Thursday, April 12, 2012

Mike Wallace CBS Documentary - The Homosexuals (1967)

Watch Here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFSCPTZLxGs

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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: Before Romney gets any closer to the White House

Wrong Jim Messina PlainOl. I feel confident that this Jim Messina that you posted is a normal, all American conservative; who feels compassion for misguided confused Marxists like Lil'TommyTomTomForNews.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:49 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXIM_IaF4ak&feature=related

On Apr 11, 11:24 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jim Messina = <Moonbat>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Before Romney gets any closer to the White House
>
> > From Jim Messina
>
> > By now you've probably seen the news: The amazing -- and amazingly
> > negative -- Republican race for president is all but over. Mitt Romney
> > is almost certainly our opponent in this election.
>
> > That means America will have a very clear choice come November.
>
> > The President believes that this is a make-or-break moment for the
> > middle class, and that without a strong and thriving middle class,
> > we'll never have the growth we need.
>
> > That's why he's fighting for an economy rooted in our fundamental
> > values -- one in which Americans can not only find work, but where
> > folks who work hard can get ahead, responsibility is rewarded, and
> > everyone, from Main Street to Wall Street, plays by the same rules.
>
> > He's fighting for an economy that's built to last, with a genuine and
> > sustained commitment to education and training, advanced
> > manufacturing, and homegrown, American energy.
>
> > He's fighting for a country in which every child has a chance, and
> > every American, after a lifetime of work, can count on retiring with
> > dignity and security.
>
> > And he's fighting to ensure that the responsibility for delivering on
> > that future is broadly shared, which means ending the budget-busting
> > tax cuts for the wealthy that add to our deficits and crowd out the
> > very investments we need to grow.
>
> > Mitt Romney has a different, and frighteningly familiar, view.
>
> > He thinks you grow our economy from the top down.
>
> > He'd take us back to an economy based on outsourcing, risky financial
> > schemes, and massive tax cuts for the wealthy. He'd return to the
> > policy of allowing Wall Street, Big Oil, and other special interests
> > to write their own rules.
>
> > But that's not all. Below are five other things that should give
> > Americans pause.
>
> > Forward this email -- and if you're ready for this fight, say you're in.
>
> > 1. Romney's positions are the most radically anti-women of any
> > candidate in a generation: He supports banning all abortions, backed a
> > so-called "personhood" amendment that could make certain forms of
> > birth control illegal, and says he would "get rid of" federal funding
> > for Planned Parenthood that provides preventive services like cancer
> > screenings for millions of women.
>
> > 2. Romney would repeal Obamacare. Insurance companies would once again
> > be allowed to run up premiums, unjustifiably deny coverage for
> > pre-existing conditions, drop patients when they get sick,
> > discriminate against women by charging them more for coverage than
> > men, and spend more of your premium dollars on CEO profits and bonuses
> > instead of your actual health care.
>
> > 3. Romney is a risk when it comes to foreign policy and national
> > security. On many of these questions, he has shifted his position for
> > political reasons, even within the same campaign. His only clear
> > commitment is to endless wars: He has no plan to end the war in
> > Afghanistan and would leave our troops there indefinitely. He called
> > the President's decision to bring our troops home from Iraq by last
> > Christmas "tragic."
>
> > 4. Despite the lessons of recent history, Romney would double down on
> > the disastrous tax policies that handed windfalls to the wealthy, but
> > stacked the deck against the middle class. Under Romney, millionaires
> > and billionaires would get a $250,000 tax cut, while families with
> > kids making less than $40,000 a year would, on average, actually see
> > their taxes go up. To the surprise of no one, Romney also opposes the
> > Buffett Rule. He would allow millionaires to continue to take
> > advantage of loopholes and special deals that often allow them to pay
> > a lower tax rate than the middle class. And he supports tax breaks for
> > companies that ship jobs overseas.
>
> > 5. Romney would end Medicare as we know it -- replacing it with a
> > voucher scheme that would drive profits for insurance companies by
> > forcing seniors to purchase private insurance, paying whatever costs a
> > voucher wouldn't cover out of their own limited budgets.
>
> > Romney and his special-interest allies are going to spend the next
> > seven months trying to deny, downplay, or hide these facts from
> > voters. It's on us to speak the truth.
>
> > So print these out, post them on your fridge, and share them on
> > Facebook. Send this list around to friends who are on the fence.
>
> > When and if your mother-in-law, or cousin, or best friend claims that
> > Romney is "moderate," you need to know what to say.
>
> > You are the President's voice out there, and I can't stress enough how
> > you will be the difference between voters hearing our message or not.
> > The more Americans learn about Mitt Romney, the less they like him,
> > and the less they trust him.
>
> > Are you ready? If yes, say so:
>
> >http://my.barackobama.com/Ready
>
> > If people know the truth about Mitt Romney and President Obama, who
> > they are, and their very different plans for this country, there's no
> > way we can lose this thing.
>
> > This race is on.
>
> > Let's go,
>
> > Messina
>
> > Jim Messina
> > Campaign Manager
> > Obama for America
>
> > P.S. -- We put together a video highlighting some of Romney's severely
> > conservative positions -- which we all need to remember as we head
> > into the general election. Take a look, and make sure your friends see
> > it too.
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/

> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
>
>

> moonbats.gif
> 2KViewDownload

--
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: Before Romney gets any closer to the White House

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXIM_IaF4ak&feature=related

On Apr 11, 11:24 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jim Messina = <Moonbat>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Before Romney gets any closer to the White House
>
> > From Jim Messina
>
> > By now you've probably seen the news: The amazing -- and amazingly
> > negative -- Republican race for president is all but over. Mitt Romney
> > is almost certainly our opponent in this election.
>
> > That means America will have a very clear choice come November.
>
> > The President believes that this is a make-or-break moment for the
> > middle class, and that without a strong and thriving middle class,
> > we'll never have the growth we need.
>
> > That's why he's fighting for an economy rooted in our fundamental
> > values -- one in which Americans can not only find work, but where
> > folks who work hard can get ahead, responsibility is rewarded, and
> > everyone, from Main Street to Wall Street, plays by the same rules.
>
> > He's fighting for an economy that's built to last, with a genuine and
> > sustained commitment to education and training, advanced
> > manufacturing, and homegrown, American energy.
>
> > He's fighting for a country in which every child has a chance, and
> > every American, after a lifetime of work, can count on retiring with
> > dignity and security.
>
> > And he's fighting to ensure that the responsibility for delivering on
> > that future is broadly shared, which means ending the budget-busting
> > tax cuts for the wealthy that add to our deficits and crowd out the
> > very investments we need to grow.
>
> > Mitt Romney has a different, and frighteningly familiar, view.
>
> > He thinks you grow our economy from the top down.
>
> > He'd take us back to an economy based on outsourcing, risky financial
> > schemes, and massive tax cuts for the wealthy. He'd return to the
> > policy of allowing Wall Street, Big Oil, and other special interests
> > to write their own rules.
>
> > But that's not all. Below are five other things that should give
> > Americans pause.
>
> > Forward this email -- and if you're ready for this fight, say you're in.
>
> > 1. Romney's positions are the most radically anti-women of any
> > candidate in a generation: He supports banning all abortions, backed a
> > so-called "personhood" amendment that could make certain forms of
> > birth control illegal, and says he would "get rid of" federal funding
> > for Planned Parenthood that provides preventive services like cancer
> > screenings for millions of women.
>
> > 2. Romney would repeal Obamacare. Insurance companies would once again
> > be allowed to run up premiums, unjustifiably deny coverage for
> > pre-existing conditions, drop patients when they get sick,
> > discriminate against women by charging them more for coverage than
> > men, and spend more of your premium dollars on CEO profits and bonuses
> > instead of your actual health care.
>
> > 3. Romney is a risk when it comes to foreign policy and national
> > security. On many of these questions, he has shifted his position for
> > political reasons, even within the same campaign. His only clear
> > commitment is to endless wars: He has no plan to end the war in
> > Afghanistan and would leave our troops there indefinitely. He called
> > the President's decision to bring our troops home from Iraq by last
> > Christmas "tragic."
>
> > 4. Despite the lessons of recent history, Romney would double down on
> > the disastrous tax policies that handed windfalls to the wealthy, but
> > stacked the deck against the middle class. Under Romney, millionaires
> > and billionaires would get a $250,000 tax cut, while families with
> > kids making less than $40,000 a year would, on average, actually see
> > their taxes go up. To the surprise of no one, Romney also opposes the
> > Buffett Rule. He would allow millionaires to continue to take
> > advantage of loopholes and special deals that often allow them to pay
> > a lower tax rate than the middle class. And he supports tax breaks for
> > companies that ship jobs overseas.
>
> > 5. Romney would end Medicare as we know it -- replacing it with a
> > voucher scheme that would drive profits for insurance companies by
> > forcing seniors to purchase private insurance, paying whatever costs a
> > voucher wouldn't cover out of their own limited budgets.
>
> > Romney and his special-interest allies are going to spend the next
> > seven months trying to deny, downplay, or hide these facts from
> > voters. It's on us to speak the truth.
>
> > So print these out, post them on your fridge, and share them on
> > Facebook. Send this list around to friends who are on the fence.
>
> > When and if your mother-in-law, or cousin, or best friend claims that
> > Romney is "moderate," you need to know what to say.
>
> > You are the President's voice out there, and I can't stress enough how
> > you will be the difference between voters hearing our message or not.
> > The more Americans learn about Mitt Romney, the less they like him,
> > and the less they trust him.
>
> > Are you ready? If yes, say so:
>
> >http://my.barackobama.com/Ready
>
> > If people know the truth about Mitt Romney and President Obama, who
> > they are, and their very different plans for this country, there's no
> > way we can lose this thing.
>
> > This race is on.
>
> > Let's go,
>
> > Messina
>
> > Jim Messina
> > Campaign Manager
> > Obama for America
>
> > P.S. -- We put together a video highlighting some of Romney's severely
> > conservative positions -- which we all need to remember as we head
> > into the general election. Take a look, and make sure your friends see
> > it too.
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
>
>
> moonbats.gif
> 2KViewDownload

--
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: Conservatives tend to have lower intelligence.

says a new jewish phd in an experimental training program in Kansas

Baaaaaaawwwwwww!!!!!

try again ... it's fun to laugh at you

On Apr 12, 9:27 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Conservatives tend to have lower intelligence.
>
> They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.
>
> Article:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/07/conservative-politics-low-ef...
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
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: SPEAKING GERMAN

ein anderer liberaler Sozialist Wortschwaelle

On Apr 11, 11:34 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Moonbats wie TommyTomTomForNews sind gefährlich für die Freie Welt. Tom
> nutzt die maschinelle Übersetzung zu lächerlich rantings übersetzen .....
> Er kann nicht sprechen Deutsch oder Französisch.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Diejenigen auf der rechten Seite haben weniger Hirn
> > als ein Haufen Mist Bär im Schwarzwald.
>
> > Wenn ein Bär im Wald kackt er hat eine bessere chance, als eine
> > sichere Sache, als er von genannt werden einen rechtsradikalen tut.
>
> > On Apr 11, 5:38 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > (I laughed!)
>
> > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:13 PM, plainolamerican
> > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > very good!
>
> > > > Strange Lincoln - Obama Coincidences
>
> > > > 1) Abraham Lincoln had no middle name. You're not allowed to say
> > > > Barack Obama's middle name.
>
> > > > 2) Lincoln eliminated involuntary servitude. Obama eliminated private
> > > > sector jobs.
>
> > > > 3) Lincoln and Obama were both married to ugly wives who went crazy.
>
> > > > 4) Each man's wife gained over forty pounds while living at the White
> > > > House.
>
> > > > 5) Lincoln was hit in the head from behind. Obama hid his head up his
> > > > behind.
>
> > > > 6) Lincoln was shot in Ford's Theater. Obama shot up while riding in a
> > > > Lincoln made by Ford.
>
> > > > 7) Both men had vice-presidents who were illiterate Democrat senators.
>
> > > > 8) Andrew Johnson nearly lived to the age of 67. Joe Biden nearly had
> > > > an IQ of 67.
>
> > > > 9) Lincoln was born in KENtucky, Obama was born in KENya - before both
> > > > moved to Illinois.
>
> > > > 10) LincOln and Obama each had a single letter "O" in their last name.
>
> > > > 11) Andrew Johnson had no middle name. Joseph Robinette Biden had a
> > > > silly one.
>
> > > > 12) JOHN W. BOOTH and BILL C. AYERS each has 10 letters.
>
> > > > 13) A Kennedy told Lincoln to take care of his health. Ted Kennedy
> > > > told Obama to pass health care.
>
> > > > 14) Lincoln and Obama were both more feminine than Hillary Clinton.
>
> > > > 15) Lincoln was placed on the penny. Obama was not quite worth a
> > > > penny.
>
> > > > 16) Lincoln was not a Muslim. Obama was not an admitted Muslim.
>
> > > > 17) Neither Lincoln nor Obama ever wrote a book.
>
> > > > 18) Lincoln suffered from major depression. Obama caused a major
> > > > depression.
>
> > > > On Apr 11, 11:53 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > --
>
> > > > > In Texas there is a town called New Braunfels, where there is a large
> > > > > German-speaking population.
> > > > > One day, a local rancher driving down a country road noticed a man
> > using
> > > > > his hand to drink water from the rancher's stock pond.
> > > > > The rancher rolled down the window and shouted: "Sehr angenehm!
> > Trink das
> > > > > Wasser nicht. Die kuehe haben darein geschissen."
> > > > > Which means: "Glad to meet you! Don't drink the water. The cows have
> > sh*t
> > > > > in it."
> > > > > The man shouted back: "I'm from New York and just down here
> > campaigning
> > > > for
> > > > > Obama. I can't understand you. Please speak in English."
> > > > > The rancher replied: "Use both hands."
>
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://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: SPEAKING GERMAN

Uhm, the Tyrant Lincoln NATIONALIZED involuntary servitude
----
In his new book, Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream,
black American author, Lerone Bennett, presents historic evidence
supporting the theory that Abraham Lincoln was, in fact, a devoted
racist harboring a life-long desire to see all black Americans
deported to Africa.

Bennett suggests that as a young politician in Illinois, Lincoln
regularly used racial slurs in speeches, told racial jokes to his
black servants, and vocally opposed any new laws that would have
bettered the lives of black Americans.

Key to Bennett's thesis is the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation which,
Bennett argues, Lincoln was forced into issuing by the powerful
abolitionist wing of his own party. Bennett asserts that Lincoln
carefully worded the document to apply only to the rebel Southern
states, which were not under Union control at the time, thus resulting
in an Emancipation Proclamation that did not in itself free a single
slave.

At one point, Bennett quotes William Henry Seward, Lincoln's secretary
of state, who referred to the proclamation as a hollow, meaningless
document showing no more than, "our sympathy with the slaves by
emancipating the slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in
bondage where we can set them free."

Henry Clay Whitney, a close friend of Lincoln, is quoted by Bennett as
saying the proclamation was "not the end designed by him (Lincoln),
but only the means to the end, the end being the deportation of the
slaves and the payment for them to their masters - at least to those
who were loyal."

Bennett asserts that Lincoln often put forth plans for deporting the
slaves to Africa both before and during his presidency.

The tone of Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream is
decidedly angry, as if Bennett feels betrayed by what he calls the
"myth" of Abraham Lincoln.

"No other American story is so enduring. No other American story
is so comforting. No other American story is so false." -- Lerone
Bennett, Forced Into Glory: Abraham Lincoln's White Dream.

On Apr 11, 2:36 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> 2) Lincoln eliminated involuntary servitude. Obama eliminated private
> sector jobs.Uhm, the Tyrant Lincoln NATIONALIZED involuntary servitude.
> see Jeffrey Rogers Hummel's book ...Emancipating Slaves, Enslaving Free Men: A History of the American Civil War.
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> Your requisition is illegal, unconstitutional, revolutionary, inhuman, diabolical and cannot be complied with.
> -- Governor Claiborne Fox Jackson in response to Lincoln's request for troops to invade neighboring states and war against fellow Americans

--
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: Barak Hussein Obama: Magic Tricks Out Of His Probverbial Butt

better version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiQn_wboHPA&feature=player_embedded

Kathy Sawada represents the new liberal Democrat, someone who is
willing to stoop to any level, even exploiting our very children, to
further her personal political agenda.

On Apr 12, 11:36 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Remember this one?
>
> Reminiscent of Great Leader Kim Jong il; and something that
> Lil'TommyTomTomForNews probably orchestrated:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXABTmZP6oA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:20 PM, plainolamerican <
> > plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL2DKkBNKYw
>
> >> On Apr 12, 11:16 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Barack the Magnificent Tries to Distract Voters
>
> >> > The key to a magic trick is distraction: the magician tries to draw his
> >> > audience's attention to some irrelevant place while he executes his
> >> trick
> >> > elsewhere. A politician with a lousy record is much like an amateur
> >> > magician. He tries to get his audience, voters, to focus on
> >> > something–anything!–other than his record in office. That is the mode
> >> that
> >> > Barack Obama is in these days, as manifested by his monomaniacal
> >> dedication
> >> > to the Buffett Ploy.
>
> >> > I thought this cartoon by Michael Ramirez was exactly on point, and puts
> >> > Obama's effort at distraction in context:
>
> >> > BarakTheMagnificant...jpg
> >> > 254KViewDownload
>
> >> --
> >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> >> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> >> * Visit our other community athttp://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: Volunteer Cops

ah ... just more brown on black violence ... old news

On Apr 11, 6:51 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> George Zimerman has been arrested and charged with second degree
> murder, which carries a life sentence.
>
> On Apr 11, 3:55 pm, Mark <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > HISTORY OF THE SHERIFF
> > The Office of the Sheriff has existed for over one thousand (1000)
> > years and is the oldest law enforcement position in the United States.
> > The word Sheriff is derived from the Shire-reeve, who was the most
> > powerful English law authority figure, even before 1000 A.D. The
> > Shire-reeve, in contrast to a reeve (in charge of mere tenths), was
> > responsible for both the order of the land within his banded group of
> > a hundred families (shire) and the call of the "hue and cry". The hue
> > and cry made every citizen in earshot of the sheriff's call lawfully
> > obligated to join in a posse-commitatas, or group, which banded to
> > catch criminals.
>
> > Additional Links
>
> > History of the Sheriff
> > A past, present and future
> > The Sheriff Politically Speaking
> > Legal Power of the Sheriff
> > New Jersey History
> > A PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE FOR THE OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF top
> > (Based on the National Sheriff's Association booklet: The Role Of The
> > Sheriff Past - Present - Future)
>
> > The exact date of the very first sheriff undertaking his sworn duties
> > to protect the lives and property of those under his jurisdiction can
> > not be determined due to ambiguous historical findings from all over
> > the World. All of these findings point towards some type of prototype
> > sheriff. Many historians believe that the ancient Roman pro-consul was
> > perhaps the first sheriff-like authority. Other historians believe
> > that a prototype sheriff appeared first in Saxon Germany. Still more
> > have discovered that there was an Arab chief or prince who was the
> > descendant of Mahammed, through his daughter Fatima, and was known as
> > the sharif - translated to mean illustrious or noble.
>
> > In 600 B.C., the Chaldean King of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, was noted
> > in the Book of Daniel as being in the company of the sheriff during
> > the setting up of the golden image. This demonstrates that the early
> > recordings of the Holy Bible provide a 2600 year old reference of an
> > existing sheriff. It is true, however, that clear references and
> > recording of sheriffs are a uniquely English achievement.
>
> > Historian W. Morris wrote in his book about sheriffs that "The office
> > of the sheriff is one of the most familiar and most useful to be found
> > in the history of English institutions,...,with the single exception
> > of kingship, no secular dignity now known to English-speaking people
> > is older." Writer Walter H. Anderson, in his book, stated that "The
> > office of the sheriff is one of antiquity" and "is the oldest law
> > enforcement office known within the common-law system and it has
> > always been accorded great dignity and high trust."
>
> > Thomas Jefferson wrote in his The value of Constitutions, that "there
> > is no honorable law enforcement authority in Anglo-American law so
> > ancient as that of the county sheriff whose role as a peace officer
> > goes back at least to the time of Alfred the Great." All of these men
> > have shown the possibility that even though there may have been
> > sheriff like people in other cultures and times, today's sheriff is
> > essentially a direct descendant of the English sheriffs. It is known
> > that even the English sheriff was once referred to as a shire reeve,
> > and perhaps it is true that the shire reeve was a descendant of these
> > sheriff-like people of other lands.
>
> > The sheriff was created because laws needed enforcing. An interesting
> > way to track the roots of the sheriff is to study the written laws of
> > Kings in ancient times. One of the first Kings to do so was
> > Lipit-Istar, the King of Isin in 2207 B.C. He developed legally
> > binding guidelines to curb the behavior of his Sumerian subjects. A
> > little over a hundred years later, Babylonian King Hammurabi, devised
> > the well known and still studied codification system affectionately
> > called the Codes of Hammurabi. In 1500 B.C., King Thutmose III spoke
> > of justice when appointing Justice Rekhmire. All of these scenarios
> > point to a building up of a legal system in the Egyptian era.
>
> > Jews were eventually ordered to follow and obey the first five books
> > of the Old Testament known as the Pentateuch, showing recorded law
> > near the Roman era. Assyrians and Chinese governments attempted
> > codified laws and the Code of Manu was used by India. As the Roman era
> > was well underway, a digest of Roman law was created in 450 A.D. This
> > was improved in 550 A.D. by Justinian. As all of these were forged,
> > there must have been some type of enforcement by authority figures,
> > whether the kings themselves or their armies. It may be possible that
> > the sheriff role was merely a title of one who enforces.
>
> > Then the Magna Carta was written and signed by King John in 1215 A.D.,
> > nearly 800 years ago. The sheriffs had already existed and were known
> > under this sir title. Sheriffs had been recognized as principle
> > participants in the drama of government, seated just under the crown's
> > barons in hierarchy. Their duties and responsibilities mostly carried
> > over as America was established.
>
> > The English creation of the sheriff and the common law was forged
> > through the earlier influence of morals and values from the Angles,
> > Saxons, and the Normans. Their belief in home rule over government
> > control spawned the establishment of the tuns (towns) that eventually
> > became the tenths of land that banded together to fight in their wars.
> > As the tenths banded into hundredths and small counties formed
> > (reeves), they needed to be headed by a chief, called a gerefa. The
> > garefa eventually became the word reeve in the Saxon language. The
> > garefas and the chiefs of the smaller tenths, known as tithingmen,
> > possessed both tribal judicial and tribal police authority. There was
> > no government centralization until in 827 A.D. This is when Egbert,
> > King of Wessex won the loyalty of all the people in the tribes, newly
> > referred to as "Englishmen".
>
> > Alfred the Great created a system of freemen pledging the good
> > behavior of their neighbor, in sort of a prototype neighborhood watch.
> > A reeve was created to sound an alarm when criminals escaped from the
> > early jail. This alarm was the repeated shouting of the words hue and
> > cry and ironically was the ancestor of the citizen's arrest.
>
> > (The Hue and Cry, from Irene Gladwin's book: The Sheriff)
>
> > England continued to expand and the larger, more modern, counties
> > formed and were called shires. The reeves put in charge of the large
> > counties were called shire reeves in order to distinguish them from
> > the smaller county reeves. England then became a very war torn
> > country, there was the Norman Invasion, the fall of Hastings and the
> > subsequent end to Saxon rule over England.
>
> > The Norman influence over England only strengthened the power of the
> > sheriff. He became government oriented and lost his home rule
> > ideology. As government taxed the people the sheriff took on a new
> > responsibility to enforce taxation. Norman rule, however, was greatly
> > abusive and faced constant rebellion from the Englishmen. In 1199
> > Richard the Lionhearted died and his despotic brother, John, inherited
> > the throne and pushed the crown to its limit. His own barons and
> > sheriffs rebelled against him and he was forced to sign the prior
> > mentioned Magna Carta. This document became the proverbial
> > "cornerstone" from which the British and American governments were to
> > proliferate their power. There were at the very least, nine (9)
> > mentions of the office of sheriff in the Magna Carta.
>
> > Discovery and conquering of new land became central to the English
> > Crown. America was discovered and potentially named after the High
> > Sheriff of Bristol, Richard Amerycke, by error in the reading of a
> > voyage map (this is a recent theory that contrasts the theory of the
> > country being named after Amerigo Vespucci). As colonies were
> > established, the sheriff's office was copied into the local culture
> > and law. The first such transition of the English Sheriff to American
> > soil was in Virginia in 1634. Sheriff's were still appointed by the
> > King and was an extension of royal authority and representative of the
> > King. There is a record of a sheriff being elected by popular vote as
> > early as 1651, but this was highly irregular for the rules of the era.
>
> > Unlike the latter English sheriffs who put great expense out of their
> > pockets to perform the duty as sheriff, the American sheriff was very
> > profitable. This was attributed to the lack of pomp and ceremony that
> > existed in England and the need their to entertain. All men sought
> > this highly prestigious position in the colonies. Maryland,
> > coincidentally, became a close second in establishing the office of
> > the sheriff in the United States.
>
> > As Colonial times continued the Sheriff faced some unique and never
> > before experienced problems. Travel was very difficult in America as
> > there was no infrastructure and no address system. This meant that the
> > sheriff had to take advantage of the culture and knowing colonists
> > attended church, would wait at the churches of those he needed to
> > serve papers at. This was a very secular and ecclesiastical issue that
> > caused the churches to lobby for banning sheriffs from their premises
> > in official capacities. Despite any hard feelings, sheriffs were
> > provided their own seats at church and they counter lobbied for laws
> > requiring ministers to read the sheriffs' proclamations on two
> > successive Sundays, thus still allowing them to get their man.
> > Ironically, the sheriff became charged with the responsibility of
> > dealing with religious non-conformists.
>
> > As the
>
> ...
>
> read 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: BigHomo:Hillary Rosen sets lesbian rights back a few decades

Hillary Rosen sets lesbian rights back a few decades
---
na ... even the worst in our society are forgiven

this bitch is a player!

On Apr 12, 11:23 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> Blog: BigHomo
> Post: Hillary Rosen sets lesbian rights back a few decades
> Link:http://bighomocon.blogspot.com/2012/04/hillary-rosen-sets-lesbian-rig...
>
> --
> Powered by Bloggerhttp://www.blogger.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.

Re: Barak Hussein Obama: Magic Tricks Out Of His Probverbial Butt

Remember this one?

Reminiscent of Great Leader Kim Jong il; and something that Lil'TommyTomTomForNews probably orchestrated:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXABTmZP6oA

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:20 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL2DKkBNKYw

On Apr 12, 11:16 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Barack the Magnificent Tries to Distract Voters
>
> The key to a magic trick is distraction: the magician tries to draw his
> audience's attention to some irrelevant place while he executes his trick
> elsewhere. A politician with a lousy record is much like an amateur
> magician. He tries to get his audience, voters, to focus on
> something–anything!–other than his record in office. That is the mode that
> Barack Obama is in these days, as manifested by his monomaniacal dedication
> to the Buffett Ploy.
>
> I thought this cartoon by Michael Ramirez was exactly on point, and puts
> Obama's effort at distraction in context:
>

> BarakTheMagnificant...jpg
> 254KViewDownload

--
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: BANGLADESH: Chief of army staff into the corruption business

crime pays

"I ain't tryin to be a killer just a nigga 'bout his cheddar." - Young
Buck

On Apr 12, 11:23 am, William Gomes <williamgomes....@gmail.com> wrote:
> BANGLADESH: Chief of army staff into the corruption business
> <http://www.williamgomes.org/?p=769>
>
> On April 12, 2012 at around 11:30pm, railway ministry car pulled over at
> the main entrance to the Pilkhana BGB headquarters in the capital and its
> driver Ali Azam hollered that there were stashes of bribe money in the
> vehicle. BGB personnel on guard at the gate searched the car and found Tk
> 70 lak
>
> The BGB personal seized the money and detained the driver, Ali Azam, and
> three others who turned out to be railway minister's Assistant Personal
> Secretary (APS) Omar Faruq Talukder, Bangladesh Railway General Manager
> (East) Yusuf Ali Mridha and its Chief Commandant Enamul Huq.
>
> It was reported in the media that Azam, the driver of APS Omar, drove the
> vehicle carrying the APS and two other officials to gate-4 at Jhigatola
> after they refused to give him Tk 5 lakh as a share of the money .The
> detainees were released at around 1:00pm yesterday.
>
> *Inside story:*
>
> Credible sources said the car was moving towards the Sudha Sadan. It was
> promised by the railway minister to give Tk 5 lakh at the end of the
> railway recruitment business.
>
> When the driver find out that he was betrayed he revealed the corruption
> money to the BGB personals.
>
> When BGB personals in the gate -4 find out a large amount of money they
> called up several senior officials. Maj Gen Anwar Hossain, director general
> of the BGB was subsequently informed about the recovery of the money.
>
> On the mean time be railway minister's Assistant Personal Secretary (APS)
> Omar Faruq Talukder was allowed to call the railway minister and he
> informed what is happening in the gate 4.
>
> Suranjit Sen Gupta quickly cut the line and he call up the Prime Minister
> Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Selim.
>
> That made a huge difference into the scene. Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd)
> Tarique Ahmed Siddique immediately called General Md Abdul Mubeen, chief of
> army staff of Bangladesh Army.
>
> Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd) Tarique Ahmed Siddique quoting Prime
> Minister Sheikh Hasina said all detained person should be released as soon
> as possible with the recovered money. Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd)
> Tarique Ahmed Siddique also said made it sure the incident should not be
> made public.
>
> General Md Abdul Mubeen called up several officials and made it sure that
> media should not be informed about the incident and the detained persons
> with recovered money get released.
>
> Railways Minister Suranjit Sengupta publicly denied his involvement with
> the corruption. Suranjit Sengupta said the incident of recovering money
> from the car of his assistant personal secretary (APS) was part of a "well
> orchestrated conspiracy" to humiliate him politically.
>
> Recently Bangladesh railway department published advertisement for
> recruiting 7,140 personnel and it has, so far been able to complete
> recruitment of only 1,771 persons. The money was collected as bribe from
> different people looking for jobs.
>
> Driver Ali Azam had taken to DGFI custody.Railway minister's Assistant
> Personal Secretary (APS) Omar Faruq Talukder, Bangladesh Railway General
> Manager (East) Yusuf Ali Mridha and its Chief Commandant Enamul Huq was
> told by prime minister's office that if they keep silent they will be
> awarded and the Prime minister's office will made sure of impunity.
>
> *Previous Extortion allegations and criminal charges:*
>
> On April 9, 2007, it was announced that Bangladesh police were
> investigating extortion charges against Hasina. She was accused of forcing
> Bangladeshi businessman Tajul Islam Farooq to pay bribes before his company
> could build a power plant in 1998. Farooq said that he paid Hasina 30
> million takas (US$441,000, or €383,211) to get his project approved by the
> government, according to a police official.
>
> On July 16, 2007, Hasina was arrested by state police at her home and taken
> before a local court in Dhaka.She was accused of extortion and denied bail
> on the same day, and was held in a building converted into a jail on the
> premises of the National Parliament. According to the Awami League, the
> arrest was politically motivated.
>
> On January 13, 2008, she was indicted by a special court along with two of
> her relatives, her sister Sheikh Rehana and her cousin Sheikh Selim, on
> extortion charges.On February 6, however, the High Court stopped the trial,
> ruling that she could not be prosecuted under emergency laws for alleged
> crimes committed prior to the imposition of the state of emergency.
>
> Intelligence sources said that Chief of army staff was awarded a large
> amount of money for tackling the situation.http://www.williamgomes.org/?p=769http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2012/04/bangladesh-chief-of-army-staf...
>
> --
> *William Nicholas Gomes*
> *Journalist & Human Rights Activist *
> *80/ B Bramon Chiron, Saydabad,
> Dhaka-1203, Bangladesh.
> Cell: +88 019 7 444 0 666
> E-mail:**William [at] williamgomes.org* <Will...@williamgomes.org>*,
> editorbd[at]gmail.com <edito...@gmail.com>
> Skype: William.gomes9
> Face book: **www.facebook.com/williamnicholasgomes*<http://www.facebook.com/williamnicholasgomes>
> *
> Twitter: **twitter.com/williamgomes* <http://www.twitter.com/persecutionbd>*
> **Web site :www.williamgomes.org*<http://www.williamgomes.org/>

--
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.

BigHomo:Hillary Rosen sets lesbian rights back a few decades

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Blog: BigHomo
Post: Hillary Rosen sets lesbian rights back a few decades
Link: http://bighomocon.blogspot.com/2012/04/hillary-rosen-sets-lesbian-rights-back.html

--
Powered by Blogger
http://www.blogger.com/

BANGLADESH: Chief of army staff into the corruption business

On April 12, 2012 at around 11:30pm, railway ministry car pulled over at the main entrance to the Pilkhana BGB headquarters in the capital and its driver Ali Azam hollered that there were stashes of bribe money in the vehicle. BGB personnel on guard at the gate searched the car and found Tk 70 lak

The BGB personal seized the money and detained the driver, Ali Azam, and three others who turned out to be railway minister's Assistant Personal Secretary (APS) Omar Faruq Talukder, Bangladesh Railway General Manager (East) Yusuf Ali Mridha and its Chief Commandant Enamul Huq.

It was reported in the media that Azam, the driver of APS Omar, drove the vehicle carrying the APS and two other officials to gate-4 at Jhigatola after they refused to give him Tk 5 lakh as a share of the money .The detainees were released at around 1:00pm yesterday.

Inside story:

Credible sources said the car was moving towards the Sudha Sadan. It was promised by the railway minister to give Tk 5 lakh at the end of the railway recruitment business.

When the driver find out that he was betrayed he revealed the corruption money to the BGB personals.

When BGB personals in the gate -4 find out a large amount of money they called up several senior officials. Maj Gen Anwar Hossain, director general of the BGB was subsequently informed about the recovery of the money.

On the mean time be railway minister's Assistant Personal Secretary (APS) Omar Faruq Talukder was allowed to call the railway minister and he informed what is happening in the gate 4.

Suranjit Sen Gupta quickly cut the line and he call up the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and Sheikh Selim.

That made a huge difference into the scene. Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd) Tarique Ahmed Siddique immediately called General Md Abdul Mubeen, chief of army staff of Bangladesh Army.

Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd) Tarique Ahmed Siddique quoting Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina said all detained person should be released as soon as possible with the recovered money. Defence Adviser Maj Gen (Retd) Tarique Ahmed Siddique also said made it sure the incident should not be made public.

General Md Abdul Mubeen called up several officials and made it sure that media should not be informed about the incident and the detained persons with recovered money get released.

Railways Minister Suranjit Sengupta publicly denied his involvement with the corruption. Suranjit Sengupta said the incident of recovering money from the car of his assistant personal secretary (APS) was part of a "well orchestrated conspiracy" to humiliate him politically.

Recently Bangladesh railway department published advertisement for recruiting 7,140 personnel and it has, so far been able to complete recruitment of only 1,771 persons. The money was collected as bribe from different people looking for jobs.

Driver Ali Azam had taken to DGFI custody.Railway minister's Assistant Personal Secretary (APS) Omar Faruq Talukder, Bangladesh Railway General Manager (East) Yusuf Ali Mridha and its Chief Commandant Enamul Huq was told by prime minister's office that if they keep silent they will be awarded and the Prime minister's office will made sure of impunity.

Previous Extortion allegations and criminal charges:

On April 9, 2007, it was announced that Bangladesh police were investigating extortion charges against Hasina. She was accused of forcing Bangladeshi businessman Tajul Islam Farooq to pay bribes before his company could build a power plant in 1998. Farooq said that he paid Hasina 30 million takas (US$441,000, or €383,211) to get his project approved by the government, according to a police official.

On July 16, 2007, Hasina was arrested by state police at her home and taken before a local court in Dhaka.She was accused of extortion and denied bail on the same day, and was held in a building converted into a jail on the premises of the National Parliament. According to the Awami League, the arrest was politically motivated.

On January 13, 2008, she was indicted by a special court along with two of her relatives, her sister Sheikh Rehana and her cousin Sheikh Selim, on extortion charges.On February 6, however, the High Court stopped the trial, ruling that she could not be prosecuted under emergency laws for alleged crimes committed prior to the imposition of the state of emergency.

Intelligence sources said that Chief of army staff was awarded a large amount of money for tackling the situation.

http://www.williamgomes.org/?p=769
http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2012/04/bangladesh-chief-of-army-staff-into.html

--
William Nicholas Gomes
Journalist & Human Rights Activist
80/ B Bramon Chiron, Saydabad,
Dhaka-1203, Bangladesh.
Cell: +88 019 7 444 0 666
E-mail:William [at] williamgomes.org,editorbd[at]gmail.com
Skype: William.gomes9
Face book: www.facebook.com/williamnicholasgomes
Twitter: twitter.com/williamgomes
Web site :www.williamgomes.org

Re: Barak Hussein Obama: Magic Tricks Out Of His Probverbial Butt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bL2DKkBNKYw

On Apr 12, 11:16 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Barack the Magnificent Tries to Distract Voters
>
> The key to a magic trick is distraction: the magician tries to draw his
> audience's attention to some irrelevant place while he executes his trick
> elsewhere. A politician with a lousy record is much like an amateur
> magician. He tries to get his audience, voters, to focus on
> something–anything!–other than his record in office. That is the mode that
> Barack Obama is in these days, as manifested by his monomaniacal dedication
> to the Buffett Ploy.
>
> I thought this cartoon by Michael Ramirez was exactly on point, and puts
> Obama's effort at distraction in context:
>
> BarakTheMagnificant...jpg
> 254KViewDownload

--
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.

Barak Hussein Obama: Magic Tricks Out Of His Probverbial Butt

Barack the Magnificent Tries to Distract Voters

The key to a magic trick is distraction: the magician tries to draw his audience's attention to some irrelevant place while he executes his trick elsewhere. A politician with a lousy record is much like an amateur magician. He tries to get his audience, voters, to focus on something–anything!–other than his record in office. That is the mode that Barack Obama is in these days, as manifested by his monomaniacal dedication to the Buffett Ploy.

I thought this cartoon by Michael Ramirez was exactly on point, and puts Obama's effort at distraction in context:

Re: Fwd: [NEWS] Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -

They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.
---
full-size conservatives usually defeat liberal shrimps

it's the whines of the liberal that makes life fun!!!

On Apr 11, 6:52 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Conservatives are more likely to be lower in intelligence.
>
> They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.
>
> On Apr 11, 4:50 pm, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > **
>
> > **
> > Strong men more likely to vote Conservative
>
> > Physically strong men are more likely to hold right wing political views
> > because they believe society should be geared to personal struggle and
> > self-preservation, an academic study claims. Researchers cite muscle-bound
> > Hollywood action heroes like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris and
> > Sylvester Stallone as evidence that aggression is linked to conservative
> > politics. (Snip) "Generally speaking, Hollywood actors are left wing, but
> > the action stars among them were more likely than not to support the
> > Republican position on foreign policy. ......
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Stron...
>
> > Click here: Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -
> > Telegraph<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Stron...>
>
> > .
>
> > __._,_.___
> > Reply to sender <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'AzGOPG...@aol.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20Strong%20men%20more%20likely%20to%20vote%20Conservative%20-');>|
> > Reply
> > to group <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'Gathering_Conservatives_News_Gr...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dRe%3A%20Strong%20men%20more%20likely%20to%20vote%20Conservative%20-');>|
> > Reply
> > via web post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group/post...>|
> > Start
> > a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group/post...>
> > Messages in this
> > topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group/mess...>(
> > 1)
> > Recent Activity:
>
> > - New Members<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group/memb...>
> > 1
>
> > Visit Your Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group;_ylc...>
> > Gathering_Conservatives_News_Gr...@yahoogroups.com <javascript:_e({},
> > 'cvml', 'Gathering_Conservatives_News_Gr...@yahoogroups.com');>
>
> > .
>
> > [image: Yahoo!
> > Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJlOGVnNWowBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycEl...>
> > Switch to: Text-Only <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group-traditio...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dChange+Delivery+Format:+Traditional');>,
> > Daily Digest <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group-dig...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dEmail+Delivery:+Digest');>•
> > Unsubscribe <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> > 'Gathering_Conservatives_News_Group-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com?subject\x3dUnsubscribe');>•
> > Terms
> > of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> > .
>
> > __,_._,___

--
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: From Tammy Baldwin: Pass The Buffett Tax Rule, Join the Coalition

The US Government does not have a taxing problem, but instead a
SPENDING problem.
---
I agree.

i am taxed to pay for:
- nat'l defense - 19% - yet the gov will not secure our southern
border from illegal alien/criminals
- medical programs - 23% - yet i've never received treatment from
these programs
- social security - 29% - yet I will probably never see any of it even
if I live long enough to collect
- the remaining 29% is spent on inefficient government employees and
their charity work

it's time to take away the credit cards

On Apr 11, 2:41 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> The US Government does not have a taxing problem, but instead a SPENDING problem.
> If the US economy is to be righted, we need GUTTING and CUTTING (Harding example that PROMPTLY corrected the Government's depression of 1920) rather than MORE FASCISM (Roosevelt example that extended the Government's depression of 1929 to 1945).
> Regard$,
> --MJ
> "The tax that was supposed to soak the rich has instead soaked America. The beneficiary of the income tax has not been the poor, but big government. The income tax has given us a government bureaucracy that outnumbers the manufacturing work force. It has created welfare dependencies that have entrapped millions of Americans in an underclass that is forced to live a sordid existence of trading votes for government handouts"
> -- economist Paul Craig Roberts.

--
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.

Conservatives tend to have lower intelligence.

They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.

Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/07/conservative-politics-low-effort-thinking_n_1410448.html

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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: [GaysUnited] [NEWS] Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -

Conservatives tend to have lower intelligence.

They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.

Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/07/conservative-politics-low-effort-thinking_n_1410448.html

On 4/12/12, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> **
>
>
> **
> Strong men more likely to vote Conservative
>
> Physically strong men are more likely to hold right wing political views
> because they believe society should be geared to personal struggle and
> self-preservation, an academic study claims. Researchers cite muscle-bound
> Hollywood action heroes like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris and
> Sylvester Stallone as evidence that aggression is linked to conservative
> politics. (Snip) "Generally speaking, Hollywood actors are left wing, but
> the action stars among them were more likely than not to support the
> Republican position on foreign policy. ......
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Strong-men-more-likely-to-vote-Conservative.html
>
> Click here: Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -
> Telegraph<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Strong-men-more-likely-to-vote-Conservative.html>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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: [GaysUnited] Fwd: [NEWS] Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -

Conservatives tend to have lower intelligence.

They make up in brawn what they lack in brains.

Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/07/conservative-politics-low-effort-thinking_n_1410448.html

On 4/11/12, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
> **
>
>
> **
> Strong men more likely to vote Conservative
>
> Physically strong men are more likely to hold right wing political views
> because they believe society should be geared to personal struggle and
> self-preservation, an academic study claims. Researchers cite muscle-bound
> Hollywood action heroes like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris and
> Sylvester Stallone as evidence that aggression is linked to conservative
> politics. (Snip) "Generally speaking, Hollywood actors are left wing, but
> the action stars among them were more likely than not to support the
> Republican position on foreign policy. ......
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Strong-men-more-likely-to-vote-Conservative.html
>
> Click here: Strong men more likely to vote Conservative -
> Telegraph<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/9197597/Strong-men-more-likely-to-vote-Conservative.html>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> .
>
>
>

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.

From Trayvon Martin's Parents: Finally

Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton

Tommy -

We are still devastated by the loss of our son Trayvon Martin, and
nothing can bring him back. But today, we are heartened to tell you
that justice may finally be served for Trayvon.

This evening, Florida State Attorney Angela Corey announced that she
will charge George Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder, weeks after he
confessed to killing Trayvon -- and now he's in custody.

For weeks after Trayvon was killed, authorities refused to arrest
Zimmerman. We couldn't believe that in 2012, public officials would
turn a blind eye to our son's killing. We couldn't let that happen.

More than 2 million people joined our call for Zimmerman's arrest. We
are so much closer to justice with the decision to bring charges
against our son's killer. We feel less alone knowing that so many
people stood with our family during this impossible time.

When Trayvon was just nine, he ran into a burning house to save his
father's life. He may be gone, but he is still our hero. We are so
thankful to all of you who fought to honor his memory.

Thank you for standing with us, and with Trayvon.

- Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton

From Change.org

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
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.

NPR, Obama, and the Misleading ‘Buffett Rule’

NPR, Obama, and the Misleading 'Buffett Rule'
Posted by David Boaz

NPR says that President Obama will propose that millionaires pay income taxes "at the same rates as average working Americans." On the 9:00 a.m. hourly news.)

That would be good news for most millionaires:

To be sure, NPR's longer stories on Obama and the "Buffett rule" are more precise, as in Tuesday's story that said the proposed law "would require anyone making a million dollars a year or more to pay at least 30 percent in taxes." Even there, though, the sentence went on to say "- about twice what some millionaires pay now." And as the charts above show, that's quite misleading. The Congressional Budget Office reported in 2010,

The overall federal tax system is progressivethat is, average tax rates generally rise with income. Households in the bottom quintile (fifth) of the income distribution paid 4 percent of their income in federal taxes, while the middle quintile paid 14 percent, and the highest quintile paid 25 percent. Average rates continued to rise within the top quintile, with the top 1 percent facing an average rate of close to 30 percent.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/npr-obama-and-the-misleading-buffett-rule/

What If the Government Rejects the Constitution?

What If the Government Rejects the Constitution?
By Judge Andrew Napolitano
4/12/2012

What if the government never took the Constitution seriously? What if the same generation -- in some cases the same human beings -- that wrote in the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech," also enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts, which made it a crime to criticize the government? What if the feds don't regard the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land?

What if the government regards the Constitution as merely a guideline to be referred to from time to time, or a myth to be foisted upon the voters, but not as a historic delegation of power that lawfully limits the federal government? What if Congress knows that most of what it regulates puts it outside the confines of the Constitution, but it does whatever it can get away with? What if the feds don't think that the Constitution was written to keep them off the people's backs?

What if there's no substantial difference between the two major political parties? What if the same political mentality that gave us the Patriot Act, with its federal agent-written search warrants that permit unconstitutional spying on us, also gave us Obamacare, with its mandate to buy health insurance, even if we don't want or need it? What if both political parties love power more than freedom? What if both parties have used the Commerce Clause in the Constitution to stretch the power of the federal government far beyond its constitutionally ordained boundaries and well beyond the plain meaning of words?

What if both parties love war because the public is more docile during war and permits higher taxes and more federal theft of freedom from individuals and power from the states? What if none of these recent wars has made us freer or safer, but just poorer?

What if Congress bribed the states with cash in return for their enacting legislation that Congress likes, but cannot lawfully enact? What if Congress went to all states in the union and offered them cash to repave their interstate highways, if the states only lowered their speed limits? What if the states took that deal? What if the Supreme Court approved this bribery and then Congress did it again and again? What if this bribery were a way for Congress to get around the few constitutional limitations that Congress acknowledges?

What if Congress believes that it can spend tax dollars on anything it pleases and tie any strings it wants to that spending? What if Congress uses its taxing and spending power to regulate anything it wants to control, whether authorized by the Constitution or not? What if anyone other than members of Congress offered state legislatures cash in return for favorable legislation? What if Congress wrote laws that let it break laws that ordinary people would be prosecuted for breaking?

What if the Declaration of Independence says that the government derives its powers from the consent of the governed? What if the government claims to derive powers from some other source that it will not -- because it cannot -- name? What if we never gave the government the power to spy on us, to print worthless cash, to kill in our names, to force us to buy health insurance or to waste our money by telling us that exercise is good and sugar is bad?

What if we never gave the government the power to bribe the poor with welfare or the middle class with tax breaks or the rich with bailouts or the states with cash? What if we don't consent to what has become of the government? What if the Constitution has been tacitly amended by the consent of both political parties, whereby instead of ratifying amendments, all three branches of government merely look the other way when the government violates the Constitution? What if the president cannot constitutionally bomb whatever country he wants? What if the Congress cannot constitutionally exempt its members from the laws that govern the rest of us? What if the courts cannot constitutionally invent a right to kill babies in the womb?

What if the federal government is out of control, no matter which party controls it? What if there is only harmony on Capitol Hill when government is growing and personal liberty is shrinking? What if the presidential race this fall will not be between good and evil, between right and left, between free markets and central planning or even between constitutional government and Big Government; but only about how much bigger Big Government should get?

What if enough is enough? What do we do about it? What if it's too late?

http://townhall.com/columnists/judgeandrewnapolitano/2012/04/12/what_if_the_government_rejects_the_constitution

Key Elements to a Successful Federal Budget

Key Elements to a Successful Federal Budget
by Laurence M. Vance

Yet another federal budget charade is now in progress. This time for fiscal year 2013, which begins on October 1, 2012.

President Obama submitted his bloated budget to Congress in February. House Republicans issued their bloated budget in March. House Democrats then countered with their bloated budget.

Because the Republicans have a majority in the House, it was no surprise that the Republican budget passed by a vote of 228-191 and the Democratic budget failed by a vote of 163-262. It was also no surprise that not a single Democrat voted for the Republican budget and not a single Republican voted for the Democratic budget.

But because it is the Democrats that have a majority in the Senate, the Republican budget passed by the House has virtually no chance of passing in the Senate. Likewise, if the Senate were to pass a budget and send it to the House, it would be just as dead on arrival as the president's budget was.

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington D.C. always eager to do the bidding of the Republican Party, has pronounced (" First Reactions to Ryan's Path to Prosperity Budget") House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan's budget "a serious plan worthy of serious consideration" that "lays out substantive policy choices, cutting spending, reforming entitlements, and avoiding tax hikes." The House Republican budget "represents real progress toward tackling the nation's fiscal and economic challenges." It not only "cuts spending, in the budget year of 2013 and into the future, from both discretionary accounts and entitlements," but "features strong, substantive, market-based reforms to the health entitlements and a solid, growth-oriented tax plan." Oh, the Ryan budget is not "perfect," but it "substantially advances the serious and necessary conversation about securing America's future and its great legacy of freedom, opportunity, and self government."

Contrary to the glowing analysis of the Heritage Foundation, the Republican budget of Paul Ryan and the House Committee on the Budget, as I have recently shown, even though it is called "The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal," is a bloated, unbalanced, fiscally irresponsible, mostly unconstitutional path toward, and blueprint for, the welfare/warfare state.

In their article on the Ryan budget plan, the Heritage coauthors list "six key elements to a successful federal government budget":

1. Does it cut spending sharply and quickly? 2. Does it begin decisive entitlement reform? 3. Does it avoid any tax hikes? 4. Does it ensure a strong national defense? 5. Does it contain pro-growth tax reforms? 6. Does it move swiftly and surely to a balanced budget?

The Republican budget fails miserably when it comes to cutting spending sharply and quickly. It actually proposes to increase spending by a trillion dollars over the next ten years. The Ryan plan also fails miserably when it comes to moving swiftly and surely to a balanced budget. Not only does it not foresee balancing the budget anytime in the next ten years, it plans on adding $4.5 trillion to the national debt during this period of time.

The Republican "Path to Prosperity" does include some entitlement reforms. I will let conservatives battle it out over whether they are decisive enough (they aren't). There are two problems with these entitlement reforms. First, the Republicans propose to spend $517.1 billion on welfare (TANF, refundable EIC, SSI, unemployment, food stamps, housing and energy assistance, school lunch subsidies, etc.) in fiscal year 2013 (not including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP), "only" $450 billion in fiscal year 2017, and then $511 billion in fiscal year 2022. A few billion less in proposed spending is hardly a decisive entitlement reform. And second, every president and every Congress talks about reforming entitlements and tinkers with them in their budgets. Didn't Clinton and the Democrats "end welfare as we know it"?

The Republican budget does avoid tax hikes, although not completely since it recommends clearing out the burdensome tangle of loopholes and broadening the tax base. And yes, there are some pro-growth tax reforms in the Ryan plan. Thank God the Republicans only want to take 25 percent of the income of successful Americans and American businesses instead of a higher percentage.

Ensuring a strong national defense is about the only thing that the House Republican budget plan does well -- if all you look at is the level of defense spending. But is this a good thing? The United States spends about as much on defense as the rest of the world combined. This is because most U.S. defense spending is spent on offense not defense. It is spent on empire, imperialism, occupations, senseless foreign wars, and interventions in other countries. When the Heritage Foundation talks about a budget ensuring a strong national defense, it refers to the defense budget being a gravy train for defense contractors.

But not only is the Republican budget a failure, the Heritage Foundation's budget elements are faulty as well. From a libertarian, constitutional, limited government perspective, here are six key elements to a successful federal budget:

1. Does it propose only spending authorized by the Constitution?

2. Does it begin to permanently end entitlements instead of just reforming them?

3. Does it cut taxes instead of just avoiding tax hikes?

4. Does it provide millions for defense but not one cent for empire?

5. Does it eliminate taxes instead of just instituting tax reform?

6. Does it balance the budget now, not in five or ten years?

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul's plan to cut the budget by a trillion dollars the first year and balance it in the second is the only thing that comes close to being a successful federal budget. All the Republican talk about cutting the budget is, as usual, just a bunch of hot air.

http://lewrockwell.com/vance/vance286.html

Good piece on the Trotskyite roots of the National Review and 'neo' conservatism

"They're much happier with a hack like Newt Gingrich who can stir up the masses to concentrate even more power in Washington. They can overlook his support for cap-and-trade and the individual mandate as long as he pushes their internationalist foreign policy."

Good piece on the Trotskyite roots of the National Review and 'neo' conservatism
Published: Wednesday, April 11, 2012, 10:33 AM Updated: Wednesday, April 11, 2012, 11:45 AM
By Paul Mulshine/The Star Ledger

Leon Trotsky: father of neoconservatism

Have you ever used the term "Islamofascist?"

Do you get excited when some politician gets up on his hind legs and starts babbling about "American exceptionalism?"

You, too, may be a Trotskyite.

Don't axe.

"Axe" - get it? Okay, it's an inside joke.

This is a reference to Leon Trotsky, who famously got an axe in the head courtesy of Joe Stalin.

I posted recently on the National Review's decision to axe John Derbyshire for writing something that wasn't politically correct.

The typical American wannabe conservative does not want to think too deeply about why a supposedly right-wing publication would get so worked up about a piece of writing that offends liberal sensibilities.

That wannabe conservative has been brainwashed by the heirs of old Leo.

I get these pests commenting constantly on my blog. They parrot the neocon line about spreading human liberation to every corner of the Earth without even realizing that every word of it has been planted in their brains by Trotskyites.

Here on the Lew Rockwell blog is a good explanation of the roots of "neo" conservatism in the thought of Trotsky:

From the anti-Stalinists who became conservatives including James Burnham, Whittaker Chambers, and Irving Kristol the Right gained a political education and, in some cases, an injection of passion. The ex-radicals brought with them the knowledge that ideological movements must have journals and magazines to articulate their perspectives. In 1955, for example, William F. Buckley, Jr., launched National Review at the urging of Willi Schlamm, a former German Communist. In its early years, National Review was largely written and edited by the Buckley family and a handful of former Communists, Trotskyists, and socialists, such as Burnham and Chambers.

Read the whole thing. Then you will get some understanding of why NR seemed conservative at a time when worldwide communism was a real threat but now seems so liberal. By "liberal" of course I mean in favor of the sort of big-government, centralized state that the Republicans created under George W. Bush.

You can see why these NR types feel so threatened by Ron Paul. He represents a return to the small-government, decentralized conservatism popular before the Trotskyites took over the American "right."

They're much happier with a hack like Newt Gingrich who can stir up the masses to concentrate even more power in Washington. They can overlook his support for cap-and-trade and the individual mandate as long as he pushes their internationalist foreign policy.

But that's not the real problem with National Review. The real problem is that it's not elitist. All conservatism, whether traditionalist or libertarian, is inherently elitist because elites naturally rise in the absence of the leveling force of government.

If you doubt that, imagine what a marathon would look like if Nancy Pelosi made the rules. Couch potatoes could ride bikes. Fat people would get a 20-mile head start.

That's why you should read the magazine that published Derbyshire rather than the one tha canned him. It's called Takimag and its founder, Taki Theodoracopulos, is unapologetically elitist. Many of the writings included therein would be considered unpublishable by NR, for the simple reason that they outrage certain segments of the population and thereby imperil the efforts to build a successful political machine for pursuing the philosophy that old Leon advanced.

And if you doubt that, then read this article by Trotskyite Stephen Schwartz in the April 2003 National Review. An excerpt:

One might also add that nobody ever asked Jay Lovestone and Bertram Wolfe, ex-Communists whose company Beichman doubtless would prefer, to apologize for having defended the Soviet purge trials and the Stalinist state, long after so many of the brave band that carried a banner with the strange device of the Fourth International were murdered for their defiance of Stalinism. And I have yet to read an apology by Beichman for his own involvement with the Communist network.

To my last breath I will defend the Trotsky who alone, and pursued from country to country, and finally laid low in his own blood in a hideously hot little house in Mexico City, said no to Soviet coddling of Hitlerism, to the Moscow purges, and to the betrayal of the Spanish Republic, and who had the capacity to admit he had been wrong about the imposition of a single-party state, as well as about the fate of the Jewish people. To my last breath, and without apology. Let the neofascists, and Stalinists in their second childhood, make of it what they will.

Lovestone, by the way, coined the term "American exceptionalism" you'll hear Gingrich and Mitt Romney parroting. Schwartz claims to have coined the term "Islamofascist," though the late Christopher Hitchens also made that claim.

Hitchens was also a Trotskyite, by the way.

So are you if you parrot this nonsense.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2012/04/good_piece_on_the_trotskyite_r.html