranky old man yelling "get off my lawn" to children passing in the street. Yet that's an image which surely fits the mood of the American public these days, and certainly they have much to be cranky about – especially when it comes to the conduct of American foreign policy.

During the Bush era, they were subjected to a regime of constant and costly warfare, with US policymakers determined to " democratize" and otherwise " liberate" the Middle East – " draining the swamp," as neocon ideologues so blithely described their war aims. Having discovered that the swamp was, instead, draining the US, the American public has turned – albeit not on a dime – and now opposes all foreign adventurism with a stubbornness that our elites disdainfully refer to with the "i"-word – as if they were doctors diagnosing the foreign policy equivalent of gout.

Yet, in reality, there is no such thing as "isolationism," and no such creature as an "isolationist": it is a fiction manufactured by the interventionist politicians of both parties to characterize any and all opposition to aggressive and unnecessary wars. No one, not even the hardcore protectionists in the labor unions and on the paleoconservative right, wants to isolate America from the rest of the world, and Diehl's use of the term is particularly egregious: after all, if ever there was a "war of choice," then it is the Libyan adventure, which the US officially describes as a "humanitarian" effort launched (initially at least) in order to " save countless lives." As Glenn Greenwald and others have pointed out, it's more likely pressure from oil companies locked out of lucrative Libyan contracts – Libya has the richest oil reserves in North Africa – that motivated US intervention in what is essentially a civil war.

In any case, the official explanation for the Libyan war is an ideological one, one that abjures any concept of national self interest, and indeed this appears to be Diehl's litmus test indicating the presence of the "isolationist" virus. If you believe, like Bachmann and the rest of the GOP candidates, that self-interest must determine our actions abroad, then you're an isolationist, but this is obviously nonsense, as most of the candidates at the debate – with the lone exception of Ron Paul – have at one time or another endorsed some form of foreign intervention, whether it be in Iraq, Afghanistan, or wherever.

That the trend is now running against the War Party in the GOP, and toward foreign policy realism, is a political fact of reality such practiced opportunists as Mitt Romney are naturally quick to pick up on. In answer to the rather generalized foreign policy question he was asked by the obnoxiously John "Coke or Pepsi?" King, the alleged "front runner" proffered that the lesson of Afghanistan is that "We've learned that our troops shouldn't go off and try to fight a war of independence for another nation." That the Afghans – both the Taliban and the Karzai government – are fighting for their independence against the Americans is not something Romney is capable of either understanding or expressing. The point, however, is that anti-interventionism is the leitmotif of the GOP's foreign policy mindset.

This comes with some important caveats, as Diehl points out:

"To be sure, Tim Pawlenty has previously supported air strikes in Libya and criticized Obama's strategy there as too 'timid.' On Monday he said he supported drone strikes against al Qaeda targets in Yemen, contrary to libertarian Ron Paul, who predictably declared that he would end American military operations everywhere. But Pawlenty didn't speak about Libya …"

You bet he didn't, because he knows which way the wind is blowing, and doesn't want to come out of the closet as a run-of-the-mill GOP warmonger any sooner than necessary.

Diehl's dissing of Paul as "predictable" is to be expected: after all, we're talking about the Washington Post, the voice of evil in America: but I wonder how predictable any of this was, at least as far as the WaPo is concerned. Surely none of their predictably neoconservative op ed columnists had this development in their sights. And much if not all of the credit goes to Rep. Paul, whose last presidential run was characterized by constant conflicts with the GOP Establishment and the other candidates (or do I repeat myself) over precisely these kinds of issues. Only Paul defied the neocon consensus, and came out, guns blazing, against interventionism in all its forms, going so far as to denounce the neocons on the floor of Congress as the perpetrators of a gigantic fraud. Now, as Paul notes, the GOP is moving toward his foreign policy views, as well as his libertarian economic views [.pdf], and this is true especially among younger Republican voters and activists – who represent the future of the GOP.

The dominance – nay, the relevance – of the neocons is over, as Diehl concludes:

"All in all this first Republican debate offered a striking change of tone for a party that a decade ago was dominated, in foreign policy, by the neoconservative movement, which favored (and still does) aggressive American intervention abroad. It also differed sharply from the last Republican presidential nominee, Sen. John McCain (R-Az.), who has been one of the strongest advocates of military action in Libya."

This isn't just partisan politics, as some have suggested, although that's a factor: it has more to do with the transformation of the conservative movement, the energizing force behind the GOP, and this ideological sea change is, in turn, motivated by the crisis of the American empire, which seems to be entering a critical phase. The impending bankruptcy of the federal government – as predicted for years by Paul and his supporters – has clarified the muddiness that has characterized GOP thinking on the subject up until this point. This, combined with the war-weariness of the American public, who are sick unto death of foreign meddling and want our leaders to focus on our seemingly intractable problems right here at home, is yet another factor in the equation.

For years, we here at Antiwar.com have been hoping for – and hopefully predicting – that this day would come: a day when the default position of conservatives is no longer "bomb 'em, and let God sort out the rest." Because what this means is that the Grand Alliance between the formerly dominant interventionist wings of both parties is sundered, and politics no longer stops at the water's edge. Furthermore, this means that the big excuse the Democratic party establishment has always used to keep its antiwar constituency in line – the Republicans will take swift advantage of any "weakness" in the party's foreign policy stance – is no longer operative.

What the revival of "isolationism" in the GOP means is that foreign policy is once again – at long last! – a debatable issue in presidential elections, and on down. And that's the first step in reclaiming and reviving the foreign policy of the Founders – and shaking off the burden of empire.

So let them call us "isolationists" – what do we care what they call us, as long as we win? The proper answer to the "isolationist"-baiters is: if this be isolationism, then let the warmongers make the most of it!

NOTES IN THE MARGIN

Okay, so who won the debate? If we measure victory by the amount of applause each candidate received, then it was clearly the only consistent anti-interventionist: Ron Paul.

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2011/06/14/if-this-be-isolationism/

Ann Coulter has a new book called: Demonic!

yep...it's autobiographical! Doncha just love it?
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Bulima anyone?

--
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.

Re: FBI Expands Agents’ Investigative Power

What is your definition of a "crime"??? I believe interventions upon the individual should be confined to punishing those crimes against person or property which are classified by law as malum in se, as distinguished from malum prohibitum. Thus, murder, arson, robbery, assault, for example, are so classified. On the other hand, selling whiskey, possessing gold, and the planting of certain crops, are examples of the malum prohibitum, concerning which there is no such general agreement.

The "tools they need to catch the bad guys" -- those accused of the violation of laws classified as malum in se -- already exist.

On 06/15/2011 08:36 AM, plainolamerican wrote:
give the FBI the tools they need to catch the bad guys and prosecute them for violating our trust and any crimes they commit  On Jun 15, 9:27 am, Jonathan Ashley <jonathanashle...@lavabit.com> wrote: 
*FBI Expands Agents� Investigative Power *  The New York Times First published Jun 12 2011 07:40PM Updated Jun 12, 2011 11:28PM  Washington � The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents � allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention.  The FBI soon plans to issue a new edition of its manual, called the Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide, according to an official who has worked on the draft document and several others who have been briefed on its contents. The new rules add to several measures taken over the past decade to give agents more latitude as they search for signs of criminal or terrorist activity.  The FBI recently briefed several privacy advocates about the coming changes. Among them, Michael German, a former FBI agent who is now a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, argued it was unwise to further ease restrictions on agents� power to use potentially intrusive techniques, especially if they lacked a firm reason to suspect someone of wrongdoing.  "Claiming additional authorities to investigate people only further raises the potential for abuse," German said, pointing to complaints about the bureau�s surveillance of domestic political advocacy groups and mosques and to an inspector general�s findings in 2007 that the FBI had improperly used "national security letters" to obtain information like people�s phone bills.  Valerie E. Caproni, the FBI general counsel, said the bureau had fixed the problems with the national security letters and had taken steps to make sure they would not recur. She also said the bureau � which does not need permission to alter its manual so long as the rules fit within broad guidelines issued by the attorney general � had carefully weighed the risks and the benefits of each change.  Some of the most notable changes apply to the lowest category of investigations, called an "assessment." The category, created in December 2008, allows agents to look into people and organizations "proactively" and without firm evidence for suspecting criminal or terrorist activity.  Under current rules, agents must open such an inquiry before they can search for information about a person in a commercial or law enforcement database. Under the new rules, agents will be allowed to search such databases without making a record about their decision.  http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/51992858-68/agents-fbi-search-bure...  --        Freedom is always illegal!  When we ask for freedom, we have already failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free. 
 

--

Freedom is always illegal!

When we ask for freedom, we have already failed. It is only when we declare freedom for ourselves and refuse to accept any less, that we have any possibility of being free.