To my shame & at 51 years of age I,like I suspect many others,don't really 'do' politics,chiefly because we are fed the same bullshit time & time again,usually around election time.It's all well & good folk saying,"Vote with your feet" and such-like.Well,we DO,but as soon as the election is over all the promises which were made during electioneering fly out of the window.A well known comment,You can tell when a politician is lying,'cause his/her lips are moving!
@701shep Whose bum do you lick then? The Queen's? Oh, no, you haven't subscribed to the BBC, but RT, Russia Today - so I guess it is Putin's bum you lick then? Better watch out in case he has laced his arse with Polonium 210.
And when you get locked up for smoking Marijuana, haven't you noticed that it is the Queen's courts who put you away in HM Prison? So do you like licking the bums of your fellow dope heads in jail then?
This woman is a fucking nasty, jealous piece of shit. Hence why she is slating Palin and has never been a fan of Margaret Thatcher, mainly because she is jealous of their elevated positions and in particular Thatcher, she knows she could never wield the authority Thatcher did and does.
@Artognou Yes but how long before you too, now that you have dragged yourself away from your heavy metal and into the political arena, are called "a fucking nasty jealous piece of shit" which could be a job description for a politician?
Politicians slate each other, always have, always will, especially so when a politician are in a different party or country to the politician they are slating.
Harman is Labour. Thatcher was conservative. What do you expect? The show must go on.
@DumpPalin What the fuck has my musical taste got to do with a comment I've put on a political video?
I'm fully aware of the continuous bickering that goes on between Labour and the Tories, I'm fully aware of the tit for tat goings on between rival politicians of various different parties.
I'm fully aware of the political world. My comment was aimed at Harman and the jealousy she is well known to harbour.
Next time you make an empty headed, ignorant comment please think beforehand.
@Artognou Harman is not jealous of Palin's republican power to do good and the morally right thing when she was governor of Alaska. Certainly Harman never wants any politician in Britain to have the power of president or vice-president to do good that Palin ran for in 2008.
Harman settles for UK politicians being forced to do evil sometimes, loyal to even a Nazi-loving monarch like King Edward, accepting rotten PMs like Chamberlain or Lloyd George, who were pals of Hitler for many years.
@Artognou So Harman, a "fucking nasty" "piece of shit" who sucks up to an evil or stupid monarch like Thatcher did. OK, I will buy that.
I just don't see Harman as particularly "jealous" of Palin. I think Harman is happy to be a UK politician toad that the kingdom can stamp on any time. Harman is not jealous of republican Palin or of any republican who stands tall by their conscience and does right, no matter what any king or dictator thinks.
@TheOrangeFondler Socialism can function for decades at a time but the reality of production and redistribution always come back to bite it in the arse. Perhaps it's al right to be socialistic in spurts but in order to have longevity; a country needs to return to conservative economic principals from time to time.
What a screwed up mindset this woman has. Harriet would disagree with 100% of Palin's policies and stances, but she doesn't really care so much because she is a woman.
Palin is (thankfully) the complete opposite of Harman in every respect.
This is what annoyes me the most in feminists: That Harriet Harman woukd never say ill of another woman politician, no matter what might that politician would have said or done, on the single fact that she is a woman. Women can't do no wrong, they shall not be criticized because they are women. My political position is on the left by the way, but that is not a reason for me to swallow stupidity or blind dogma
Because we thought McCain was on the verge of dieing!!! But we were wrong. Palin cannot be elected to anything. She is as stupid as a brick. It's somewhat obvious.
Why does Britain care whoever runs for US president? I have to chuckle a little bit when non-Americans state we're so arrogant and believe we're better than everyone, but then they turn around and feel the need to be concerned with our elected officials. At this precise moment in time I have no clue who the president of....oh....let's say Switzerland is. It's not a matter of arrogance, it's just apathy
@objectivechristian The US Presidents are very well aware of who the head of state of the United Kingdom is and indeed they seem very keen to meet with Queen Elizabeth - as did President Obama recently in London and President Bush even invited her to the White House.
Now, I am a Scottish and British republican but it makes it harder for republicans here to overthrow the monarchy when the US presidents and governments are being seen to support the UK monarchy.
@DumpPalin True, the leaders of a nation should know who everyone else's leaders are. But who was that woman in the audience who asked the question?
You make a good point about the monarchy. Why do so many Americans care about Will and Kate's wedding? To me they're no more important than any other people I've never met. We don't make a big deal about Regular Joe getting married in a chapel down the street, why would we care about some balding British guy getting married?
How many monarchs have come between him and Old Biddy Betty Windsor? -Roughly half a dozen. Meaning for 200 years, like it or not, that has been the British head of state.
Unless it changes by popular referendum, there is no reason to not visit the Windsors on official visits.
You're stuck with the way it is until the old biddy dies, I am afraid.
@shadowkitty56 You misunderstand if you think the age of Queen Elizabeth is the problem. You misunderstand if you think British republicans want a younger king, Charles or William.
Oh no, we are not stuck with waiting until she dies because that would not improve matters.
Only exiling or killing the whole royal family, from oldest to youngest, would solve the royal family problem and vacate the head of state position to allow election of British (& Scottish, English etc) presidents.
If you Americans stop caring who was head of state of Britain and saw British republicans who want to exile or assassinate the Queen and royal family as the freedom fighters we are instead of as "terrorists" then we could stop caring about USA politics.
But so long as your American president keeps denying us our own British presidents then who your president is matters to us because we might need his (or her) help to defend our liberties.
@DumpPalin I think that might be more the viewpoint of the politicians rather than the populace. Granted in the day there were many here who loved Tony Blair, even when many of his own countrymen viewed him as merely a puppet of the American political machine. I see your point
Overall most Americans, from what I can tell, have no particular viewpoint of monarchy. There are pockets that might desire something radical like assassination, but there's no mainstream support as far as I have noticed
@objectivechristian Yeah! American politics never effect foreign countries! And besides why should foreign countries care who has the codes for nuclear bombs?! Mind your own business!
@IWolfieI Following your logic, does the rest of the world worry about Russia, Israel, France, England, South Africa, Italy, etc...? These nations also have nuclear weapons. Why do you single out the USA? We haven't utilized nuclear weapons offensively since World War 2, and it was a Democrat who issued the executive order for their use.
@objectivechristian Um, yeah - the rest of the world does worry about countries with nuclear weapons. I single out the USA in this instance because the video we are commenting on is regarding Sarah Palin who was a strong candidate for vice president even though it was apparent she is inexperienced and not knowledgeable. Pretty scary stuff for the entire world. That you don't acknowledge the effect American politics has on the rest of the world just shows how limited your world view is.
@objectivechristian i wondered what had motivated you to put such an ill thought out and very closed minded, uneducated question on here, then i seen your user name which explained everything. you need saving from yourself & not rely on some book of fairytales to educate you as it clearly has failed you.
@objectivechristian because everything u people do affects the uk, australia, new zealand etc. basically every country except china- which is the future world super power
@MamaMario13 Well you got no argument from me regarding China. However I respectfully disagree about "us people" and how much influence we have. Yeah we got a big military, but we're not invincible.
A small example is that most nations won't extradite criminals to the USA because of our policies on punishment. If we had the glorious Palpatinian influence everyone seems to think we have, we shouldn't have trouble in this one small area. Just ignore the US, we'll kill ourselves off silently.
@objectivechristian Because you rem tards have a lot of money, power and business. So when a fuck tard like Palin could get in and get her inbred fingers on those nuke codes, it affects us all. Get it? Hmmm? You understand this? We share the globe yes? Mhmm? You get it yank? You understand that hmm? Redneck? Hmm, you get it? Yes? You get that redneck? Do you understand these words yes? Hmmm?
@Dandramere It's funny how people fear the idea of Mrs Palin getting the nuke launch codes, but do they fear Ahmadinejad getting launch codes? Perhaps. Just a thought.
@objectivechristian "Why does Britain care whoever runs for US president?" We have a phrase, 'When America sneezes we catch a cold'. I think you're right, most Americans are apathetic about the rest of the world, except when it threatens them on home soil, then they're all to ready to go to war.
If China had as much military power as the US & had shown it's willingness to use that power as america has, you'd be bloody interested in who was going to be the next leader of China.
@Primordialfan1 I respect that you have strong feelings. However in order for me to be a hypocrite you would need to have an example of me doing the opposite of what I preach. I have no idea what's going on in Irish politics, and therefore I have no opinion of it. I have nothing against Ireland, particularly since much of my heritage comes from there. I am merely apathetic since it in no way affects me. It's nothing personal against you.
@objectivechristian As a politically active american, i feel the need to respond to this: the rest of the world very much has a vested interest in who the US elects. We live in a connected world with a global economy- if the US economy tanks, it certainly won't help European markets or Asian markets. And from one american to the other, I've got to say that this "apathy" won't work anymore and it misrepresents the rest of us. What happens with the euro, yuan, pound, etc. WILL affect you.
@objectivechristian Because the politics of the USA effect everyone in the world. Don't pay any attention to the bullshit answer from DumpPalin, we have a monarchy here because the majority support it. In terms of Palin, she's an interesting person so we watched her. Harriet Harman is a moron, through and through. But decisions made in the USA effect the whole world, economically and socially and so we have to be interested.
@taxiride1 Let me ask this then: What other nations' politics affect the world on or near the same level as that of the USA? In follow up, does the rest of the world worry as much about them as they do about the USA?
@objectivechristian Well Russia and China are almost as powerful as the USA and I suppose the European Union collectively but none of those three really bother with elections or democracy. Maybe Saudi Arabia but we don't watch their elections very closely either. Obviously. I'm voting Michele Bachmann as presidential candidate, I got good odds for her at Ladbrokes too!
@objectivechristian People around the world need to care about american politics cos you bullshitt your way into absolutely all other governents either by military or CIA or politics....u cant seriously laugh at other people for watching what idiots you guys put in power? you cant be that thick? oh nm you voted bush in, twice...
@Kaldhore Heh. You presume a lot. Let me proudly assure you that Sarah Palin would never get elected. If you think GWB had no credibility, SP has even less. It simply would never happen.
I however agree that we do throw our military around too much. Let me make this clear. I am all about isolationism as far as our military goes. I was pissed off when Obama sent in American troops to Libya. We have no business being there. You're right, we do tend to elect idiots.
@objectivechristian I know what you mean and it's a very fine line. I have no problem with Americans having an opinion about us. The only ones I have a problem with are the ones who don't respect our decisions. For example Mike Savage: "You should let him in" = fine, "You should be made to let him in" = not fine.
@BasilFawlty4444 The music was composed for the ballet Spartacus by Aram Khachaturian, from suite No. 2 Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia. This music was used as the theme tune of the British TV period drama from 1971 to 1980 "The Onedin Line" about 19th century style sail ships or tall ships.
See the DumpPalin video "Sarah Palin's journey of personal discovery. The GOPdin Line"
watch?v=-ub7sOt_i-0
for an explanation of why I used that music in my DumpPalin videos.
@N330AA There's that word "fascist" being thrown about again. You do know that fascists want a large, totalitarian government, don't you? That doesn't fit Palin's ideology.
@ttiiyy true but British politics don't impact the rest of the world in the same way that American politics do, we obviously have no right to interfere but the entire world has a stake in American politics and so we have a stake in thier polititians
What's the point of all this? Even Republicans don't take her seriously. I don't understand why Britons even care about her.
I think a lot of people misread GOP. Republicans do get upset when Democrats attack Sarah Palin personally. However, those Republicans who do defend her do not look her as presidential material. Even right wing Fox News Channel told the viewers that Sarah Palin did not know that Africa's a continent, not a country. NOBODY in the US takes her seriously.
@ttiiyy Republicans had Palin on the GOP 2008 ticket, for VP, so they were treating her seriously there. Britons care who leads the most powerful country in the world and who is running for president or VP.
You are in denial buddy. There was a story on CBS Evening News last night - Sarah Palin to launch bus tour to "energize Americans". The bus tour is the latest indicator that Palin, who consistently ranks near the top of GOP presidential polls, will enter the race.
@DumpPalin@DumpPalin I'm in denial? LMAO Is Sarah Palin VP today? You seem to think that Republicans are not able to think on their own.
Let me ask you this: how many Democrats take Hillary Clinton seriously even though she's the Secretary of State? How many Democrats really like her especially after Clinton refused to apologize for NAFTA? The liberal media trashed her during the election, but she is as powerful as you can ever get today. Does that mean Democrats like her now?
@DumpPalin Now regarding the last part of your sentence: Palin, who consistently ranks near the top of GOP presidential polls. Could you please tell me what polls that you're talking about? The media are not exactly famous for doing good polls.
Even that right wing Bill O'Reilly barely talks about Sarah Palin any more. So exactly what polls give you the idea that Sarah Palin is taking the lead today?
@Useless2112 The music was composed for the ballet Spartacus by Aram Khachaturian, from suite No. 2 Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia. This music was used as the theme tune of the British TV period drama from 1971 to 1980 "The Onedin Line" about 19th century style sail ships or tall ships.
See the DumpPalin video "Sarah Palin's journey of personal discovery. The GOPdin Line"
watch?v=-ub7sOt_i-0
for an explanation of why I used that music in my DumpPalin videos.
@KenMacMillan Anything would be better than the corporate shadow goverment that has been controlling or assasinating EVERY american president for the last hundred years...
@Thesortvokter When politicians tell you to stop smoking dope because it is bad for your health especially your thought processes, they aren't telling lies.
Norway's most malign influence these days is promoting the political evil of constitutional monarchy which Norwegians do via the Nobel Peace Prize by never awarding it to those who advocate assassinating royal families as the quick and easy way to a democratic republic.
@KenMacMillan No, it is lone nut-cases like Lee Harvey Oswald who assassinate US Presidents and they do that because Americans fail to understand and interpret their own constitution which defines the right to bear arms in terms of a well-regulated militia. Oswald and the many gun criminals are not members of a well-regulated militia but instead of the US constitution, Americans take their lead from the National Rifle Association and it gun dealer funders. It's gun law anarchy out there.
@KenMacMillan The Four Freedoms were goals articulated by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 6, 1941. In an address known as the Four Freedoms speech (technically the 1941 State of the Union address), he proposed four fundamental freedoms that people "everywhere in the world" ought to enjoy:
Freedom of speech & expression are the same thing & just like worship was protected in America long before FDR & long before anywhere else. FDR violated people's right of free speech routinely. No government has the ability to provide freedom from want or fear. FDR halted the recovery of the depression then made it worse & had no problem using fear to accomplish his goals.
@KenMacMillan FDR's inclusion of the latter two freedoms went beyond the traditional US Constitutional values protected by its First Amendment, and endorsed a right to economic security and an internationalist view of foreign policy that have come to be central tenets of modern American liberalism. They also anticipated what would become known decades later as the "human security" paradigm in social science and economic development.
@DumpPalin A right to economic security is impossible to enforce without taking from other people which is a fundamental failure of modern liberalism. No one has a right to my property & no one has a right to your property. Command & control economies always fail. From what I can gather about the "human security" paradigm is that it's just a vehicle for activism. They can't even define it. Maybe they don't want to.
@KenMacMillan So not only did FDR beat the fascists in world war 2, taking the US to the point of victory before his death, he had the wisdom to know the worth of social security, a wisdom neglected by many on the American right who seem to prefer a shoot out with the hungry and homeless!
From my perspective as a Briton, FDR looks like an effective anti-fascist and a good world leader.
Sure, we could have done with the US in WW2 long before Pearl Harbour, otherwise, not bad FDR. Thanks!
@KenMacMillan Combine the flood of guns with the poor US social security making for poor and desperate people in want then you have a recipe for the US high crime rates, massive spending on jailing a lot more people and a 4 times higher murder rate than the UK.
The UK only has a constitution-from-hell but at least Britons know what "well regulated" means.
@DumpPalin Nice try, England has higher crime rates than the U.S. Higher burglary rates, higher violent crime rates, higher car theft rates, & higher rates of overall victimization. If you're getting that murder rate from Wikipedia then you have to explain to me the "excluding attempts" that they seem to apply to all European countries. Sounds like favoritism to me.
Not to mention that most murders happen in liberal cities where guns are as close to illegal as possible & in states with the highest illegal immigration rates. Crime in America is on the decline from the 1960's when the hippies sent it through the roof. Guns lower crime rates. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out that we have more people in prison because we prosecute more criminals rather than let them go. Liberalism is destroying this country, it needs to die a quick death.
At first I didn't know who they were talking about, it was the beauty queen part that threw me.
Although I am decidedly in the Democrat camp here in the United States, were I to be a British national I would be hard put to decide between Labor and Conservative. I resent everything the Republican Party stands for, but issues are better divided in Britain making party allegiance a more difficult decision.
@Zyworski The Democrat camp believe in republican principles, such as electing a president as head of state of the USA, yes?
But it seems you are in a different camp, swallowing pro-royalist BBC propaganda is re-broadcast in the USA? Don't you resent a monarch as head of state?
With a American republican education can't you do better than choose between two rotten royalist UK parties Labour and Conservative?
What about British republican revolution and national independence for us Britons?
@DumpPalin Wow, I really seem to have struck a nerve with my centrist comment. I can't speak much for your political system over there, so let me tell you about over here. The two party system constantly gives us a choice between two extremes, neither of which I can agree with fully. On the one hand the Republicans see the whole world as a giant commodity to be exploited at the earliest opportunity for their corporate masters. The Democrats are the party of give away. read more next comment.
@Zyworski The Labour Party suck on the Queen's left tit and the Conservative Party suck on the Queen's right tit. I won't tell you what part of the Queen's anatomy in which the Liberal-Democrats stick their tongue.
So most UK electoral politics is royalist and right-wing though somehow the left tit suckers over here have managed to get extract more in terms of welfare benefits and a national health service from which the British poor have until now done better than the US poor.
@Zyworski Buddy you don't need to explain the US political system over there. US political news gets covered on our TV, always has been. What's new is with digital broadcasting we cab now even can watch CBS Evening News with Katie Couric and ABC World News with Diane Sawyer.
I had no idea that there was such a deep seated resentment towards the monarchy, or that it had such a large influence over the affairs of people. Speaking from a personal and spiritual point of view I would rather be caught fornicating with a dog than to be caught sitting on a throne when our Lord returns, but that is just me. From my other comment I was starting to say that I long for a 3rd political party that is not aligned to a linear spectrum and can think outside the box. more>
@Zyworski The British population are mostly anaesthetized against the pain of not being allowed the freedom and dignity to elect our own president by a 24-7 pro-royal propaganda machine, known as "the BBC". Only the clever and strong willed can resist this constant brainwashing. Most here therefore are happy with the Queen and are only occasionally dully aware that a few resent the Queen and kingdom without being able to articulate why. They like you ignore the issue.
@DumpPalin You're preaching to the choir. There is a pseudo royalty here in the US. The children of the who is who of 1950 are the same people who hold cabinet level positions today. The Generals of our army came from generations of military and industrial might. The average person in America is oblivious to the fact that we have devolved into a class society. Because the Monarchy never had to suffer the humiliation of total defeat it is no surprise that they still retain inordinate power. more>
@Zyworski Condoleezza Rice held the Cabinet position of US Secretary of State, she was born in 1954 and I have produced a video showing she is like "Doctor Who", a Briitsh Science Fiction time-travelling hero (I will share this video with you, it is entitled - "Dr Rice - that's who! Condi as Doctor Who")
So as you can see American "pseudo-royalty" is expanding their support base into Britain. I also have a video showing Condi's head on British stamps and proposing "Rice for Queen 2012".
@DumpPalin I am starting to hear multiple references to the power structure in Britain using unacceptable force against the population, I assure you that I can relate. I thank you for your invitation and would surely enjoy a group that offers political thinking on a tangent off the linear spectrum of tradition.
I also would like to thank you for taking the time to scrutinize my beliefs prior to just throwing an invitation at me, you have picked the right guy for intelligent debate
@tjmac7 I went over to your channel and caught the comment on 'BBC now admits al Qaeda never existed', thanks for putting that video up, I will be sure to share it with all my friends on FB along with some choice comments.
@Zyworski - this is true in fact the Democrat Party is more right wing than our Conservative Party. The Republicans are completely off the scale as far as UK politcs are concerned.
@JCtheHP I am from the Democratic Party of the 1970's and think that Jimmy Carter was the last good President we had. Bill Clinton was the best Republican we have had. George W Bush is the herald of the Anti-Christ. Ronald Reagan had Alzheimer's long before anyone is willing to admit. The jury is still out on Barack Obama, but so far nothing but mediocrity. I almost forgot George H.W. Bush is a stone cold pussy that had to amass a an army to do what a couple dozen battalions could have done.
@Zyworski - a very accurate analysis I'd say. As for the UK Clement Atlee was the only half decent one we ever had imo. It's been a complete shower since then.
Why do we sit down and watch these people lie to us everyweek wake up britain and string these fuckers up.Do not belive anythink the british goventment tell u they serve big companys and will slowy make every part of your life more expensive mark my words that is were it is going and i dont see no one doing anythink about it. Talk about the people being asleep.
The whole 2 party system (both here in the uk, where a draw or failing to get majority means that libdems make the numbers and the mainstream back 2 parties cons and lab, and in the US) is completely flawed and needs to be changed.
@killahoe62 I think Sarah Palin knows more about republican politics than Harriet Harman.
Oh I am all in favour of dumping Palin from a presidential election ticket but in favour of Condoleezza Rice, not in favour of someone like HH who doesn't even support having a republic and an elected president!
Rice-for-President or Palin-for-President make some sense.
Harman for President would be opposed by the royalist Harman who wants to keep the Queen succeeded by a man, King Charles. IDIOT!
Why would Harman support it? The Republican movement in the United Kingdom is extremely small and ignored. The only Republican Party in the UK with any seats is Sinn Féin which isn't aloud to sit in the House of Commons because they refuse to aware allegiance to the Queen - they also don't want to oust the Queen and replace her with a President, they only want a United Ireland. All the other parties are generally supporters of the Monarchy.
@alexsau91 Well one reason is that the Labour Party constitution defines Labour as a "democratic socialist party".
Democratic socialism implies the democratic election of a president as head of a republic, ending the kingdom.
The workers, trade unionists and Labour party members and voters would benefit most from a republic.
So if Harman wanted to avoid being called a "traitor to true Labour, a traitor to democratic socialism" and lose Labour support then she would be a republican.
@DumpPalin Labour weren't established with the ideology of being democratic socialists, they were established to represent Trade Unions, whose ideas often coincided with democratic socialism. The majority of British Trade Unionists support the monarchy, thus it stays. Besides, we've reached a fantastic balance in Britain where the Queen has the power to stop government if she so desires, whilst being quite easy to abolish, basically meaning she can only get involved if the public demand it.
@killahoe62 trash america and the free market system is all the left can do, doesnt matter that america held back the soviet union and helped defeat the nazis and stands up for freedom
,,she can't stand Sarah because most English today are scared brainwashed liberal pansies who are suffering from the domino effect of social liberalism, destined to hand their very own nation over to Islam.
@killahoe62 'The democrats, a party that has long stood for equality'. right so the party that founded and sponsored the KKK stood for equality did it? she certainly doesn't know about history. Also how does Palin not know about politics. After all, politics is about conning people into believing they can trust you and I'd say the evidence suggests that Palin was pretty good at that.
@killahoe62 'The democrats, a party that has long stood for equality'. right so the party that founded and sponsored the KKK stood for equality did it? she certainly doesn't know about history. Also how does Palin not know about politics. After all, politics is about conning people into believing they can trust you and I'd say the evidence suggests that Palin was pretty good at that.
@Rascasseman sarah palin is a proper thick shit, full on cliche of a dumb American. She didn't know that Africa is a continent and said North Korea are Americas allies.
Harriet Harman - give us a break - get out of politics - you are clearly in it for what you can get out of it. This bitch was born with a silver spoon in her BIG mouth.
@aceridgey Oh no many bigger bitches - the Queen, the biggest bitch of them all followed by Princess Anne. Home Secretary Theresa May is a HUGE bitch.
Since Labour got kicked out of government Harman is an opposition bitch only which makes her significantly smaller as a bitch.
Harman described Treasury Chief Secretary Danny Alexander as a "ginger rodent". So she was more IN touch about that evil welfare state cutter than other politicians.
@aceridgey And why is that? Because you don't have the choice thickie. If you think you are better go and stand against her and see how many votes you get. Will you? Of course not.
@ChristewieTV Who? Which "she"? Sarah Palin or Harriet Harman? Palin didn't win the US Vice President and Harman didn't win the Deputy Prime Minister job either.
Why not thank the voters? After all, the people who did get elected were not THAT good, were they? Not like they were Condolezza Rice or anybody REALLY good, right?
@bonfirejovi Rubbish - hates most men, yes OK but she hates most women too. The men Harman loves are (1) Prince Charles as she wants only him to be the next head of state ruling Britain the place where she and I stay. (2) the other Princes in line to the throne.
So Harman hates all other men here and thinks we deserve to be ruled by the few princes she loves.
She also hates all women except the Queen and Princess Anne for the same reason.
@SenorKristobbalVLog I can't argue with that. What makes Hislop a twat is that he is a royalist despite the fact that freedom of the press has been lost under the kingdom. He edits the magazine Private Eye which has been dragged through the courts and sued for libel and so on. Made a point about that on "Have I got news for you" with the redacted headlines. But his precious Queen failed to defend freedom of the press - a rotten oppressive state - his papers suffers but still he grovels! TWAT!
@DumpPalin What the hell are you talking about? The Queen has no legislative powers at all. He is not a royalist in the sense that he wants the Royal Family to be in power, being a royalist today means he is in favour of keeping the Royal Family as opposed to getting rid of them. He and Private Eye have been dragged through the courts and will continue to be I expect, but the amount of press freedoms has nothing to do with that, more issues of libel.
@biggingeryeti I am talking about the UK's constitution from hell.
The monarch, on the advice of the privy council, gives royal assent to acts of parliament. Their power is to stop an elected president vetoing undemocratic laws (eg. libel) which get the royal rubber-stamp instead of the republican shredder.
The royal family kept means unchallenged power to the state, the courts, and no power for the people to publish freely.
A war to get rid of the royals allows for people power.
@DumpPalin The Monarch's role in British politics is ceremonial. The queen is advised and she can advice, but she can't veto any acts suggested by Parliament. What happens is Parliament develop an act which moves to the House Of Lords, where it is debated, accepted or declined. The Papers are free to publish. Our tabloids are infamous for the crap they publish. Of course a person can take legal action but the Queen has no role in any of this.
@biggingeryeti Politics here is anti-British because the kingdom stops the British people electing presidents as heads of state and then the state denies the rights of the people.
Yes there is ceremony instead of an elected president doing the needed job of head of state. So long as they are allowed to do the royalist ceremony we can't have a republic. So the ceremony and the fact of the kingdom and a do nothing head of state matters.
@biggingeryeti The fact the acts of parliament are not vetoed is a big part of the problem. The fact that the selection of Prime Minister was not vetoed was a big problem. I am not saying the monarch could do the vetoing. I am saying we needed a president to do the vetoing.
Democracy demands that many undemocratic acts and dictatorial Prime Ministers should have been vetoed to defend citizens rights such as free speech, freedom of publication and so on.
@biggingeryeti The papers are not free to publish, neither is anyone else. Someone takes legal action and a judge imposes a gagging order, an injunction and imprison editors for up to LIFE IMPRISONMENT for contempt of court if they defy the court ban.
The Queen just by being there - and if would be the same WHOEVER was monarch - stops an elected president sending in the army to arrest the judges and the police and prison staff enforcing the courts gagging orders.
@DumpPalin They are enacted by elected parties and the House of Lords (which should be entirely elected although some are hereditary). I still do not know why we would need a war to remove the Royal Family. They do not do anything. They have no power. If they have no power they can't dictate about freedoms. And our newspapers are full of stories embarrassing the Royal family. You can't just put a gagging order on anything and they are decided by judges.
@biggingeryeti So if a party gets elected which decides to exterminate everyone with ginger hair that is OK according to you? Parliament is allowed to pass a law and big ginger yetis like yourself can be snuffed out legally and constitutionally?
You may not feel under threat from the kingdom's officials because they don't actually have it in for you gingers- just for strong critics of their rule which they would like to eliminate, by imprisonment or by inappropriate psychiatric treatments.
@biggingeryeti The Queen is not doing anything to defend the liberties of those under threat from the state, but we need a president to do a lot, to take action, to start arresting judges who are denying freedoms.
We can't have a republic and elect a president so long as there is a royal family there committing the crime against the people of getting in the way of the establishment of our republic.
A country can be a kingdom with a monarch or it can be a republic with a president.
@biggingeryeti The state is dictating against freedoms but the police, the judges and the parliamentarians love it, because they get to rule.
We need an elected head of state to take action against those undemocratic judges and police who are denying freedom according to how the politicians want things, but democracy means "government by all the people" not "government by the politicians".
Just because one newspaper prints the tittle-tattle it wants doesn't make it a free country.
@biggingeryeti Exactly, it is a dictatorship by judges who gag whomsoever they want. The citizens have no rights in practice and can be imprisoned for life if we don't obey the orders of the Queen's judges.
The judges are the problem. They don't defend constitutional rights, they defend the reputation of rotten royalist officials running important institutions (badly, incompetently and to the danger of human life).
Yes the Queen's judges decide and it leads to death and disaster.
@biggingeryeti The judges claim to do things according to the law but it matters little whether they do or not - you still go to jail if they say.
However, even supposing parliamentary law is upheld 100% - that is not democratic because parliament doesn't mind citizens being jailed for life for contempt of court for breaching a gagging order when someone was trying to speak out against an official which the parliamentarians had confidence in.
@DumpPalin Contempt of court laws also exist in the U.S., where citizens can be kept jailed at the discretion of a judge. I agree that is wrong. In the case of the U.K., the home secretary can step in and change judgments (this is relatively rare). Parliamentary dictatorship would not be freedom, but we do not have a Parliamentary dictatorship any more than you have a Presidential dictatorship.
To my shame & at 51 years of age I,like I suspect many others,don't really 'do' politics,chiefly because we are fed the same bullshit time & time again,usually around election time.It's all well & good folk saying,"Vote with your feet" and such-like.Well,we DO,but as soon as the election is over all the promises which were made during electioneering fly out of the window.A well known comment,You can tell when a politician is lying,'cause his/her lips are moving!
popazz1 2 months ago
most people in the uk dont give a fuck who is president of the states just these fuckin left wing politions we have.
O please america let us brits lick ya bum first .
701shep 2 months ago
@701shep Whose bum do you lick then? The Queen's? Oh, no, you haven't subscribed to the BBC, but RT, Russia Today - so I guess it is Putin's bum you lick then? Better watch out in case he has laced his arse with Polonium 210.
And when you get locked up for smoking Marijuana, haven't you noticed that it is the Queen's courts who put you away in HM Prison? So do you like licking the bums of your fellow dope heads in jail then?
DumpPalin 2 months ago
This woman is a fucking nasty, jealous piece of shit. Hence why she is slating Palin and has never been a fan of Margaret Thatcher, mainly because she is jealous of their elevated positions and in particular Thatcher, she knows she could never wield the authority Thatcher did and does.
Artognou 2 months ago
@Artognou Yes but how long before you too, now that you have dragged yourself away from your heavy metal and into the political arena, are called "a fucking nasty jealous piece of shit" which could be a job description for a politician?
Politicians slate each other, always have, always will, especially so when a politician are in a different party or country to the politician they are slating.
Harman is Labour. Thatcher was conservative. What do you expect? The show must go on.
DumpPalin 2 months ago
@DumpPalin What the fuck has my musical taste got to do with a comment I've put on a political video?
I'm fully aware of the continuous bickering that goes on between Labour and the Tories, I'm fully aware of the tit for tat goings on between rival politicians of various different parties.
I'm fully aware of the political world. My comment was aimed at Harman and the jealousy she is well known to harbour.
Next time you make an empty headed, ignorant comment please think beforehand.
Artognou 2 months ago
@Artognou Harman is not jealous of Palin's republican power to do good and the morally right thing when she was governor of Alaska. Certainly Harman never wants any politician in Britain to have the power of president or vice-president to do good that Palin ran for in 2008.
Harman settles for UK politicians being forced to do evil sometimes, loyal to even a Nazi-loving monarch like King Edward, accepting rotten PMs like Chamberlain or Lloyd George, who were pals of Hitler for many years.
DumpPalin 2 months ago
@Artognou So Harman, a "fucking nasty" "piece of shit" who sucks up to an evil or stupid monarch like Thatcher did. OK, I will buy that.
I just don't see Harman as particularly "jealous" of Palin. I think Harman is happy to be a UK politician toad that the kingdom can stamp on any time. Harman is not jealous of republican Palin or of any republican who stands tall by their conscience and does right, no matter what any king or dictator thinks.
DumpPalin 2 months ago
@Artognou You simpleton! Putting Palin and Thatcher in the same sentence should be a punishable offence.
EarlRegent 1 week ago
@EarlRegent Being Palin or Thatcher should be a punishable offence.
TheOrangeFondler 1 day ago
@TheOrangeFondler Socialism can function for decades at a time but the reality of production and redistribution always come back to bite it in the arse. Perhaps it's al right to be socialistic in spurts but in order to have longevity; a country needs to return to conservative economic principals from time to time.
EarlRegent 1 day ago
What a screwed up mindset this woman has. Harriet would disagree with 100% of Palin's policies and stances, but she doesn't really care so much because she is a woman.
Palin is (thankfully) the complete opposite of Harman in every respect.
GoldenbanjoDJ 5 months ago
harriet harman is just a frustrated lesbian who wants to fuck sarah palin
DickHead69able 5 months ago
This is what annoyes me the most in feminists: That Harriet Harman woukd never say ill of another woman politician, no matter what might that politician would have said or done, on the single fact that she is a woman. Women can't do no wrong, they shall not be criticized because they are women. My political position is on the left by the way, but that is not a reason for me to swallow stupidity or blind dogma
frepi 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Because we thought McCain was on the verge of dieing!!! But we were wrong. Palin cannot be elected to anything. She is as stupid as a brick. It's somewhat obvious.
MohammedTheBabyRaper 5 months ago
Harriet Harman is a shit politician. Just like the labour front bench. Who the hell are these people on labour front bench
eddieoxford 5 months ago
Rice for president wtf ....lol
Lava91point0 5 months ago
too many erms erm erm erm, she is crap
micksphotos 5 months ago
Why does Britain care whoever runs for US president? I have to chuckle a little bit when non-Americans state we're so arrogant and believe we're better than everyone, but then they turn around and feel the need to be concerned with our elected officials. At this precise moment in time I have no clue who the president of....oh....let's say Switzerland is. It's not a matter of arrogance, it's just apathy
Just stop caring about USA politics.
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@objectivechristian The US Presidents are very well aware of who the head of state of the United Kingdom is and indeed they seem very keen to meet with Queen Elizabeth - as did President Obama recently in London and President Bush even invited her to the White House.
Now, I am a Scottish and British republican but it makes it harder for republicans here to overthrow the monarchy when the US presidents and governments are being seen to support the UK monarchy.
DumpPalin 6 months ago 3
@DumpPalin True, the leaders of a nation should know who everyone else's leaders are. But who was that woman in the audience who asked the question?
You make a good point about the monarchy. Why do so many Americans care about Will and Kate's wedding? To me they're no more important than any other people I've never met. We don't make a big deal about Regular Joe getting married in a chapel down the street, why would we care about some balding British guy getting married?
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@DumpPalin There is one little problem with that.
Who was king c. 1784?- Yep, George III.
How many monarchs have come between him and Old Biddy Betty Windsor? -Roughly half a dozen. Meaning for 200 years, like it or not, that has been the British head of state.
Unless it changes by popular referendum, there is no reason to not visit the Windsors on official visits.
You're stuck with the way it is until the old biddy dies, I am afraid.
shadowkitty56 4 months ago
@shadowkitty56 You misunderstand if you think the age of Queen Elizabeth is the problem. You misunderstand if you think British republicans want a younger king, Charles or William.
Oh no, we are not stuck with waiting until she dies because that would not improve matters.
Only exiling or killing the whole royal family, from oldest to youngest, would solve the royal family problem and vacate the head of state position to allow election of British (& Scottish, English etc) presidents.
DumpPalin 4 months ago
@objectivechristian It is a two-way process buddy.
If you Americans stop caring who was head of state of Britain and saw British republicans who want to exile or assassinate the Queen and royal family as the freedom fighters we are instead of as "terrorists" then we could stop caring about USA politics.
But so long as your American president keeps denying us our own British presidents then who your president is matters to us because we might need his (or her) help to defend our liberties.
DumpPalin 6 months ago
@DumpPalin I think that might be more the viewpoint of the politicians rather than the populace. Granted in the day there were many here who loved Tony Blair, even when many of his own countrymen viewed him as merely a puppet of the American political machine. I see your point
Overall most Americans, from what I can tell, have no particular viewpoint of monarchy. There are pockets that might desire something radical like assassination, but there's no mainstream support as far as I have noticed
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@objectivechristian Yeah! American politics never effect foreign countries! And besides why should foreign countries care who has the codes for nuclear bombs?! Mind your own business!
IWolfieI 6 months ago
@IWolfieI Following your logic, does the rest of the world worry about Russia, Israel, France, England, South Africa, Italy, etc...? These nations also have nuclear weapons. Why do you single out the USA? We haven't utilized nuclear weapons offensively since World War 2, and it was a Democrat who issued the executive order for their use.
So I reiterate:
Just stop caring about USA politics.
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@objectivechristian Um, yeah - the rest of the world does worry about countries with nuclear weapons. I single out the USA in this instance because the video we are commenting on is regarding Sarah Palin who was a strong candidate for vice president even though it was apparent she is inexperienced and not knowledgeable. Pretty scary stuff for the entire world. That you don't acknowledge the effect American politics has on the rest of the world just shows how limited your world view is.
IWolfieI 6 months ago
@objectivechristian i wondered what had motivated you to put such an ill thought out and very closed minded, uneducated question on here, then i seen your user name which explained everything. you need saving from yourself & not rely on some book of fairytales to educate you as it clearly has failed you.
demozdaze 6 months ago
@objectivechristian because everything u people do affects the uk, australia, new zealand etc. basically every country except china- which is the future world super power
MamaMario13 6 months ago
@MamaMario13 Well you got no argument from me regarding China. However I respectfully disagree about "us people" and how much influence we have. Yeah we got a big military, but we're not invincible.
A small example is that most nations won't extradite criminals to the USA because of our policies on punishment. If we had the glorious Palpatinian influence everyone seems to think we have, we shouldn't have trouble in this one small area. Just ignore the US, we'll kill ourselves off silently.
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@objectivechristian Because you rem tards have a lot of money, power and business. So when a fuck tard like Palin could get in and get her inbred fingers on those nuke codes, it affects us all. Get it? Hmmm? You understand this? We share the globe yes? Mhmm? You get it yank? You understand that hmm? Redneck? Hmm, you get it? Yes? You get that redneck? Do you understand these words yes? Hmmm?
Dandramere 6 months ago
@Dandramere It's funny how people fear the idea of Mrs Palin getting the nuke launch codes, but do they fear Ahmadinejad getting launch codes? Perhaps. Just a thought.
Peace be with you.
objectivechristian 6 months ago
@objectivechristian I am also scared of Ahmadinejad-crazy-nutter getting the nuke codes also, Palin is a religious nut and so is he.
Dandramere 6 months ago
@objectivechristian "Why does Britain care whoever runs for US president?" We have a phrase, 'When America sneezes we catch a cold'. I think you're right, most Americans are apathetic about the rest of the world, except when it threatens them on home soil, then they're all to ready to go to war.
If China had as much military power as the US & had shown it's willingness to use that power as america has, you'd be bloody interested in who was going to be the next leader of China.
GuillemotWatcher 5 months ago
@objectivechristian Political Globalization is the simply answer.
CJRankz 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@objectivechristian Political Globalization is the simply answer.
CJRankz 5 months ago
@objectivechristian
You should see the ''politics'' section on the dublin craigslist.
Vitrolic hatred from teabagging christian americans telling US what to do.
So yeah. Get fucked you hypocritical cunt.
Primordialfan1 5 months ago
@Primordialfan1 I respect that you have strong feelings. However in order for me to be a hypocrite you would need to have an example of me doing the opposite of what I preach. I have no idea what's going on in Irish politics, and therefore I have no opinion of it. I have nothing against Ireland, particularly since much of my heritage comes from there. I am merely apathetic since it in no way affects me. It's nothing personal against you.
objectivechristian 5 months ago
@objectivechristian As a politically active american, i feel the need to respond to this: the rest of the world very much has a vested interest in who the US elects. We live in a connected world with a global economy- if the US economy tanks, it certainly won't help European markets or Asian markets. And from one american to the other, I've got to say that this "apathy" won't work anymore and it misrepresents the rest of us. What happens with the euro, yuan, pound, etc. WILL affect you.
VAThrasher 5 months ago
@objectivechristian Because the politics of the USA effect everyone in the world. Don't pay any attention to the bullshit answer from DumpPalin, we have a monarchy here because the majority support it. In terms of Palin, she's an interesting person so we watched her. Harriet Harman is a moron, through and through. But decisions made in the USA effect the whole world, economically and socially and so we have to be interested.
taxiride1 5 months ago
@taxiride1 Let me ask this then: What other nations' politics affect the world on or near the same level as that of the USA? In follow up, does the rest of the world worry as much about them as they do about the USA?
objectivechristian 4 months ago
@objectivechristian Well Russia and China are almost as powerful as the USA and I suppose the European Union collectively but none of those three really bother with elections or democracy. Maybe Saudi Arabia but we don't watch their elections very closely either. Obviously. I'm voting Michele Bachmann as presidential candidate, I got good odds for her at Ladbrokes too!
taxiride1 4 months ago
@objectivechristian because.... you BUTT in every other countrys polotics you idiot.
Kaldhore 4 months ago
@objectivechristian People around the world need to care about american politics cos you bullshitt your way into absolutely all other governents either by military or CIA or politics....u cant seriously laugh at other people for watching what idiots you guys put in power? you cant be that thick? oh nm you voted bush in, twice...
Kaldhore 4 months ago
@Kaldhore Heh. You presume a lot. Let me proudly assure you that Sarah Palin would never get elected. If you think GWB had no credibility, SP has even less. It simply would never happen.
I however agree that we do throw our military around too much. Let me make this clear. I am all about isolationism as far as our military goes. I was pissed off when Obama sent in American troops to Libya. We have no business being there. You're right, we do tend to elect idiots.
objectivechristian 3 months ago
Comment removed
JuxtaMonkey 3 months ago
@objectivechristian I know what you mean and it's a very fine line. I have no problem with Americans having an opinion about us. The only ones I have a problem with are the ones who don't respect our decisions. For example Mike Savage: "You should let him in" = fine, "You should be made to let him in" = not fine.
spudthrasher 2 months ago
@xgnothixseautonx Hand-bags at dawn, lol
DumpPalin 7 months ago
what song is that at the end?
BasilFawlty4444 7 months ago
@BasilFawlty4444 The music was composed for the ballet Spartacus by Aram Khachaturian, from suite No. 2 Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia. This music was used as the theme tune of the British TV period drama from 1971 to 1980 "The Onedin Line" about 19th century style sail ships or tall ships.
See the DumpPalin video "Sarah Palin's journey of personal discovery. The GOPdin Line"
watch?v=-ub7sOt_i-0
for an explanation of why I used that music in my DumpPalin videos.
DumpPalin 7 months ago
Not much of attack really was it? A fairly diplomatic response, especially considering how much of a grotesque fascist Palin actually is.
N330AA 7 months ago
@N330AA There's that word "fascist" being thrown about again. You do know that fascists want a large, totalitarian government, don't you? That doesn't fit Palin's ideology.
MrToadful 6 months ago
@MrToadful Fascism is fairly loose term, but far-right wing nutter sums it up quite well.
N330AA 6 months ago
@ttiiyy true but British politics don't impact the rest of the world in the same way that American politics do, we obviously have no right to interfere but the entire world has a stake in American politics and so we have a stake in thier polititians
jp2855 7 months ago
What's the point of all this? Even Republicans don't take her seriously. I don't understand why Britons even care about her.
I think a lot of people misread GOP. Republicans do get upset when Democrats attack Sarah Palin personally. However, those Republicans who do defend her do not look her as presidential material. Even right wing Fox News Channel told the viewers that Sarah Palin did not know that Africa's a continent, not a country. NOBODY in the US takes her seriously.
ttiiyy 8 months ago
@ttiiyy Republicans had Palin on the GOP 2008 ticket, for VP, so they were treating her seriously there. Britons care who leads the most powerful country in the world and who is running for president or VP.
You are in denial buddy. There was a story on CBS Evening News last night - Sarah Palin to launch bus tour to "energize Americans". The bus tour is the latest indicator that Palin, who consistently ranks near the top of GOP presidential polls, will enter the race.
DumpPalin 8 months ago 4
@DumpPalin @DumpPalin I'm in denial? LMAO Is Sarah Palin VP today? You seem to think that Republicans are not able to think on their own.
Let me ask you this: how many Democrats take Hillary Clinton seriously even though she's the Secretary of State? How many Democrats really like her especially after Clinton refused to apologize for NAFTA? The liberal media trashed her during the election, but she is as powerful as you can ever get today. Does that mean Democrats like her now?
ttiiyy 8 months ago
@DumpPalin Now regarding the last part of your sentence: Palin, who consistently ranks near the top of GOP presidential polls. Could you please tell me what polls that you're talking about? The media are not exactly famous for doing good polls.
Even that right wing Bill O'Reilly barely talks about Sarah Palin any more. So exactly what polls give you the idea that Sarah Palin is taking the lead today?
ttiiyy 8 months ago
@DumpPalin If Americans start to criticize British politicians, Britons will tell Americans to mind America's own business.
ttiiyy 8 months ago
Sarah Palin is a shower of shit.
boldertits 8 months ago 3
I know of many people who voted Democrat simply because Sarah Palin was a running mate.
MrDelusionalPenguin 8 months ago
Idiot feminist. Basicly saying, Sarah Palins wrong about everything, but should get elected because she's a woman.
youxknowxyouxluvxit 8 months ago
What is the music at the end?
Useless2112 8 months ago
@Useless2112 The music was composed for the ballet Spartacus by Aram Khachaturian, from suite No. 2 Adagio of Spartacus and Phrygia. This music was used as the theme tune of the British TV period drama from 1971 to 1980 "The Onedin Line" about 19th century style sail ships or tall ships.
See the DumpPalin video "Sarah Palin's journey of personal discovery. The GOPdin Line"
watch?v=-ub7sOt_i-0
for an explanation of why I used that music in my DumpPalin videos.
DumpPalin 8 months ago
Sarah Palin would be a SMASHING US president. Then we wouldn't forget the legacy of George Bush, the embodiment of the american dream.
Totally fucking brainwashed robot thinking.
Thesortvokter 8 months ago
@Thesortvokter Anything would be better than Obama.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan Anything would be better than the corporate shadow goverment that has been controlling or assasinating EVERY american president for the last hundred years...
Thesortvokter 8 months ago
@Thesortvokter It's not a corporate shadow government. It's fascism. All western nations have their own form of fascism. Ours was implemented by FDR.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan I don't disagree with that. Our fascism (Norway) was implemented by Jens Christian Hauge and others, and it's still running smothly.
A little joke:
Q: When can you tell that a politician is lying?
A: When his lips are moving.
Thesortvokter 8 months ago
@Thesortvokter When politicians tell you to stop smoking dope because it is bad for your health especially your thought processes, they aren't telling lies.
Norway's most malign influence these days is promoting the political evil of constitutional monarchy which Norwegians do via the Nobel Peace Prize by never awarding it to those who advocate assassinating royal families as the quick and easy way to a democratic republic.
Now quit smoking pot and get your head straight.
DumpPalin 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan No, it is lone nut-cases like Lee Harvey Oswald who assassinate US Presidents and they do that because Americans fail to understand and interpret their own constitution which defines the right to bear arms in terms of a well-regulated militia. Oswald and the many gun criminals are not members of a well-regulated militia but instead of the US constitution, Americans take their lead from the National Rifle Association and it gun dealer funders. It's gun law anarchy out there.
DumpPalin 8 months ago
@DumpPalin Lee Harvey Oswald was on the left, just like you.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan The Four Freedoms were goals articulated by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt on January 6, 1941. In an address known as the Four Freedoms speech (technically the 1941 State of the Union address), he proposed four fundamental freedoms that people "everywhere in the world" ought to enjoy:
1. Freedom of speech and expression
2. Freedom of worship
3. Freedom from want
4. Freedom from fear
DumpPalin 8 months ago
Freedom of speech & expression are the same thing & just like worship was protected in America long before FDR & long before anywhere else. FDR violated people's right of free speech routinely. No government has the ability to provide freedom from want or fear. FDR halted the recovery of the depression then made it worse & had no problem using fear to accomplish his goals.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan FDR's inclusion of the latter two freedoms went beyond the traditional US Constitutional values protected by its First Amendment, and endorsed a right to economic security and an internationalist view of foreign policy that have come to be central tenets of modern American liberalism. They also anticipated what would become known decades later as the "human security" paradigm in social science and economic development.
- Wikipedia "Four Freedoms"
DumpPalin 8 months ago
@DumpPalin A right to economic security is impossible to enforce without taking from other people which is a fundamental failure of modern liberalism. No one has a right to my property & no one has a right to your property. Command & control economies always fail. From what I can gather about the "human security" paradigm is that it's just a vehicle for activism. They can't even define it. Maybe they don't want to.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan So not only did FDR beat the fascists in world war 2, taking the US to the point of victory before his death, he had the wisdom to know the worth of social security, a wisdom neglected by many on the American right who seem to prefer a shoot out with the hungry and homeless!
From my perspective as a Briton, FDR looks like an effective anti-fascist and a good world leader.
Sure, we could have done with the US in WW2 long before Pearl Harbour, otherwise, not bad FDR. Thanks!
DumpPalin 8 months ago
@DumpPalin If you'd like to learn about FDR's soft fascism listen to the liberal historian Thaddeus Russel.
/watch?v=WWAS746Rb74
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't forget part 2
/watch?v=p-afbC7FWzk
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
@KenMacMillan Combine the flood of guns with the poor US social security making for poor and desperate people in want then you have a recipe for the US high crime rates, massive spending on jailing a lot more people and a 4 times higher murder rate than the UK.
The UK only has a constitution-from-hell but at least Britons know what "well regulated" means.
DumpPalin 8 months ago
@DumpPalin Nice try, England has higher crime rates than the U.S. Higher burglary rates, higher violent crime rates, higher car theft rates, & higher rates of overall victimization. If you're getting that murder rate from Wikipedia then you have to explain to me the "excluding attempts" that they seem to apply to all European countries. Sounds like favoritism to me.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
Not to mention that most murders happen in liberal cities where guns are as close to illegal as possible & in states with the highest illegal immigration rates. Crime in America is on the decline from the 1960's when the hippies sent it through the roof. Guns lower crime rates. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find out that we have more people in prison because we prosecute more criminals rather than let them go. Liberalism is destroying this country, it needs to die a quick death.
KenMacMillan 8 months ago
Did you call this an attack? Christ! Who uploaded this video!?
MickeyMouseApollo 8 months ago
.....Cain in the election was saying, when Palin opened her mouth..."geezzz i'm screwed"
salbella50 8 months ago
At first I didn't know who they were talking about, it was the beauty queen part that threw me.
Although I am decidedly in the Democrat camp here in the United States, were I to be a British national I would be hard put to decide between Labor and Conservative. I resent everything the Republican Party stands for, but issues are better divided in Britain making party allegiance a more difficult decision.
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski The Democrat camp believe in republican principles, such as electing a president as head of state of the USA, yes?
But it seems you are in a different camp, swallowing pro-royalist BBC propaganda is re-broadcast in the USA? Don't you resent a monarch as head of state?
With a American republican education can't you do better than choose between two rotten royalist UK parties Labour and Conservative?
What about British republican revolution and national independence for us Britons?
DumpPalin 9 months ago
@DumpPalin Wow, I really seem to have struck a nerve with my centrist comment. I can't speak much for your political system over there, so let me tell you about over here. The two party system constantly gives us a choice between two extremes, neither of which I can agree with fully. On the one hand the Republicans see the whole world as a giant commodity to be exploited at the earliest opportunity for their corporate masters. The Democrats are the party of give away. read more next comment.
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski The Labour Party suck on the Queen's left tit and the Conservative Party suck on the Queen's right tit. I won't tell you what part of the Queen's anatomy in which the Liberal-Democrats stick their tongue.
So most UK electoral politics is royalist and right-wing though somehow the left tit suckers over here have managed to get extract more in terms of welfare benefits and a national health service from which the British poor have until now done better than the US poor.
CondiTV1 9 months ago
@Zyworski Buddy you don't need to explain the US political system over there. US political news gets covered on our TV, always has been. What's new is with digital broadcasting we cab now even can watch CBS Evening News with Katie Couric and ABC World News with Diane Sawyer.
CondiTV1 9 months ago
I had no idea that there was such a deep seated resentment towards the monarchy, or that it had such a large influence over the affairs of people. Speaking from a personal and spiritual point of view I would rather be caught fornicating with a dog than to be caught sitting on a throne when our Lord returns, but that is just me. From my other comment I was starting to say that I long for a 3rd political party that is not aligned to a linear spectrum and can think outside the box. more>
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski The British population are mostly anaesthetized against the pain of not being allowed the freedom and dignity to elect our own president by a 24-7 pro-royal propaganda machine, known as "the BBC". Only the clever and strong willed can resist this constant brainwashing. Most here therefore are happy with the Queen and are only occasionally dully aware that a few resent the Queen and kingdom without being able to articulate why. They like you ignore the issue.
CondiTV1 9 months ago
@Zyworski We Britons are used to having the BBC tell us our only choice is between parties loyal to the Queen.
It is a disappointment when we are told the same thing by an American or an Irish when you have the luxury of electing your own president.
If it is good enough for you, why shouldn't Britons elect a president?
Must you treat us like subjects?
The kingdom's guns are in our faces requiring loyalty or death. Can't Americans stick your guns in the Queen's face on our behalf?
DumpPalin 9 months ago
@DumpPalin You're preaching to the choir. There is a pseudo royalty here in the US. The children of the who is who of 1950 are the same people who hold cabinet level positions today. The Generals of our army came from generations of military and industrial might. The average person in America is oblivious to the fact that we have devolved into a class society. Because the Monarchy never had to suffer the humiliation of total defeat it is no surprise that they still retain inordinate power. more>
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski Condoleezza Rice held the Cabinet position of US Secretary of State, she was born in 1954 and I have produced a video showing she is like "Doctor Who", a Briitsh Science Fiction time-travelling hero (I will share this video with you, it is entitled - "Dr Rice - that's who! Condi as Doctor Who")
So as you can see American "pseudo-royalty" is expanding their support base into Britain. I also have a video showing Condi's head on British stamps and proposing "Rice for Queen 2012".
CondiTV1 9 months ago
@Zyworski We Britons would just like to be free of the kingdom's murdering officers that never spend a day in jail for killing innocent Britons.
Must we splatter the Queen's brains all over the pavement before you Americans will hear our demand for our own nation state republics?
I read your channel Zyworski and you seem like a nice guy so I will invite you to the For Freedom Forums - "FIGH. TK"
DumpPalin 9 months ago
@DumpPalin I am starting to hear multiple references to the power structure in Britain using unacceptable force against the population, I assure you that I can relate. I thank you for your invitation and would surely enjoy a group that offers political thinking on a tangent off the linear spectrum of tradition.
I also would like to thank you for taking the time to scrutinize my beliefs prior to just throwing an invitation at me, you have picked the right guy for intelligent debate
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski In case you are wondering CondiTV1 = DumpPalin = me, Peter Dow.
Please check your YouTube Inbox for an invite to the For Freedom Forums - FIGH. TK
DumpPalin 9 months ago
@Zyworski
If your a democrat in the US then the conservatives would be a move to the left for you. Labour would be a massive move to the left for you.
srspower 9 months ago
@srspower That is my impression also. Things have shifted so far to the right that I am uncomfortable with politics over here.
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski - if you were a British national you would probably see the massive gulf between the 2 parties and the people who vote for them.
tjmac7 9 months ago
@tjmac7 I went over to your channel and caught the comment on 'BBC now admits al Qaeda never existed', thanks for putting that video up, I will be sure to share it with all my friends on FB along with some choice comments.
Zyworski 9 months ago
@Zyworski - this is true in fact the Democrat Party is more right wing than our Conservative Party. The Republicans are completely off the scale as far as UK politcs are concerned.
JCtheHP 8 months ago
@JCtheHP I am from the Democratic Party of the 1970's and think that Jimmy Carter was the last good President we had. Bill Clinton was the best Republican we have had. George W Bush is the herald of the Anti-Christ. Ronald Reagan had Alzheimer's long before anyone is willing to admit. The jury is still out on Barack Obama, but so far nothing but mediocrity. I almost forgot George H.W. Bush is a stone cold pussy that had to amass a an army to do what a couple dozen battalions could have done.
Zyworski 8 months ago
@Zyworski - a very accurate analysis I'd say. As for the UK Clement Atlee was the only half decent one we ever had imo. It's been a complete shower since then.
JCtheHP 8 months ago
did she just use the word "impressive"? lol
pawndominance1 9 months ago
Palin is a birdbrain.
But, bigger birdbrains follow her around!
harpo103 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why do we sit down and watch these people lie to us everyweek wake up britain and string these fuckers up.Do not belive anythink the british goventment tell u they serve big companys and will slowy make every part of your life more expensive mark my words that is were it is going and i dont see no one doing anythink about it. Talk about the people being asleep.
musspuss 10 months ago
Impressive woman ? Good lord ! The only impressive thing about that woman is that she's NOBODY and yet, people talk about her.
AnAcidKing 11 months ago
who cares what Harriet harperson thinks anyway, im pretty sure the americans dont especially not now.
hillsongchick 11 months ago
Does Sarah Palin still support the US "ally" North Korea :)
TheDepotCat 1 year ago
@TheDepotCat Of course she does! Kim Jong Il is our friend and loves his country, he's an inspiration :P
ElMa1788 11 months ago
The whole 2 party system (both here in the uk, where a draw or failing to get majority means that libdems make the numbers and the mainstream back 2 parties cons and lab, and in the US) is completely flawed and needs to be changed.
AEF091 1 year ago
@AEF091 A thoughtful comment which deserves to be explored in greater detail but in the For Freedom Forums FIGH. TK rather than here.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
yes but who gives a shit who is president of the usa.
why is it a big concern in england.
it doesnt effect anything here.
i dont give two fucks whos president.
MrArnold1972 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What sets the American apart from all other people of the world is that the American will die on his feet fighting before he will live on his knees.
George Washington
scottishchap2008 1 year ago
atleast harriet knows about politics unlike the idiot palin. She really wanted to say that palin is a fucking idiot.
killahoe62 1 year ago 28
@killahoe62 I think Sarah Palin knows more about republican politics than Harriet Harman.
Oh I am all in favour of dumping Palin from a presidential election ticket but in favour of Condoleezza Rice, not in favour of someone like HH who doesn't even support having a republic and an elected president!
Rice-for-President or Palin-for-President make some sense.
Harman for President would be opposed by the royalist Harman who wants to keep the Queen succeeded by a man, King Charles. IDIOT!
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin
Your comments make very little sense...
Why would Harman support it? The Republican movement in the United Kingdom is extremely small and ignored. The only Republican Party in the UK with any seats is Sinn Féin which isn't aloud to sit in the House of Commons because they refuse to aware allegiance to the Queen - they also don't want to oust the Queen and replace her with a President, they only want a United Ireland. All the other parties are generally supporters of the Monarchy.
alexsau91 1 year ago
@alexsau91 Well one reason is that the Labour Party constitution defines Labour as a "democratic socialist party".
Democratic socialism implies the democratic election of a president as head of a republic, ending the kingdom.
The workers, trade unionists and Labour party members and voters would benefit most from a republic.
So if Harman wanted to avoid being called a "traitor to true Labour, a traitor to democratic socialism" and lose Labour support then she would be a republican.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin Labour weren't established with the ideology of being democratic socialists, they were established to represent Trade Unions, whose ideas often coincided with democratic socialism. The majority of British Trade Unionists support the monarchy, thus it stays. Besides, we've reached a fantastic balance in Britain where the Queen has the power to stop government if she so desires, whilst being quite easy to abolish, basically meaning she can only get involved if the public demand it.
secretsantaone 10 months ago
@killahoe62 trash america and the free market system is all the left can do, doesnt matter that america held back the soviet union and helped defeat the nazis and stands up for freedom
scottishchap2008 1 year ago
,,she can't stand Sarah because most English today are scared brainwashed liberal pansies who are suffering from the domino effect of social liberalism, destined to hand their very own nation over to Islam.
RudeComment 9 months ago
@killahoe62 'The democrats, a party that has long stood for equality'. right so the party that founded and sponsored the KKK stood for equality did it? she certainly doesn't know about history. Also how does Palin not know about politics. After all, politics is about conning people into believing they can trust you and I'd say the evidence suggests that Palin was pretty good at that.
JREwingofDallasTexas 8 months ago
@killahoe62 'The democrats, a party that has long stood for equality'. right so the party that founded and sponsored the KKK stood for equality did it? she certainly doesn't know about history. Also how does Palin not know about politics. After all, politics is about conning people into believing they can trust you and I'd say the evidence suggests that Palin was pretty good at that.
JREwingofDallasTexas 8 months ago
Tell you what Harriet, i will just leave my house open so any one can come and take what they WANT
Because its only theft by a different way, just like you latest barmy idea on sending money back to Africa
You arse clown
otto1066 1 year ago
What a ghastly creature this woman is. The funniest thing about her is that even now she cant understand why "New Labour" were so unpopular!!
Her latest crazy outburst is to inforn a meeting in Southwark that is "great that asylum seekers send money home to thier villages" !!!!!!
Rock on Harriet dear , with views like that it will be a long time before Labour return!!!
lossadjuster1 1 year ago
I don't think Harriet is a bitch, I've met her several times and she's a nice person and does a lot for her constituency.
ManUMan2008 1 year ago
The labour party hahaha
bigmangiff 1 year ago
Harriet Harman makes Sarah Palin look intelligent.
Rascasseman 1 year ago
@Rascasseman sarah palin is a proper thick shit, full on cliche of a dumb American. She didn't know that Africa is a continent and said North Korea are Americas allies.
jonnyd89 1 year ago
Harriet Harman - give us a break - get out of politics - you are clearly in it for what you can get out of it. This bitch was born with a silver spoon in her BIG mouth.
microsoft57 1 year ago
smelly fishy cunt useless bitch
LondonCitygent 1 year ago
This woman is a Vile labour bitch
TheTubestud 1 year ago
GOD harriet harman is the biggest bitch in british politics,
the most out of touch politition,, fucking horrible woman
aceridgey 1 year ago 4
@aceridgey Oh no many bigger bitches - the Queen, the biggest bitch of them all followed by Princess Anne. Home Secretary Theresa May is a HUGE bitch.
Since Labour got kicked out of government Harman is an opposition bitch only which makes her significantly smaller as a bitch.
Harman described Treasury Chief Secretary Danny Alexander as a "ginger rodent". So she was more IN touch about that evil welfare state cutter than other politicians.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin
You forgot the 2 biggest bitches.
Thatcher and Widdecombe.
I know it's been a while since they were around.
But no one should fail to mention them next to the word "Bitch"
shotta0121 1 year ago
@aceridgey Yeah she makes my skin crawl...and thats before she gets into her stride...
coveneyr 1 year ago
@aceridgey But thousands have been voting for her for decades, anyone ever voted for you? Thought not.
Dave70100 6 months ago
@Dave70100 ahaha i am not a politician you child
aceridgey 6 months ago
@aceridgey And why is that? Because you don't have the choice thickie. If you think you are better go and stand against her and see how many votes you get. Will you? Of course not.
Dave70100 6 months ago
Thank god, allah, buddah or whoever you pray to that she didn't win
ChristewieTV 1 year ago 28
@ChristewieTV Who? Which "she"? Sarah Palin or Harriet Harman? Palin didn't win the US Vice President and Harman didn't win the Deputy Prime Minister job either.
Why not thank the voters? After all, the people who did get elected were not THAT good, were they? Not like they were Condolezza Rice or anybody REALLY good, right?
DumpPalin 1 year ago
Men and Women in politics are as bad as each other, scumwhores the lot of them.
WE R 1
Tomken12345 1 year ago
Shut up Harriet, you vile, vile woman!
StevenDeedle 1 year ago
@StevenDeedle If she shuts up how will we learn how vile she is?
Harman is no more vile than most MPs - admittedly that is vile indeed!
DumpPalin 1 year ago
.....Admirer of Hilary's???
I can imagine the pair of you entwined in a welter of limbs, a mingling of bodily fluids and a flurry of flailing tongues Harriet.
Why wouldn't you admire her?
'(Scuse me for a moment...)
steveh777ify 1 year ago
@steveh777ify Palin, too, is imagined as an admirer of Hillary in the porno movie "Who's Nailin' Paylin". I liked the threesome with Condi.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
Errrr....
nyc999 1 year ago
Wow harman really hates men.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
@bonfirejovi Rubbish - hates most men, yes OK but she hates most women too. The men Harman loves are (1) Prince Charles as she wants only him to be the next head of state ruling Britain the place where she and I stay. (2) the other Princes in line to the throne.
So Harman hates all other men here and thinks we deserve to be ruled by the few princes she loves.
She also hates all women except the Queen and Princess Anne for the same reason.
Harman is an equal opportunity hater.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@bonfirejovi No kidding.
kev95 1 year ago
Harman and her revenge bill isn't much better.
bonfirejovi 1 year ago
ian hislop is a twat
SenorKristobbalVLog 1 year ago
@SenorKristobbalVLog I can't argue with that. What makes Hislop a twat is that he is a royalist despite the fact that freedom of the press has been lost under the kingdom. He edits the magazine Private Eye which has been dragged through the courts and sued for libel and so on. Made a point about that on "Have I got news for you" with the redacted headlines. But his precious Queen failed to defend freedom of the press - a rotten oppressive state - his papers suffers but still he grovels! TWAT!
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin What the hell are you talking about? The Queen has no legislative powers at all. He is not a royalist in the sense that he wants the Royal Family to be in power, being a royalist today means he is in favour of keeping the Royal Family as opposed to getting rid of them. He and Private Eye have been dragged through the courts and will continue to be I expect, but the amount of press freedoms has nothing to do with that, more issues of libel.
biggingeryeti 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti I am talking about the UK's constitution from hell.
The monarch, on the advice of the privy council, gives royal assent to acts of parliament. Their power is to stop an elected president vetoing undemocratic laws (eg. libel) which get the royal rubber-stamp instead of the republican shredder.
The royal family kept means unchallenged power to the state, the courts, and no power for the people to publish freely.
A war to get rid of the royals allows for people power.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin The Monarch's role in British politics is ceremonial. The queen is advised and she can advice, but she can't veto any acts suggested by Parliament. What happens is Parliament develop an act which moves to the House Of Lords, where it is debated, accepted or declined. The Papers are free to publish. Our tabloids are infamous for the crap they publish. Of course a person can take legal action but the Queen has no role in any of this.
biggingeryeti 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti Politics here is anti-British because the kingdom stops the British people electing presidents as heads of state and then the state denies the rights of the people.
Yes there is ceremony instead of an elected president doing the needed job of head of state. So long as they are allowed to do the royalist ceremony we can't have a republic. So the ceremony and the fact of the kingdom and a do nothing head of state matters.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti The fact the acts of parliament are not vetoed is a big part of the problem. The fact that the selection of Prime Minister was not vetoed was a big problem. I am not saying the monarch could do the vetoing. I am saying we needed a president to do the vetoing.
Democracy demands that many undemocratic acts and dictatorial Prime Ministers should have been vetoed to defend citizens rights such as free speech, freedom of publication and so on.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti The papers are not free to publish, neither is anyone else. Someone takes legal action and a judge imposes a gagging order, an injunction and imprison editors for up to LIFE IMPRISONMENT for contempt of court if they defy the court ban.
The Queen just by being there - and if would be the same WHOEVER was monarch - stops an elected president sending in the army to arrest the judges and the police and prison staff enforcing the courts gagging orders.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin They are enacted by elected parties and the House of Lords (which should be entirely elected although some are hereditary). I still do not know why we would need a war to remove the Royal Family. They do not do anything. They have no power. If they have no power they can't dictate about freedoms. And our newspapers are full of stories embarrassing the Royal family. You can't just put a gagging order on anything and they are decided by judges.
biggingeryeti 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti So if a party gets elected which decides to exterminate everyone with ginger hair that is OK according to you? Parliament is allowed to pass a law and big ginger yetis like yourself can be snuffed out legally and constitutionally?
You may not feel under threat from the kingdom's officials because they don't actually have it in for you gingers- just for strong critics of their rule which they would like to eliminate, by imprisonment or by inappropriate psychiatric treatments.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti The Queen is not doing anything to defend the liberties of those under threat from the state, but we need a president to do a lot, to take action, to start arresting judges who are denying freedoms.
We can't have a republic and elect a president so long as there is a royal family there committing the crime against the people of getting in the way of the establishment of our republic.
A country can be a kingdom with a monarch or it can be a republic with a president.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti The state is dictating against freedoms but the police, the judges and the parliamentarians love it, because they get to rule.
We need an elected head of state to take action against those undemocratic judges and police who are denying freedom according to how the politicians want things, but democracy means "government by all the people" not "government by the politicians".
Just because one newspaper prints the tittle-tattle it wants doesn't make it a free country.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti Exactly, it is a dictatorship by judges who gag whomsoever they want. The citizens have no rights in practice and can be imprisoned for life if we don't obey the orders of the Queen's judges.
The judges are the problem. They don't defend constitutional rights, they defend the reputation of rotten royalist officials running important institutions (badly, incompetently and to the danger of human life).
Yes the Queen's judges decide and it leads to death and disaster.
DumpPalin 1 year ago
And they base decisions around the law which is developed by Parliamant. Not the monarchy.
biggingeryeti 1 year ago
@biggingeryeti The judges claim to do things according to the law but it matters little whether they do or not - you still go to jail if they say.
However, even supposing parliamentary law is upheld 100% - that is not democratic because parliament doesn't mind citizens being jailed for life for contempt of court for breaching a gagging order when someone was trying to speak out against an official which the parliamentarians had confidence in.
Parliamentary dictatorship is not freedom!
DumpPalin 1 year ago
@DumpPalin Contempt of court laws also exist in the U.S., where citizens can be kept jailed at the discretion of a judge. I agree that is wrong. In the case of the U.K., the home secretary can step in and change judgments (this is relatively rare). Parliamentary dictatorship would not be freedom, but we do not have a Parliamentary dictatorship any more than you have a Presidential dictatorship.
biggingeryeti 1 year ago