REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

A Statement

POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Saturday, January 12, 2008 07:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4124
PAGE 2 of 2

Thursday, January 10, 2008 4:18 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


AnthonyT

Unless there's a revolution, you'll be doing what you can.

Think of it this way - do you remember what got the Argentine junta out ? Not guns. It was old ladies standing in the plazas with signs asking about 'the disappeared'. Not confronting anyone, not yelling, just - standing. That's what happens when you do what you can and you're in it for the long haul.

And it is SO much better - even smarter and more moral - than saying - what difference will it make anyway ? It's all the same.

***************************************************************

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 10, 2008 5:34 PM

SERGEANTX


I don't buy it Rue. Most of above evils you mention, and they are definitely that, occurred with the tacit approval of the Democrat controlled congress. So I'm not seeing these big differences you're suggesting. They shouldn't need a majority to act out against these things, but now that they've had the upper hand for two years, the Democrats have no excuse.

In 2004, I followed something like your logic and rallied for Kerry, if a bit begrudgingly. Because at that point, we KNEW what kind of a bastard Bush was. Just about anything but Bush would have been a dramatic improvement. But he's leaving office.

All we have now are unknowns. I have no idea how any of the mainstream candidates will behave once in office because: Every damned one of them are used car salesmen. Even if you believe them, they don't present anything like a clear philosophy of government. They pick and choose sides on the various issues to strategically satisfy constituencies. How do you ever know what someone like that is going to do? And why in the world would you assume a Democrat has any more moral authority, or would be any more likely to provide intelligent leadership, after the party's underwhelming performance in recent years?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 10, 2008 6:56 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Oh you mean those Democrats who promised to get us out of Iraq, like, immediately if they secured a majority in congress.

Hmmm, how's that workin out for ya, then ?

You're going to a card sharpers house, and playing on his table, with his deck, and somehow expecting to do something other than lose... that's just silly.

Make em play by YOUR rules, and as for peaceful protest, BWAHAHAHAHA, better bring a gas mask and a taserproof jacket just in case you dare leave the "Free Speech Zone" in the basement of some parking garage miles away from the event to get a sandwich or something.

Ask the Bonus marchers, or the IWW, or any other peaceful protest that annoyed the powers that be just how well that went for the protestors - ask how well it went in Florida, where they were UTTERLY CRUSHED, brutalised, and beaten down...

Versus Seattle, where they fought rough and tumble, and not only won the day, but *because of that* did so with LESS violence over all, and not all in one direction, than when they decided to "play nice" in Florida.

To be blunt, what are you gonna do at your peaceful protest when the riot batons, the gas, pepperball rounds and the like start flying at you, just lay down and take it, show the status quo that it works ?

Nonviolent protest ONLY works when your opponent and their political backing has a conscience, and in this day and age, our current cabal, the corporate lords, I defy you to tell me with a straight face that playing on their conscience will do you any good.

As for simply laying down and taking it, even Ghandi had some strong words about that.

I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence.

Nonviolence is not a cover for cowardice, but it is the supreme virtue of the brave. Exercise of nonviolence requires far greater bravery than that of swordsmanship. Cowardice is wholly inconsistent with nonviolence. Translation from swordsmanship to nonviolence is possible and, at times, even an easy stage. Nonviolence, therefore, presupposes ability to strike. It is a conscious deliberate restraint put upon one's desire for vengeance. But vengeance is any day superior to passive, effeminate and helpless submission.
-Mahatma Gandhi

So what's your strategy for when (not if, but when) the riot shields and billyclubs come out then ?

Cause that is as important as anything else - if you are violently attacked simply for exercising your rights, and you throw in your hand and fold, you've accomplished naught but to send the message that you'll stand up, but only so far, and that such oppression works.

Stand up, or stand aside.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, January 10, 2008 8:55 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
I believe this statement refers to the idea that the loss of life (say in a terrorist attack) is not worth the loss of privacy and freedom (as say in cell phone monitoring, cameras on every corner, email monitoring ect ect).

Maybe Im wrong, but how can we honestly call ourselves a free country if the government is involved in every aspect of our lives, both professional AND private?

I dont believe it refers to the criminal/victim relationship.


Man.... I like this guy.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 5:31 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


It seems to me that we are at a crossroads. Non-violent political action, somewhat political action (like voting and hoping that it isnt "adjusted" or that it will even count) accepting things as they are and just trying to get by, violent action, or stockpiling a compund in Texas....

Tell me, will any of it work? Or should I just buy a plane ticket to (insert name of 3rd world country here), take my savings of 300 bucks, and live like a king?

I can buy a mansion for 60 dollars, hire an army for 80, and buy food and weapons for a year with the rest....(Im joking, of course. Trying to make a point about how ineffective Im feeling)


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 5:56 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Nonviolent protest ONLY works when your opponent and their political backing has a conscience, and in this day and age, our current cabal, the corporate lords, I defy you to tell me with a straight face that playing on their conscience will do you any good.
Yes but/ and ... You need several things for a direct action to work:

1) AN OUTLET TO THE PRESS
I've seen nonviolent protests work, even when the response was brutal... but only when the cameras were rolling and the image played day in and day out. Kent State. Civil rights marches. Indian independence from Britain. I've seen nonviolent protest fail, not by being crushed but by being ignored to death. Do you remember the 1977 million-woman march on Washington supporting the ERA? Of course not. The difference between a protest "failing" and "winning" is not the police response or the level of violence but the amount of press. (Sometimes violence brings press coverage as in Seattle. But sometimes it doesn't, as in Florida.) So if you're going to have a protest, bring your own cameras, and send the image to every outlet. Embed the foreign press if you can- they're less biased than ours when it comes to our "internal matters". Write your own newspaper, but whatever you have to do GET THE IMAGES OUT THERE.

2) A SYMPATHETIC AUDIENCE
If your audience doesn't give a rat's patooties about you or your cause it doesn't matter if a million of you are killed by a tactical nuke on live TV. Your audience will just say: Glad those troublemakers/ terrorists/ bastards are dead! You need to prepare the ground a bit. You need good writers and orators... a Rachel Carson or a Germaine Greer or a MLK.

3) MUSCLE
SOME of this movement has to be ready for a muscular response. Publicity stunts actually work rather well. Again, bring your own cameras. I would not post more because that would be considered "terrorism". You get my drift. But the "muscle" has to be calibrated so as not to turn popular response off.

So, let's say that our first goal is clean elections. Not "next time".... THIS TIME. Are you ready to roll? START HERE

http://civic.moveon.org/protectourvotes//
And HERE

www.blackboxvoting.org/
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:07 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


SergeantX
"Most of above evils you mention, and they are definitely that, occurred with the tacit approval of the Democrat controlled congress. ... now that they've had the upper hand for two years, the Democrats have no excuse."

I get really pissed off when people don't tell the truth. So when exactly was the Congress controlled by democrats ?

Were democrats the House majority in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 ? Or even 2006 ? (putting Democrat House control at 1 year, since the actual switchover didn't occur till January 2007.)

As for the Senate, when were the Democrats a majority ? Was is here ?

Senate
107th Congress (2001-2003)
Democrat (50 seats)
Republican (50 seats)
Other Parties: 0
Total Seats: 100

Here ??
Republican (50 seats)
Democrat (50 seats)
Other Parties: 0
Total Seats: 100

Perhaps here ?

Senate
108th Congress (2003-2005)
Majority Party: Republican (51 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

Or could it be here ?

Senate
109th Congress (2005-2007)
Majority Party: Republican (55 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (44 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100


PLEASE - if you're going to lay blame, at least have the honesty to get your facts straight. All it takes is a simple google search.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:18 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


FremD

"Oh you mean those Democrats who promised to get us out of Iraq, like, immediately if they secured a majority in congress. Hmmm, how's that workin out for ya, then ?"

I get really pissed off when people don't tell the truth. So when exactly was the Congress controlled by democrats ?

Were democrats the House majority in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 ? Or even 2006 ? (putting Democrat House control at 1 year, since the actual switchover didn't occur till January 2007.)

As for the Senate, when were the Democrats a majority ? Was is here ?

Senate
107th Congress (2001-2003)
Democrat (50 seats)
Republican (50 seats)
Other Parties: 0
Total Seats: 100

Here ??
Republican (50 seats)
Democrat (50 seats)
Other Parties: 0
Total Seats: 100

Perhaps here ?

Senate
108th Congress (2003-2005)
Majority Party: Republican (51 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (48 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

Or could it be here ?

Senate
109th Congress (2005-2007)
Majority Party: Republican (55 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (44 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

"... as for peaceful protest, BWAHAHAHAHA, better bring a gas mask and a taserproof jacket ..."
Just can't stand the idea that signs worked better than guns, can you ? For the record, while I used it as ONE example, there are MANY OTHER THINGS ONE CAN DO AS A PART OF THE PROCESS, and I gave other examples as well. So to you and your bogus arguments.



You know, ALL you supposed freedom lovers are so full of **it it's incredible. You'll make ANY excuse to not exercise and protect the freedom you DO have. I mean really, your views are SSOOOoooo entrenched even simple, readily available facts don't penetrate.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:32 AM

SERGEANTX


Pulled this off Wikipedia. Sounded like what I'd heard so I went with it. How is it wrong?

Quote:
Since the 2006 midterm elections the Democratic Party is the majority party for the 110th Congress; the party holds an outright majority in the House of Representatives and the Democratic caucus (including two independents) constitutes a majority in the United States Senate. Democrats also hold a majority of state governorships and control a plurality of state legislatures. In 2004, it was the largest political party, with 42.6 percent of 169 million registered voters claiming affiliation.


Are you saying Democrats have done a passable job as a minority party?

I know you're convinced the Democrats will do better, and that you prefer the liberal Democrat view of things, and that's fine. But they've been nearly equal partner's in selling out our nation and have barely lifted a finger to stop the worst of Bush's abuses.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:37 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"But they've been nearly equal partner's in selling out our nation and have barely lifted a finger to stop the worst of Bush's abuses."

Oh so the Democrats are still responsible no matter who really did the deed ? Give it a rest.

***************************************************************
BTW, does your bias put Robert Wexler in the same category as the republicans ? He's the democrat trying to impeach Cheney. How about Obama - who never supported the Iraq war. Does he fit into the 'just like a repubican' category ? Or perhaps Edwards, you know, the guy who said he was wrong on Iraq. Hear any repubicans saying that lately ?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:40 AM

KIRKULES


The Democrats had strong majorities in both Houses of Congress from 1932-1980. During that time American liberties were violated regularly. The Dems have shown that their claim to support civil liberties is just a campaign slogan and once in power they abuse peoples rights worse than Republicans ever have.

Their promise to get out of Iraq was just another campaign slogan. After 48 years holding Congress it took a Republican to get us out of Vietnam.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:46 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


And thanks for playing fact-free irrelevant distractions !

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 8:50 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Oh so the Democrats are still responsible no matter who really did the deed ? Give it a rest.


Well, I'm assuming that you'll acknowledge that the Democrats have been weak in their opposition to the neo-cons. So, perhaps its just a question of how much of the blame they share. The system of checks and balances set up by our constitution is supposed to prevent the off-the-rails abuses of the current administration. But it requires conscientious leaders ready to fight the good fight.

I'll grant you the Republicans have more to answer for than the Democrats. And if the Dems had been fighting back in any substantial way over the last six years, I'd grant what you're saying. But I haven't seen it. What did I miss? That's what get's me. It takes a fringe, libertarian Republican to say the things that the Democrats should have been jumping on since before the Iraq invasion. If they had been, I'd be standing right there with you, despite my disagreements on their other policies.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 9:03 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


You know, I consider the haters of liberty to fall into several camps

the repubican partisans who'd take the country over a cliff as long as it meant 'they' got to 'win'. Geezer, Hero, Finn, Rap et al - you know who you are.

the single issue 'freedom lovers' who just can't be bothered with liberty as long as they get to keep their - gun, cigarettes - whatever

the people who are secretly happy to see gitmo, torture, the USPATRIOT Act, illegal wiretaps and the rest, b/c they think it's all about terrorists and whiny liberals and it'll never come home to them - up until voter ID - in which case the whole idea of government out of control comes as a shock

the people who refuse to exercise their freedom b/c it's not exactly how they want it, so - what's the point

and various shadings and combinations thereof.


BTW, does your bias put Robert Wexler in the same category as the repubicans ? He's the democrat trying to impeach Cheney. How about Obama - who never supported the Iraq war. Does he fit into the 'just like a repubican' category ? Or perhaps Edwards, the guy who said he was wrong on Iraq. Hear any repubicans saying that lately ? How about Waxman ? Trying to dig into Bush et al misdeeds while getting blocked by repubicans at every turn.

This whole - 'they're JUST like' is, well, lame. At best.

***************************************************************
Also, it's been 'progressives' - those damn whiny liberals - who've been at the forefront on these issues. Not 'fringe libertarians'.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 9:41 AM

SERGEANTX


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
... does your bias put Robert Wexler in the same category as the republicans ?


Where was he six years ago? It seems a little pointless to impeach at this point.
Quote:
How about Obama - who never supported the Iraq war. Does he fit into the 'just like a repubican' category ?

But what does he say now? He's voted for more funding, I recall reading that - which means he caved to Bush's demagoguery, just like most of the other Democrats. Are we to believe he would have done any differently if he were serving in congress when the whole thing started?.

There are some good Democrats out there. But they're too few to matter much. Again it's just a question of degree. You see the 2.5% difference between the two parties as worth consideration. I don't.

Quote:
This whole - 'they're JUST like' is, well, lame. At best.


I wholeheartedly agree

Quote:
Also, it's been 'progressives' - those damn whiny liberals - who've been at the forefront on these issues. Not 'fringe libertarians'.


I might vote for them then. Is Obama a 'progressive'?

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 10:21 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
Where was he six years ago?
It Sarge X- YOu have an incredibly uninformed view of how Congress works. "Nearly equal partners", huh? Okay- who controls the committees? Why, it's the majority party! Who proposes legislation? The majority party! Who holds hearings? The majority party!

There was a Democrat (can't recall who) who wanted to hold hearings about Iraq. He was told by the Senate committee leader that he couldn't hold "hearings" but he could have a small meeting. And then he was relegated to a small basement room- I kid you not- w/ no room for the press. And the electricity "failed" partway through.

So, what should the Dems do? If they try to bring up hearings it's "not getting the job done". If they block Republican legslation and appointments its "being obstructive". "Nearly equal partners" means nothing. The best you can do is fillibuster (which, if you recall the Republicans threatened to do away with). You assume there is some sort of partnership in Congress- there isn't. The Repugs are following a scorched-earth strategy.

Now, I grant you that the Demcratic Party's vote against the Iraq incursion, US Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act etc. should have been more robust. It would have looked as if they were at least united in opinion, even if they couldn't actually block anything. But the fact is that the Democratic vote for liberty is far more frequent than the Repugs. You can reform The Dems by pressure and by vote. You can't reform the Repugs- for now they're a lost cause.

---------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 10:52 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Votes against Iraq incursion:
DEMOCRATS- Akaka, Bingaman, Boxer, Byrd, Conrad, Corzine, Dayton, Durbin, Feingold, Graham, Inouye, Kennedy, Leahy, Levin, Mikulski, Murray, Reed, Sarbanes, Stabenow, Wellstone, Wyden

REBULICANS- Chafee

INDEPENDENTS Jeffords

Votes against the Miliary Commissions Acts
DEMOCRATS- Lincoln, Boxer, Feinstein, Dodd, Biden, Akaka, Inouye, Harkin, Durbin, Obama, Bayh, Kennedy, Kerry, Mikulski, Sarbanes, Levin, Dayton, Baucus, Conrad, Dorgan, Bingaman, Reid, Clinton, Schumer, Reed, Leahy, Cantwell, Murray, Feingold, Kohl, Byrd

INDEPENDENTS Jeffords

REPUBLICANS Snowe (did not vote), Chafee, Wyden


---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 10:59 AM

SERGEANTX


Is that an accurate list? I know of at least one Republican you left off.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 11:08 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"Where was he six years ago? It seems a little pointless to impeach at this point."

From Wexler's Home page

"A Case for Hearings

On November 7, 2007 the House of Representatives voted to send a resolution of impeachment of Vice President Cheney to the Judiciary Committee. As Members of the House Judiciary Committee, we strongly believe these important hearings should begin."

So - the House - under the Democrats - sent a resolution to impeach Cheney, and Wexler is trying to move it along. I don't really know what else you could expect out of him, especially 6 years ago considering the process that can only be invoked by the majority. Read that a couple of times so you can get what it means. 6 years ago impeachment was not AT ALL possible. You going to blame democrats for that ?

Now, going to his biography:

"During his tenure in Congress, Wexler has authored numerous bills including the Honor Thy Parents Act, which proposed an inexpensive and comprehensive Medicare prescription drug benefit for seniors, and the Social Security Forever Act, which extended the life of the Social Security trust fund for future generations. Wexler is committed to providing health care to all Americans and ensuring that senior citizens have access to the high quality care that they deserve.

Congressman Wexler is a nationally recognized advocate for the integrity of our election system. Following the 2000 presidential election controversy in Florida that centered in his district, Congressman Wexler has worked to ensure that all election machines produce a voter verified "paper trail." Wexler has filed federal and state lawsuits asking that a paper trail be mandatory, and during the summer of 2007 Wexler joined Florida Governor Charlie Crist as the state's historic paper trail legislation was signed into law."

He has good ideas, BUT - as a minority-party congressman they couldn't get anywhere.

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

On to the next

"(Obama's) voted for more funding, I recall reading that - which means he caved to Bush's demagoguery, just like most of the other Democrats."

Or maybe he's doing what he said he would do:

"I have been very clear even as a candidate that, once we were in, that we were going to have some responsibility to make it work as best we could, and more importantly that our troops had the best resources they needed to get home safely," Obama, an Illinois Democrat, told reporters in a conference call. "So I don't think there is any contradiction there."

Strange that, a politician who does what he says he will do, and it being held against him as a liability. Do you find that strange as well ?

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

"There are some good Democrats out there. But they're too few to matter much."

Hmmm ... it seems that the House democrats - with a solid, though not veto-proof - majority are actually doing stuff you wouldn't find repubicans doing. And never did find repubicans doing. And never will find repubicans doing. Like voting to start impeachment investigations.

SO NOW ... let's take the last 'emergency spending bill" which finances the Iraq war but also Katrina recovery and other genuine emergencies.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_c
fm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00181

Out of 44 democratic senators who voted (there are 46), 10 voted against. By my calculation that's 23%. Out of 46 repubicans who voted, 3 voted against. By my calculation that's a mere 7 %.

Simple arithmetic, really ... You should try it.




***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 11:09 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


That's Senate vote list, not House.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 11:19 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Yes. I couldn't find a roll-call vote by the House, but the vote was pretty much along party lines and very close:

In an unusual two-step, lawmakers first voted 253-154 to approve the omnibus spending bill; they then voted 206-201 to add $31 billion for troops in Afghanistan to the measure. The combined $516 billion spending package is set for Senate debate on Tuesday.

Democrats simply had it all over repubicans on that.



***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 11:36 AM

SERGEANTX


Too little, too late. Obama's just another car salesman. If his schtick works for you, great. Maybe you're right. But everything I see from him, or Hillary, points to more of the same. They're the kind of people who play the system. They do what they have to get votes. They smile and shake hands at all the right moments. They give warm, glowing speeches about hope and change and apple pie. They whip out their canned quips, supplied by their staff of 'handlers'. Everything they do is painfully phony and clearly a product of Madison Avenue psychology.

We have a system that rewards shrewd manipulators and punishes everyone else. I don't know how you can pretend it will offer us anything other than crap. Ultimately, sadly, we'll get the government we deserve. If we wake up and reject the 'reality-show' mentality of mainstream politics, maybe we'll see some improvement. But when's that happening?


SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:18 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


You're completely ignoring the repubican record. And by doing that you're saying that everything THEY chose to do - doesn't matter to you.

Or maybe you really don't know what the record is, since your posts have been so wildly off track from reality. So, since you seem to be so woefully ignorant about repubicans, here are some things we DO know about your buds, for your edification:

Repubicans had the US PATRIOT Act drafted 6 months before 9/11. Do you really think Gore would have done that ?

Repubicans have made 'voter fraud' and 'real ID' their pet projects, despite strong opposition from democrats at all levels. You down with being in a biometric database just to keep your vote ? You want more of the same ? 'Cause your friends did that, all on their own.

Repubicans jury-rigged the Iraq NIE to get the Iraq vote they wanted. 'Ya know, you can't blame the democrats for voting how they voted - given the information they had. BTW - the estimate is that there were probably 4 repubicans in the loop when it came to real information. You like that ? Go ahead then, say it doesn't matter, keep enabling them.

Anyway, I have work to do.


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:19 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
You know, I consider the haters of liberty to fall into several camps

the repubican partisans who'd take the country over a cliff as long as it meant 'they' got to 'win'. Geezer, Hero, Finn, Rap et al - you know who you are.

the single issue 'freedom lovers' who just can't be bothered with liberty as long as they get to keep their - gun, cigarettes - whatever

the people who are secretly happy to see gitmo, torture, the USPATRIOT Act, illegal wiretaps and the rest, b/c they think it's all about terrorists and whiny liberals and it'll never come home to them - up until voter ID - in which case the whole idea of government out of control comes as a shock

the people who refuse to exercise their freedom b/c it's not exactly how they want it, so - what's the point

and various shadings and combinations thereof.

Just curious Rue, where do you slot yourself?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:23 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Writing letters, paying big bucks, and fighting the fight to keep our liberties intact. Walking my talk. And you ?

Oh yeah, you're just a sideline slacker who has nothing better to do than troll.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:25 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Writing letters, paying big bucks, and fighting the fight to keep our liberties intact. Walking my talk. And you ?

Oh yeah, you're just a sideline slacker who has nothing better to do than troll.

And you know that how?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:30 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Because you said so yourself. And who would know better than you ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:34 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


I'm not crazy about Obama and I detest Hillary. I like Edwards because I think he's pointing to our REAL problem. But I'll vote for the lesser of two weevils if necessary, and push and shove in-between.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:38 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Oh, but SignyM - you forget - democrats and repubicans are exactly the same. Exactly ! There is no shade of better or worse here. And besides, the democrats have to make good on the Bush administration and repubican policies and so are locked onto them. Just like the repubican candidates. So you see, they are exactly like repubicans. Exactly !

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:48 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Because you said so yourself. And who would know better than you ?

Prove it.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 12:54 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


One last thing:

"Since the 2006 midterm elections the ... Democratic caucus (including two independents) constitutes a majority in the United States Senate."

So clearly my numbers - posted from the Senate website and taking into account resignations, governor appointments and party-switches - are in error.

Senate
109th Congress (2005-2007)
Majority Party: Republican (55 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (44 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

I bow to the wisdom of Wiki and rebuke the official record of note.

bastards


***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 1:07 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Thanks Siggy, yeah Bev and Jim down at BBV are a wonder, and they got some good folk working for em, I don't really have the knowledge and expertise in that kind of thing to be much help, but I do support what they do.

As for the rest, the internet does change the game a bit, so long as it remains free - the mainstream media wouldn't touch the problems with taser and other abuses by law enforcement, but it's come to light publicly regardless.

That bein said, getting a hook into some media is a priority, but that's even harder than bending a politician, especially on a national scale where you have bastards like Sinclair and Murdochs petty little empire, and the remains of Hearsts snivelling bastards too.

Really we need to start building our own media companies, but we got precious little support on that aspect at the current time.

And a note on committe control - why do you think I am up Conyers ass all the time, hell, even his WIFE is trying to put the arm on him, while he's practically hiding under the Judiciary Committe Table.
=====================

Rue, they GOT enough seats to push the issue, especially when popular opinion is so goddamn strong in LIGHT of the media trying to bury it...

So it's not a total overwhelming majority, so what, if that bitch Pelosi ever got off her ass, if that pansy Conyers ever did, the public outcry over even a tenth part of the resultant investigation would BURY those sumbitches, why the hell do you think their approval rating is in the crapper ?

Cause they begged those seats on the promise that they would put an end to this madness, and when they got em they rolled over and played dead, cause in the end they figure they can carry 2008 and then all this front loaded executive power falls into their hands, which is what they want.

They don't wanna cut the leash, they just wanna change who's holding it and I TOLD YOU THAT, TWICE, just before those elections, I'm quite sure Sarge remembers me saying exactly that.

And hell yes I am mocking peaceful protest, when folks stage a peaceful protest and get PLOWED UNDER, violently, by agents of the state, and it doesn't even make the news - you have not accomplished a damned thing but get your ass kicked, and by not defending yourself once attacked like that, hell yes it DOES send the message to the status quo that brutal repression works.

In case you somehow managed to miss it, I can and have held signs along with other folk, but only folk who aren't going to curl into a little ball and beg for mercy when their legal rights are stomped on.

Like Ghandi said, nonviolence doesn't mean you are UNABLE to strike, it shows the maturity of not wanting to settle things that way if you do not have to - but he also advocated defending yourself, with violence if need be, should you BE attacked.

You wanna do something, fine, do something, but be prepared to stand in your own defense or don't bother - maybe that's not how you look at it, but I do... and to sit there busting MY chops when you know damn well I am attacking the root of the problem at the earliest point of intervention is idiotic.

I do what I can on the here and now, but my primary focus is on breaking the chain of abusive and dehumanising conditioning that makes children into those sociopathic corpo climbing drones who contribute to the process, and YOU KNOW THIS, or you damn well should by now, and it's damned thankless work and a lot of it freakin dangerous as well as traumatising to anyone who does do it, one reason I have such a soft spot for Protect.org

But the means and methods are something that will not be discussed not only because it would compromise the process, but let me be blunt, you do NOT want to know, just scratching the surface on some of this shit would give you nightmares for weeks, I guarantee it, do you really WANT to hear a blow by blow account of how a 7 year old was brutalized and slowly crushed to death for the horrible "crime" of blowing bubbles in her milk ?

You wanna bust my chops so bad, you go visit some of these fucking places yourself, talk to the survivors, find out what HAPPENS in our society to children who display anything but meek subservience to an inhumane and wholly destructive system of education-indoctrination, and get a nice, up close and personal look at the carnage, and maybe you'll understand why...

In order for any of the rest of this shit to WORK you need people with some level of humanity, of empathy, and we're busy crushing it the hell out of people too young to physically, emotionally, or even legally resist such abuse, and since they don't vote and have no financial or other resources, nobody seems to give a damn.

We might not be able to stop this insanity from the top down, but I damned sure mean to pour sand in the gears of the factory that produces the folk who create and contribute to the process, those folks do not spring, fully formed, out of a vacuum - and if we were to ever have ENOUGH support and people down at this end of things, it would self-correct by not producing the kind of people who create and perpetuate such abuses of their fellow mankind - in short the bad guys would run out of troops and eventually die off, and good riddance to them.

Hack at the branches all you like, good for you, cause I'll be down here chopping at the roots, where I've been since the very first moment I realized that's where the problem lies.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 1:47 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


FremD

You walk your talk.

I just can't see NOT voting AGAINST the repubican policies b/c the democrats aren't 'good enough' for you. That's like handing over a signed blank check for more of the same.

***************************************************************
That pretty much sums it up for me.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 1:52 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Because you said so yourself. And who would know better than you ?

Prove it.

Bump for Rue, still waiting.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 1:58 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Has to do with de-lurking to ... stir stuff up.

Not, to contribute, not to discuss, not to express - naaahhh, just to be a twerp. BTW, I did a google search under de-lurking to stir - no quotes or anything. And by gum, there you were at the top of the search. You made quite and ass of - I mean a name for - yourself with that.

***************************************************************
Gooood joooob.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 2:09 PM

BIGDAMNNOBODY


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Has to do with de-lurking to ... stir stuff up.

Not, to contribute, not to discuss, not to express - naaahhh, just to be a twerp. BTW, I did a google search under de-lurking to stir - no quotes or anything. And by gum, there you were at the top of the search. You made quite and ass of - I mean a name for - yourself.

Talk about an irrelevant distraction.
You do know the difference between a fan-site and real life right? Or are you too much of a doofus to figure it out?
Tell me how you know anything about what any of the Posters on this site do in real life? I've seen you make broad generalizations about a number of people which I'm guessing you are basing solely on a few anonymous posts from a fan-site.
How do I know you write letters and spend money in defense of liberty? Am I supposed to take your word for it? And who do you write letters too? Where does your money go? Do you have certain hot button issues which you focus on? Do those include smoking and gun ownership or are you a hypocrite?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:13 PM

SERGEANTX


Quote:
Senate
109th Congress (2005-2007)
Majority Party: Republican (55 seats)
Minority Party: Democrat (44 seats)
Other Parties: Independent (1 seat)
Total Seats: 100

I bow to the wisdom of Wiki and rebuke the official record of note.

bastards


Since your numbers are from 2005-2007, it may be that they don't include the midterm election. It's not really a big deal one way or another from my point of view. They'd already let us down long before then anyway.

Anwway, I'm not saying they are exactly the same. But they're the same basic animals at the core. Both parties want a large, powerful government and they want to control it. I think that's why you don't get my ambivalence toward the 'differences' between the parties. To you, they're real differences because both the Democrats and Republicans both agree about the big powerful government part. To you, the important part is how to use government power. To me, it's how we can go about getting rid of as much of it as possible.

From my point of view neither party is addressing the central problem. Until we reign in the overgrown and overreaching government policies in general, the situation will be unacceptable. As I said, I was willing to vote Democrat to get Bush out of office. But I see no point in wasting my vote on someone I disagree with when it's a coin toss which one would be better.

We'll see. If it comes down to Giuliani vs Edwards, I'd probably entertain voting for Edwards. But Clinton vs Giuliani is a tossup. We'll all lose big if those two get it.

To get back to your original question, it may be clear by now that I think the threat of the third party run is good thing. It's about the only damper on our freefall right now. It would be even better if we could changed the system so that it wasn't rigged.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:31 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
But they're the same basic animals at the core.
Ah, the infamous "they". A couple of people in the Republican party are downright decent. A few more (IMHO) in the Dem party are also downright decent. Support them with money come election time, even if they're not from your state.

There used to be a poster who has long since disappeared. Bright guy, self-professed tomato farmer in upstate NY if I recall correctly. He used to say that the best way to swing the Presidential vote is not with a third-party candidate but in the primaries. That's when a small group can make a HUGE difference. But AFA Congress is concerned, I think third parties would are a GREAT idea. We should see more of them.

PS: BDN, you've gotten better but a lot of your old posts were rather trollish.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:37 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


SergeantX

"I think the threat of the third party run is good thing."

In Congress - yeah. For the WH - not so much. And first you have to get the sick bastards out. We can squabble about the niceties later.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:41 PM

SERGEANTX


Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Ah, the infamous "they". A couple of people in the Republican party are downright decent. A few more (IMHO) in the Dem party are also downright decent. Support them with money come election time, even if they're not from your state.


Sure, I'm overgeneralizing, and we should definitely get behind the few that don't completely suck.

Quote:
He used to say that the best way to swing the Presidential vote is not with a third-party candidate but in the primaries. That's when a small group can make a HUGE difference.


Ayup, I was part of those conversations and I'm walking that path currently. Why else would I tarnish my "good" name by registering as a... ahem Republican?

But a third party challenge keeps parties at least somewhat interested in the desires of the minority.

Quote:
... but a lot of your old posts were rather trollish.


moi?

guess it depends on whether I'm typing under the influence or not.

You haven't really improved, btw, but, you know, keep working on it.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:45 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:
moi?
NO NO!!! I'm sorry! That was to BDN!!! Let me edit my post... post-haste!

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:46 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Oh dear, I think SignyM meant BDN.

And when it comes to trollish - not sure if I count but I do get VERY heated when discussing the topic. At least I'm on topic though !

***************************************************************
Best that can be said. Oh, and I express my opinions. No guessing about what they are.

Oh yeah - and to add to that - when Bush got handed the WH the first time he promised to be a 'uniter not a divider' and to 'to restore dignity to The White House.' Very shortly after that it became 'my way or the highway' (Paul O'Neill 'The Price of Loyalty') and a nastier set of political thugs, liars and crooks had never been assembled.

So I get how people mouth platitudes and make promises they fully intend to break - just to get into the WH.

Should it happen on an egregious scale with a democrat as it did with the repubicans I will join all you naysayers. But if it doesn't - and I'm thinking I'm right - I will say I told you so and at every opportunity.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:53 PM

FREMDFIRMA


"I just can't see NOT voting AGAINST the repubican policies b/c the democrats aren't 'good enough' for you. That's like handing over a signed blank check for more of the same."

Too bloody true, I *did* vote for Granholm, but she bought that through smashing a ring of predators I had been trying to bring down for years - and she did it in six weeks.

Not to mention being sick of Engler and his shite, not the least of which was the Metrocars deal, which directly impacted ME negatively via my employment.

Second time around, well, what did they have.. DeVos ? and his connection to Amway and that nutter Erik Price of Blackwater USA, who has recently been thrown OFF the IMA/IPOA, often mockingly regarded as the "Merc Council".

It sure didn't help his case to show up disheveled and hung over to a debate with a woman ever so capable of handing him his ass verbally even on his BEST day, neither.

I adore Jenny, but yanno, I don't think she's ruthless enough for politics, she still expects people to do their job, even when sandbagging it is of more political benefit... the budget crisis showed that, and it also showed the MI Rethugs were fuckin liars, since we seem to have a budget SURPLUS rather than the deficit they SAID we had, once the numbers came out - and they pulled that shit to bait the Dems into raising taxes so they'd look bad.

Jenny wants to apply that surplus by cutting gas taxes, giving us poor fuel dependent folks a break, but those same sandbagging, lying, backstabbing Rethugs are fighting it tooth and claw cause they wanna earmark it for some juicy pork... grrr.

I hate both sides equally, but when I DO have an opportunity of any kind to hack this crap off at the knees, I take it and hammer it down all the way, you bet.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 4:58 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


THIS DOUBLE POST BROUGHT TO YOU BY BIG BROTHER.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 5:05 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
You only say so 'cause you're an idiot.

Who gave us the USPATRIOT Act ? Gitmo ? Pen-registers and trap-and-trace on 10% of everyone in the US ?

So, rather than take a little step away from the fire you'd rather stand where you are 'cause that little step isn't absolutely everything you want. Sit and burn, then.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."


Wow Rue. I don't think I've ever seen you attack anyone before.

I'm assuming from prior conversations that we've had here that you don't condone the Patriot Act, Gitmo, etc..... What are you doing about it?

Not trying to pick a fight with you or anything. Honest qustion. I know you lump me in this category, so I'm just curious what advice you would give me since your frustration is not only with Wolfenstar, but with me and others like me as well.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, January 11, 2008 5:17 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Sorry 6-ix, but I took a look at your posts with the pictures all in a row and all I could think of was - wow, if they were each just a little different from the other you could flip them really fast and watch 'em move.

Mostly I try to be informed about the issues and records so I'm not going on feel-good commercials, distractions and lies. And I give money - till it hurts - to the one organization that seems to be doing anything at all about it - the EFF. And write, write write those letters. To senators, and representatives and newspapers. And keep my eyes out for candidates that are better on liberty than the incumbents. (Feinstein is a democrat and she sucks. I swear she thinks she represents the state of Israel, not California. I can hardly wait till someone challenges her. They WILL get the biggest checks I can write.) Support their candidacies. And write, write write some more of those letters. Mostly, I do what I can.

BTW, I'm curious myself. To me repubican intentions to reduce liberty were very clear. That's why I railed against the US PATRIOT Act, sneak and peak, illegal wiretaps, gitmo, torture, signing statements, so-called voter fraud, data-mining and databases, and the like. But the silence here was deafening.

Did none of these make any alarm bells go off with you ?

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, January 12, 2008 7:57 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


IMHO the Dems are rather split. There are Dems who just want to make our cage a little fluffier while taking away any real say in anything. I count Hillary in that camp. Last thing I want is to be tossed into the maw of the health insurance industry, just like I didn't want to be tossed into the maw of the internationals.

I would vote in a heartbeat for anyone who promised to pull out of NAFTA, gut the MCA and USPAT acts, rescind the DMCA, and trash all of those "business-friendly" government mandates that strip us and lay us bare for the rape. Unfortunately he has a snowball's chance in hell.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, November 28, 2024 17:10 - 4778 posts
Russian losses in Ukraine
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:32 - 1163 posts
Trump, convicted of 34 felonies
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:10 - 45 posts
Salon: How to gather with grace after that election
Thu, November 28, 2024 14:04 - 1 posts
End of the world Peter Zeihan
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:59 - 215 posts
Another Putin Disaster
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:58 - 1540 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:46 - 650 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:41 - 4847 posts
Dubai goes bankrupt, kosher Rothschilds win the spoils
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:31 - 5 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:29 - 7515 posts
Jean-Luc Brunel, fashion mogul Peter Nygard linked to Epstein
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:27 - 14 posts
All things Space
Thu, November 28, 2024 13:17 - 270 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL