I Love this Video and also I checked out your Channel. Very interesting! If you need any help getting this Video and your Channel exposed to were it is top in all the search I found this site called tubeviews.(net) that has took my breath away. I'm working on my 4th Channel now, this one I just made. My Videos are getting so many hits now. Check it out and keep in touch.
Look at yourself....hanging around a minor candidate thread trying to big-note yourself with your one-note off-tune claim that Dr Paul has done something wrong, in order to steal a vote or two off him for your own minor candidate, when all the while, you'll need about a million times as many votes than your candidate currently has to make any difference. How many emails have you sent to Pelosi? How many emails have you sent to the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee? None, I'll bet. Loser.
Hi Davis. You've got my vote. Who cares anyway since the media has already ordained McCain. McCain? Jayzus. Anyway, I think and hope and pray that democrats will become a supermajority in congress, so they can get something done and no excuses.
I'm beginning to really like you Davis! You left out "press 1 for english. Did you lease Osama's cave for that video? Oops, can't be .. that doesn't look like a dialysis chair.
Sigh. You and your one-note song bore me. I'm guessing someone else taught it to you, because anybody rational presented with the facts, as you have been, would have learned by now that they are being just an idiot by repeatedly calling for the wrong thing, when clearly presented with where the real bottleneck is.
You know, if you spent half the time you spent spamming youtube with your drivel, trying to convince Nancy Pelosi (D) and John Conyers (D) to push Kucinich's impeachment resolution, rather than hold it up in Committee, you might actually get somewhere towards impeachment. But, no, you seem intent on just being a useless bore.
I guess I'll take this opportunity to AGAIN point out (to any others that see this) that you are conveniently ignoring the fact that you are proposing different impeachment procedures for Cheney than what Clinton had, and you AGAIN conveniently ignore the fact that I have shown you the impeachment roadblock is the House Judiciary Committee, chaired and controlled by DEMOCRATS 23:17.
WTF? Did you even read the above comments? Ron Paul is FOR impeachment, but it needs to be done *properly*, as it was with Clinton, not just rammed through without investigation. Right now, the hold up is the House Judiciary Committtee, which is controlled by DEMOCRATS. When it comes out of that committee (if it ever does...and that's the problem: the Dems aren't progressing it), then Ron Paul would support the House impeachment vote. It would then go to the Senate for a trial and further vote.
Anything anyone has got to say on Clinton's impeachment is not going to change the FACTS that:
(1) You are promoting different procedures for a Cheney impeachment than happened for Clinton, and
(2) You are trying to get some sort of mileage from attacking Dr Paul, when it is the DEMOCRATS controlling the House Judiciary Committee that are currently blocking Kucinich's impeachment motion from moving forward, and
You're an idiot, you really are. A useless waste of space. An oxygen thief.
Here you are, attacking the greatest defender of freedom this country has seen in 200 years, rather than focusing your efforts on where it counts. And you are being a hypocrite, to do so.
I consider hypocrites lower than pedophiles, because at least pedophiles can be honest with themselves. You have the intellectual integrity of a gnat. Get a life, loser.
Bush and Cheney are more hated by Dr Paul supporters than you hate them, I'll bet
If you think Dr Paul has committed some heinous contradiction, put up or shut up: provide the link(s) to the direct quote. I reckon you're just full of shit, and unable to produce anything. Just like you've been proven wrong when I showed it was the DEMOCRATS currently roadblocking Kucinich's impeachment resolution, and that you are demanding DIFFERENT procedures for Cheney's impeachment than Clinton's impeachment
They say the definition of insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly, and hoping for a different result. I guess you just proved it.
No matter which way you slice it, I have proven it is the House Judicial Committee CHAIRED AND CONTROLLED by DEMOCRATS that is the hold-up on the impeachment.
And you fail to acknowledge that. And you also fail to acknowledge that you are promoting a course of action DIFFERENT to that faced by Clinton.
"And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god who will grant them joy and peace and pride. This god, this one word: 'I.'"
No impeachment leads to more of the same. Did you expect otherwise? I didn't.
Democrats are just as bad as Republicans. Like I said earlier: it's THEM vs *US*(We the People), top-down oligarchical collectivists - on BOTH sides of the aisle - are waging WAR against bottom-up grassroots individualism. That is, they are attacking We The People. Fight *COLLECTIVISM*, as _IT_ is the enemy. Corporatism/Fascism are forms of collectivism just as much as socialism/communism. Defend *individualism*.
"crypto-Christian", what bullshit. I'm an anti-theist, and individualism is about the *individual*, not about surrendering the power of the individual to anyone, so to suggest it's about surrendering yourself to some extraneous entity is just stupid.
Individualism is blind to all flavors, recognizing only the basic unit of "individual". You have no clue.
And I've never read a word of Rand, so that's another thing you've clearly got no idea on
That's the second time you've been prattling on about "King", and that's the second time I've got no clue what you're on about. Speak in English, not in tongues.
You've been plastering your "jive assing" bullshit all over youtube, but have now been proven to be 100% wrong about Ron Paul and the impeachment of Cheney. Where's your "Nancy Pelosi (Rep-D) and John Conyers (Rep-D) and the House Judicial Committee are "jive-assing" about the impeachment of Cheney." Where's your apology to Dr Paul?
You spread lies about Dr Paul, the greatest defender of freedom in 200 years, you fail to acknowledge that you are wrong when presented with facts that it is the Dems roadblocking the impeachment, you spout your stupid, out-of-context word-of-the-week "jive-assing" around like it's going to earn your some sort of respectability, and you do nothing but hurl ad-hominem invective. What an intellectual giant you are! I feel dumber, for having listened to your drivel, whilst setting you straight.
What the hell are you talking about? Dr Paul's platform is about peace, prosperity, and happiness, brought about by the promotion of individual freedom and responsibility. If you think that actually allowing individuals the right to do what they want with their lives, free from State interference, - as Dr Paul wants to do - is bad for the Republic, then you are a fool that doesn't deserve such a great man to be fighting for your freedoms every day.
"The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, a Christian Socialist, and the cousin of Socialist Utopian novelist Edward Bellamy...."
Now that's reeeeally irrelevant. Nobody cares who wrote it or what his politcal, religious, and economic views were. Eisenhower got the "...under God..." portion included. Again, no one cares.
When Jane Harman's legislation becomes law, if I bitch, "I be diggin ditch"
Let us not forget HR1955 (thought crime)
"CIA Director Michael V. Hayden today presented the Agency Seal Medal to Rep. Jane Harman in appreciation of her "thoughtful and thorough" oversight of CIA as ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The medal is awarded to people outside the Agency who have made significant contributions to CIA's mission."
I truly and utterly despise the prostitute known as Nancy Pelosi. She's just one more American whore with way too much power.
With that in mind, I wish Shirley Golub, Nancy's primary contender in the next election, my best wishes. I hope she totally kicks some Pelosi ass! Send her a contribution...please!
Fascist America------- Blueprint to Dictatorship 1. Invoke internal/external enemy create the problem offer a soulation. 2. Create a Gulag Guantanamo Bay 3. Develop a Thug Blackwater 4. Set up Surveillance "look around your on film" 5. Harass citizens groups 6. Engage in detention and release 7. Target Key Individuals Billybob /scottishcream 8. Control the press YOUTUBE 9. Dissent equal treason Question 9-11 10. Martial Law directive 51 BUSH EX ORDER STEPS TO DICTATORSHIP
I'm tempted to register as a Green Party candidate, dems have ceased to identify w/ my point of view, or rather have lost fire in them, I think it will depend on this, wether or not they allow democracy to take place in the dem party nomination process. This whole delegate thing does not rep democracy, it's what gave us Gore winning pop vot while Bush took office, huh? That moment made me see that we do not live in a democracy at all, it has to change, if we are to call rselves a dmcrtc nation
I just changed my voter registration to "Non-affiliated" (Independent) status to signal that I will be no one's whore. After all, your party affiliation makes absolutely no difference when voting in the General Elections (this Nov). The only time party affiliation matters is during the PRIMARIES -- and we've seen how all that worked out (and is still working out -- superdelegates, Ron Paul marginalization, and all!). The system is rigged -- almost totally, and very unfortunately.
Oh, and by the way, and yet again, we're NOT a democracy -- even though that's the continual party line. We are (or once were) a thriving, energetic, and FREE Republic.
WRONG! The will of all Democrats is not represented by the way the Primaries are conducted in the first place! For example, a small minority of the people caucusing in small Iowa makes a HUGE freaking impact on the rest of the race. Remember, in a caucus, you get only people who can make it at the right time. By it's nature, a caucus suppresses turnout. If you can't show up at 7 p.m., you don't participate; there's no absentee ballot and no early voting. The whole primary season is a crock.
No dude. This is not a democracy It's what's known as a constitutional REPUBLIC. Remember the Pledge of Allegiance? "...and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands..."
There is a very significant difference between a democracy and a republic. Problem is, we aren't a functioning republic anymore either. The Union might more appropriately be referred to as a dictatorship (or perhaps a fascist plutocracy) -- which is characterized by all the tyranny and despotism that currently surrounds us.
Dude that is the way its been since the begining... Only a revealution will change that.. Elites never trust the people and they want to keep us from Guns and keep us all tided to the yoke chancing the Carrot due to inflasion on a longer and longer stick
Paul was right about procedure in Clinton's impeachment--now he's selling himself and his supporters out for the Republican fucking party and being complicit with the criminal Bush administration.
Rove and the boys probably gave huge sums on those big fund-raising days.
Paul is defusing the antiwar vote (whether he knows it or not).
"While some may talk about whether or not an offense is 'impeachable,' that is only so much political rhetoric. The Constitution only specifies that Congress can impeach a president for 'high crimes' and 'misdemeanors,' but the definitions of those words are left to Congress to determine-anything a sufficient number of Members of Congress find offensive can be cause for impeachment...."
I don't think "...drifted so far to the center, that you have disenfranchised your left wing base" is either accurate, or a particularly wise attempt at a slur. To view the US political scene as a left/right dichotomy is false. It's not a case of left v right, progressive v conservative, or Democrat V Republican. It's a case of Us v THEM, or, more accurately, *THEM* v *US*. "THEM" being top-down oligarchical collectivists, "Us" being bottom-up grassroots individualism, seen as "We The People".
They want us to keep voting....and voting....and voting....As our outlet to give us the feeling like we're contributing something. It's a distraction from the only action that will help us. Systematically dismantling the electoral system and removing all politicians from power. Gathering the greatest intellectuals we can muster to fasten together a temporary replacement system that will set forth necessary policies to make government completely transparent and restore power to the people.
Come on Davis. You must realise who we all are dealing with here. They are all politicians. You have your beliefs and values. They believe in value. Meaning the value of money, and money brings power. They don't serve us any longer because they don't have to. As long as they are comfortable, they all, Republicans and Democrats, could give a rats ass about the rest of us. I love to sound pessimistic, but WTF is going on? We "vote" for change, but nothing ever does.
Ah, come on, not following YOUR plan will spell the end of the Democratic party (as we know it)? First of all, that's arrogant and I'm disappointed, second of all, the Democratic party as we know it sucks. And McCain can be beaten. All you need is someone to actually make the case, which isn't happening. I'll be looking to you for that.
"The failure to hold impeachment hearings on what seems extremely solid grounds...amounts to complicity by Congress in this abrogation of the Constitution. Moreover we're seen as an outlaw state by the international community for ignoring international law on torture and on aggression. The attack on Iraq without authorization by the U.N. Security Council... means that we have committed and are in the process of committing a crime against the peace in the Nuremburg sense..."
two: you must have a cheap mottarolla phone cuz it's makin your camera buzz just like mine makes my clock radio buzz when it rings. i suppose we're both broke.
When are people goin to realize that the superdelegates are a blatent, in your face proof that your vote DOES NOT COUNT ! If your voting for the dems. Another thing the people that we call "republicans" are now more liberal than the most left leaning dem. Thats why Ron Paul wasn't taken seriously, he's a real conservative. Please check out (Hillary the Movie). I've found it on youtube and googlevideo. It is riviting.
Brandt761 - Please read my other comments on this thread, re: Ron Paul and impeachment WHICH HE FAVORS, *IF DONE CONSTITUTIONALLY*.
And we don't want to "bring down the government". But we certainly do want to CONSTRAIN the government to act Constitutionally - something that hasn't happened in a long while, from EITHER side.
Mopsius - Please see my other comment on this thread on that subject. Basically, Ron Paul is supportive of impeachment measures, but they must be done CONSTITUTIONALLY, as was done with Clinton. The intent - and successful actions - of the OTHER Republicans was to force DK to head down an UNCONSTITUTIONAL path, so Ron Paul voted against it. He is SUPPORTIVE of impeachment measures, provided they are done properly, as happened with Clinton.
There's a proper process to take to lead to impeachment, and Ron Paul SUPPORTS such proper action. Kucinich's impeachment bill first needed to go through an investigative Committee, and for them to report back to congress PRIOR to taking the impeachment vote. That's the exact same procedure as happened with Bill Clinton
The OTHER Republicans, by forcing an early vote - prior to that investigative/reporting stage - successfully derailed the investigative stage.
We're talking about Bush/Cheney impeachment process, as promoted by Kucinich. Stick to your own subject.
And, yes, if you think that what I have claimed Dr Paul's position to be is incorrect, you DO have to "go get his own fucking quotation". Because I have watched and read pretty much every word he has uttered in public in the last twelve months, and I know that he is supportive of Dennis's proposal PROVIDED IT IS DONE CONSTITUTIONALLY, as before.
Slight problem--Paul in relation to Clinton's impeachment said, rightly, that consitutionally nothing was necessary but a majority vote of the House to impeach.
Not only the at, Paul said, also validly, that any charge the House said was a valid charge was a valid charge.
Clinton's impeachment procedure required an investigative committee step as part of the two-step process( (1 - An accusation or indictment, AND 2 - Trial). You seem to favor Bush's impeachment procedure to NOT do that SAME investigative step.
Why are you proposing special treatment for Bush?
And enough with this "jive-assing" crap. Does anyone actually use that phrase, other than yourself? I'm not even sure what the hell you mean, other than it being derogatory.
You are proposing that the charge be levied without Congressional investigation to see if it is justified, and you are saying that the trial should be had without presentation of evidence.
And you are suggesting that be done, CONTRARY to the fact that Clinton at least had a full investigation and trial?
Should we institute trial-without-evidence across the board?
If you think that all the House of Reps has to do is vote and send it to Senate, then you're an ignoramus, you really are. Is that all they did for Clinton's impeachment? *NO*! Do some research. Ron Paul supports impeachment, and has done everything he needs to do to support Kucinich's resolution. Your problem is not with Dr Paul, but with the House Committee on the Judiciary. And guess what? It's Chaired and majority controlled by *23 DEMOCRATS over 17 Repubs*, as it has been SINCE NOV 06. Duh!
Congressional district conventions are rigged and controlled by the unions and the party bosses.
In electing delegates, there is what is called a "unity slate" which is the list of people who have been pre-selected to go to the national convention.
The Superdelegate issue is just ONE PROBLEM in the Democratic party. Local Democratic party organization - in the counties - are run by small cliques or, in the larger counties, by the various local union bosses. If you are not a member of a union or "the" inside clique, the average party member has virtually no say in their local party (let alone the state or national parties).
In my state, we have Congressional District Conventions which "elect" 5 delegates to the national convention.
There was one small glimmer of democracy at my county level party in 2006. I was elected precinct delegate (very easy since few people bother to run). Being precinct delegate entitles one to the distinct privilege of attending the "county convention" of the party.
The county convention is able to pass resolutions and send them to the state party convention for consideration. In a room of about 60 to 70 delegates, we got a resolution passed (with only one dissenting vote).
Intersting and compelling. I'm not ashamed of voting for McCain this time around, however I notice that all the people that I listen to in regards to politics on youtube are either Obama or Hilary supporters.
I think I know what it is...what it is that none of us democrats or republicans like what we have to choose from, once again. Word?
Yes Davis the democrats have alienated the left wing of their own party.
I was a democrat, my parents are democrats, my grandparents were democrats. I come from a long line of democrats going back at least a century and I am voting for:
so first you criticize fringe candidates (by the way, ron paul, mike huckabee, and mccain were all once considered fringies) for making an effort to succeed, then you go ahead and try to make a fringe effort to succeed based on nothing but yourself? you're losing me, davis...
The case of Senator Dole is pertinent as analogue. He was no coward, but stupid in the way he got himself shot. The Sergeant who risked his own life to save Dole's was the real hero, and he never got credit or office or anything like that for saving the little elite idiot's ass.
McCain is a fraud even as a "war hero". An admiral's son, he was known as an incompetent by his classmates in Flight School, who called him "Ace" for the number of planes he crashed in training.
Some say he is running now because the last eyewitnesses who were prisoners with him in Hanoi are dead.
"The failure to hold impeachment hearings on what seems extremely solid grounds...amounts to complicity by Congress in this abrogation of the Constitution. Moreover we're seen as an outlaw state by the international community for ignoring international law on torture and on aggression. The attack on Iraq without authorization by the U.N. Security Council... means that we have committed and are in the process of committing a crime against the peace in the Nuremburg sense..."
I hope they take you up on that as what is democracy if the people in power decide all seems like there will be a lot of back handers and it will get much more personal day by day.
the more i think of it, the only "the people" can take back the country is through actual physical force. there will be a slim chance of the people winning. our only hope is that was decide to take back our country while the military is away and not so healthy.
Davis - Don't listen to these trollers and flamers. And don't be beholden to your "party elders". I'm sorry, but this is a vein attempt you must know that Pelosi along with the rest of the establishment left would never go for such a radical action. This is a time for the rank and file to form up, not use their votes to make some kind of statement.
It's a shame we can't get a chance to think without all this noise. I think you have the right idea, but I think your execution lacks purpose.
This has been flagged as spam show
I Love this Video and also I checked out your Channel. Very interesting! If you need any help getting this Video and your Channel exposed to were it is top in all the search I found this site called tubeviews.(net) that has took my breath away. I'm working on my 4th Channel now, this one I just made. My Videos are getting so many hits now. Check it out and keep in touch.
Have A Good one!
Bahuladh 2 years ago
You muffocking crypto-Born Again Paulistas make the fucking Bolsheviki look plausible.
mopsius 3 years ago
Paul is looking more and more like a running dog of the Republican Party,m defusing the anti-war vote.
And you fucking Saint Paul Randist solipsists just confirm the suspicion.
Fuck you and your self-ownership.
mopsius 3 years ago
Look at yourself....hanging around a minor candidate thread trying to big-note yourself with your one-note off-tune claim that Dr Paul has done something wrong, in order to steal a vote or two off him for your own minor candidate, when all the while, you'll need about a million times as many votes than your candidate currently has to make any difference. How many emails have you sent to Pelosi? How many emails have you sent to the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee? None, I'll bet. Loser.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Omission, hombre, not commission.
mopsius 3 years ago
Keep us posted on her response if any.
I switched to the Green Party when Pelosi took impeachment off the table.
ferickson 3 years ago
Hi Davis. You've got my vote. Who cares anyway since the media has already ordained McCain. McCain? Jayzus. Anyway, I think and hope and pray that democrats will become a supermajority in congress, so they can get something done and no excuses.
Thanks for staying in.
iamwhatnormalis 3 years ago
I'm beginning to really like you Davis! You left out "press 1 for english. Did you lease Osama's cave for that video? Oops, can't be .. that doesn't look like a dialysis chair.
Marry me! ;-)
Oneblend 3 years ago
Important one tonight:
antiwar(dot)com/blog/2008/04/09/white-house-choreographed-to rture-sessions/
mopsius 3 years ago
Stop jiveassing Mr. Paul--join Kucinich and Wexler to impeach NOW.
mopsius 3 years ago
Sigh. You and your one-note song bore me. I'm guessing someone else taught it to you, because anybody rational presented with the facts, as you have been, would have learned by now that they are being just an idiot by repeatedly calling for the wrong thing, when clearly presented with where the real bottleneck is.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Stop jiveassing about procedure, Mr. Paul.
Call for immediate impeachment now!
mopsius 3 years ago
You know, if you spent half the time you spent spamming youtube with your drivel, trying to convince Nancy Pelosi (D) and John Conyers (D) to push Kucinich's impeachment resolution, rather than hold it up in Committee, you might actually get somewhere towards impeachment. But, no, you seem intent on just being a useless bore.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
You know lastnymleeft, at one point I thought you were worth talking with.
You are obviously one of the Paul Chosen.
Take your absurd "self-owned" BS and go fuck yourself.
mopsius 3 years ago
Right - I point out all the places that you are wrong, and then you take your bat and ball and go home. Not unexpected, to be honest.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Your supposed "rebuttals" are strictly between you and your ass.
Don't hurt yourself.
mopsius 3 years ago
I guess I'll take this opportunity to AGAIN point out (to any others that see this) that you are conveniently ignoring the fact that you are proposing different impeachment procedures for Cheney than what Clinton had, and you AGAIN conveniently ignore the fact that I have shown you the impeachment roadblock is the House Judiciary Committee, chaired and controlled by DEMOCRATS 23:17.
Good luck with your delusions, Loser!
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Oh, so Paul is against impeachment? Sounds like it, he sure isn't making it happen.
queny2 3 years ago
WTF? Did you even read the above comments? Ron Paul is FOR impeachment, but it needs to be done *properly*, as it was with Clinton, not just rammed through without investigation. Right now, the hold up is the House Judiciary Committtee, which is controlled by DEMOCRATS. When it comes out of that committee (if it ever does...and that's the problem: the Dems aren't progressing it), then Ron Paul would support the House impeachment vote. It would then go to the Senate for a trial and further vote.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
You still have not read or understood Paul on Clinton's impeachment, have you?
He's jiveassing now.
mopsius 3 years ago
Anything anyone has got to say on Clinton's impeachment is not going to change the FACTS that:
(1) You are promoting different procedures for a Cheney impeachment than happened for Clinton, and
(2) You are trying to get some sort of mileage from attacking Dr Paul, when it is the DEMOCRATS controlling the House Judiciary Committee that are currently blocking Kucinich's impeachment motion from moving forward, and
(3) Dr Paul SUPPORTS impeachment of Cheney/Bush
Your one-note song is out of tune
lastnymleft 3 years ago
You have your head up your ass.
Starr has no CONSTITUTOINAL role, period--as Paul himself said at the time.
Now Paul is singing a different tune.
mopsius 3 years ago
You're an idiot, you really are. A useless waste of space. An oxygen thief.
Here you are, attacking the greatest defender of freedom this country has seen in 200 years, rather than focusing your efforts on where it counts. And you are being a hypocrite, to do so.
I consider hypocrites lower than pedophiles, because at least pedophiles can be honest with themselves. You have the intellectual integrity of a gnat. Get a life, loser.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Whale, iffen he's been defending freedom, as you say he ain't done a very good job of it.
And he's doing a worse one now.
mopsius 3 years ago
You are the hypocrite: Bush and Cheney make Clinton and Nixon look like Boy Scouts.
And Paul was right about the Consitution requring no investigation in regard to impeaching Clinton.
So go fuck your altar boys, padre.
mopsius 3 years ago
Bush and Cheney are more hated by Dr Paul supporters than you hate them, I'll bet
If you think Dr Paul has committed some heinous contradiction, put up or shut up: provide the link(s) to the direct quote. I reckon you're just full of shit, and unable to produce anything. Just like you've been proven wrong when I showed it was the DEMOCRATS currently roadblocking Kucinich's impeachment resolution, and that you are demanding DIFFERENT procedures for Cheney's impeachment than Clinton's impeachment
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Put up or shut up, Mr. Paul.
Impeach now!
mopsius 3 years ago
They say the definition of insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly, and hoping for a different result. I guess you just proved it.
No matter which way you slice it, I have proven it is the House Judicial Committee CHAIRED AND CONTROLLED by DEMOCRATS that is the hold-up on the impeachment.
And you fail to acknowledge that. And you also fail to acknowledge that you are promoting a course of action DIFFERENT to that faced by Clinton.
You're just an intellectually-dishonest schmuck.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
"And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god who will grant them joy and peace and pride. This god, this one word: 'I.'"
Ayn Rand
Come again--WHO?
mopsius 3 years ago
"...seedier than Eliot Spitzer's hooker transactions..."
I guess you win - I watched a video where someone said that on purpose as a joke. Well, somebody has to win in this situation, right?
seaoconn 3 years ago
So impeachment leads nowhere?
Where does no impeachment lead?
mopsius 3 years ago
No impeachment leads to more of the same. Did you expect otherwise? I didn't.
Democrats are just as bad as Republicans. Like I said earlier: it's THEM vs *US*(We the People), top-down oligarchical collectivists - on BOTH sides of the aisle - are waging WAR against bottom-up grassroots individualism. That is, they are attacking We The People. Fight *COLLECTIVISM*, as _IT_ is the enemy. Corporatism/Fascism are forms of collectivism just as much as socialism/communism. Defend *individualism*.
lastnymleft 3 years ago 2
Theo-Fascists and Neo-Fascists.
But you and the Randists are naive in positing "individuals", which is crypto-Chrsitian actually.
And Paul is clearly a fraud.
mopsius 3 years ago
Don't try intellectualism, it doesn't become you.
"crypto-Christian", what bullshit. I'm an anti-theist, and individualism is about the *individual*, not about surrendering the power of the individual to anyone, so to suggest it's about surrendering yourself to some extraneous entity is just stupid.
Individualism is blind to all flavors, recognizing only the basic unit of "individual". You have no clue.
And I've never read a word of Rand, so that's another thing you've clearly got no idea on
lastnymleft 3 years ago
You wouldn't recognize "intellectual" if it bit you on the ass.
mopsius 3 years ago
Gee, maybe you're right, because I sure couldn't see it in your replies.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Anyway it is better to have a Congress of clowns at one another's throats than all bowing to the new and unconstitutional King.
mopsius 3 years ago
That's the second time you've been prattling on about "King", and that's the second time I've got no clue what you're on about. Speak in English, not in tongues.
You've been plastering your "jive assing" bullshit all over youtube, but have now been proven to be 100% wrong about Ron Paul and the impeachment of Cheney. Where's your "Nancy Pelosi (Rep-D) and John Conyers (Rep-D) and the House Judicial Committee are "jive-assing" about the impeachment of Cheney." Where's your apology to Dr Paul?
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Hehe--did you invent your own language?
Did you give birth to yourself?
Fucking mental hermaphrodite--self-owned and self-fucked, like jiveass Paul and the Calvinist Social Darwinist crowd.
mopsius 3 years ago
You spread lies about Dr Paul, the greatest defender of freedom in 200 years, you fail to acknowledge that you are wrong when presented with facts that it is the Dems roadblocking the impeachment, you spout your stupid, out-of-context word-of-the-week "jive-assing" around like it's going to earn your some sort of respectability, and you do nothing but hurl ad-hominem invective. What an intellectual giant you are! I feel dumber, for having listened to your drivel, whilst setting you straight.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Oh, and you repeatedly push for double-standard different procedures for Cheney than was meted out to Clinton.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
I follow what Paul said at the time of Clinton's impeachment. He was right--no procedure necessary. N
It is Paul who now has the double standard.
And you are jiveassing just as he is.
You have your head up your ass.
mopsius 3 years ago
Gee, lastnymleft--you'd make a peachy little Leibnitzian monad.
mopsius 3 years ago
It took you 13 minutes to think of that? Classic!
lastnymleft 3 years ago
The dead end I see is no impeachment and new King, whoever that might be.
mopsius 3 years ago
Bush has now clearly committed specific felonies, inaddition to all the consitutional offenses, as has Cheney.
The only Constitutional solution is immediate impeachment.
The House and Seante define their own procedure and it is not "constitutional" at all.
You should be careful jiveassing with you r hea
mopsius 3 years ago
Crazy.
Extreme.
Drastic.
In this context, that's high praise.
If you can get ONE superdelegate you can likely get 8 or 10. They're prone to form groups, you know. Not unlike cattle.
jamesmorgandavies 3 years ago
I am writting KUCINICH in for President and thats my final answer !!!!
nohealthcare62 3 years ago
Paul is jive-assing on impeachment.
mopsius 3 years ago
BECOME A DELEGATE OR RON PAUL WILL NOT BE PRESIDENT!!!!!!!
You can sign up to be a delegate on
R O N P A U L 2 0 0 8 . C O M
****look for the BECOME A RON PAUL DELEGATE sign up box on the top right of the homepage where Ron Paul's face is****
YOU can help change the course of this nation for the better! YOU can be a hero!
He still has a VERY good chance of getting the nomination in a brokered convention! This is how Lincoln won!
PLEASE! We need you!
G5F4D3S2A1 3 years ago
Paul's real aim, it would appear, is not to save the Republic but to save the Republican Party.
The two aims are mutually contradictory at the moment.
mopsius 3 years ago
Rubbish. How can ridding the world of neo-con power be bad for the Republic?
lastnymleft 3 years ago
By replacing it with something quite as bad, but in a different direction.
Which is, it is beginning to look like, Paul, or the people around him, aim to do.
mopsius 3 years ago
What the hell are you talking about? Dr Paul's platform is about peace, prosperity, and happiness, brought about by the promotion of individual freedom and responsibility. If you think that actually allowing individuals the right to do what they want with their lives, free from State interference, - as Dr Paul wants to do - is bad for the Republic, then you are a fool that doesn't deserve such a great man to be fighting for your freedoms every day.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Paul increasingly looks like a tool of the Neo-Cons and of the crypto-Christian Social Darwinists and Neo-Know Nothing Skinheads that surround him.
mopsius 3 years ago
I don't think anyone who turns their back to Gravel's campaign deserves to speak about morality.
PersonalJesus348 3 years ago
Gravel has been emphasizing impeachment from the getgo.
Kucinich too--and he introduced the motion to impeach Cheney.
Paul, on the other hand, is standing around with his finger up his ass.
mopsius 3 years ago
of course but my point was Davis Fleetwood has no authority to speak on this when his morality is intwine with the public at large.
Which isn't all that good these days.
PersonalJesus348 3 years ago
The Bill of Rights restricts what the Federal government or a majority vote can do.
The Roman Republic has its checks and balances in much different form--in some ways more effective.
mopsius 3 years ago
Most importantly, the Bill of Rights.
mopsius 3 years ago
"The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, a Christian Socialist, and the cousin of Socialist Utopian novelist Edward Bellamy...."
[wiki]
Favorite of the elder Bush too, wasn't it?
mopsius 3 years ago
Now that's reeeeally irrelevant. Nobody cares who wrote it or what his politcal, religious, and economic views were. Eisenhower got the "...under God..." portion included. Again, no one cares.
KobyBrandt 3 years ago
The Athenians considered "vote by majority" undemocratic.
mopsius 3 years ago
In fact, "In God we trust" as the "national motto" is likely unconsitutional, whatever the Supreme Court says, and after Madison.
But these consitutional abuses have been going on for a long time.
mopsius 3 years ago
No shit Sherlock...
KobyBrandt 3 years ago 3
I say, Watson--might you have a spot of time to toddle off to the Museum and excavate Paul's position on faith-based initiatives?
mopsius 3 years ago
"In God we trust" too (1956).
mopsius 3 years ago
oopsie I forgot to mention to Davis how yummy he's lookin'!
hehehe
Freedom of Speech and H.R. 1955 pt. 1
watch?v=9wJsovPRTEM
(is important)
ikekll 3 years ago
agolosha, isn't my right to bitch?
When Jane Harman's legislation becomes law, if I bitch, "I be diggin ditch"
Let us not forget HR1955 (thought crime)
"CIA Director Michael V. Hayden today presented the Agency Seal Medal to Rep. Jane Harman in appreciation of her "thoughtful and thorough" oversight of CIA as ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The medal is awarded to people outside the Agency who have made significant contributions to CIA's mission."
ikekll 3 years ago
I truly and utterly despise the prostitute known as Nancy Pelosi. She's just one more American whore with way too much power.
With that in mind, I wish Shirley Golub, Nancy's primary contender in the next election, my best wishes. I hope she totally kicks some Pelosi ass! Send her a contribution...please!
KobyBrandt 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
ironladmr 3 years ago
smcuriel - yes, never forget 12/12/2000! The day the Supreme Court said, nope, don't try to count all the votes. It would be detrimental to poor W.
JustThisGuyYaKnow 3 years ago 2
I'm tempted to register as a Green Party candidate, dems have ceased to identify w/ my point of view, or rather have lost fire in them, I think it will depend on this, wether or not they allow democracy to take place in the dem party nomination process. This whole delegate thing does not rep democracy, it's what gave us Gore winning pop vot while Bush took office, huh? That moment made me see that we do not live in a democracy at all, it has to change, if we are to call rselves a dmcrtc nation
smcuriel 3 years ago 2
I just changed my voter registration to "Non-affiliated" (Independent) status to signal that I will be no one's whore. After all, your party affiliation makes absolutely no difference when voting in the General Elections (this Nov). The only time party affiliation matters is during the PRIMARIES -- and we've seen how all that worked out (and is still working out -- superdelegates, Ron Paul marginalization, and all!). The system is rigged -- almost totally, and very unfortunately.
KobyBrandt 3 years ago 2
Oh, and by the way, and yet again, we're NOT a democracy -- even though that's the continual party line. We are (or once were) a thriving, energetic, and FREE Republic.
KobyBrandt 3 years ago
WRONG! The will of all Democrats is not represented by the way the Primaries are conducted in the first place! For example, a small minority of the people caucusing in small Iowa makes a HUGE freaking impact on the rest of the race. Remember, in a caucus, you get only people who can make it at the right time. By it's nature, a caucus suppresses turnout. If you can't show up at 7 p.m., you don't participate; there's no absentee ballot and no early voting. The whole primary season is a crock.
JustThisGuyYaKnow 3 years ago
"The democratic party (or any political party) can choose thier candidate ANYWAY THEY WANT. Out of a top hat or magic 8 ball."
At the time of writing this you had -5.
Can someone please tell me, what control over a private organization you expect to have? Is this organization harming anyone?
Should you be able to go into a McDonalds and demand to have a Whopper served to you and actually expect them to give you one?
Please
waveoflight 3 years ago
Is this democracy???????
cosmlayla 3 years ago
NO!
waveoflight 3 years ago 2
No dude. This is not a democracy It's what's known as a constitutional REPUBLIC. Remember the Pledge of Allegiance? "...and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands..."
There is a very significant difference between a democracy and a republic. Problem is, we aren't a functioning republic anymore either. The Union might more appropriately be referred to as a dictatorship (or perhaps a fascist plutocracy) -- which is characterized by all the tyranny and despotism that currently surrounds us.
KobyBrandt 3 years ago 2
The so-called Pledge of Allegiance is a late "pseudo-pledge", with no constitutional significance.
mopsius 3 years ago
So mopsius, are you telling me that I'm wrong and this is not a Constitutional Republic?
KobyBrandt 3 years ago
The so-called Pledge of Allegiance is irrelevant to the point, eh?
mopsius 3 years ago
You didn't answer my question, eh?
KobyBrandt 3 years ago 2
Athenian "demokratia", Polybius' Mixed Constitution, Res publica with some "democratic" aspects, plutocracy, oligarchy--and so forth.
"Nobody cares who wrote what"?
Whatever you say.
mopsius 3 years ago
Actually I did but you don't follow the answer.
Bush and Cheney are guilty of a long line of crimes against the Constitution.
As Ellsbergs recently said Bush is now also obviously and specifically guilty of felonies in relation to wiretapping.
To stand about talking about proper procedure for impeachment is a sell-out.
Paul is jive-assing on the issue.
mopsius 3 years ago
Dude that is the way its been since the begining... Only a revealution will change that.. Elites never trust the people and they want to keep us from Guns and keep us all tided to the yoke chancing the Carrot due to inflasion on a longer and longer stick
btigtime 3 years ago
So the problem with the Dems is that they went way too far to the centre, aye?
Still in the Left-Right rut Davis, I see.
europarl 3 years ago
Pelosi should be kicked out of the fucking speakership too. NOW!
Put up or shut up.
mopsius 3 years ago 4
Put up or shut up, Mr. Paul.
mopsius 3 years ago
Paul was right about procedure in Clinton's impeachment--now he's selling himself and his supporters out for the Republican fucking party and being complicit with the criminal Bush administration.
Rove and the boys probably gave huge sums on those big fund-raising days.
Paul is defusing the antiwar vote (whether he knows it or not).
mopsius 3 years ago 2
"While some may talk about whether or not an offense is 'impeachable,' that is only so much political rhetoric. The Constitution only specifies that Congress can impeach a president for 'high crimes' and 'misdemeanors,' but the definitions of those words are left to Congress to determine-anything a sufficient number of Members of Congress find offensive can be cause for impeachment...."
[Ron Paul September 28, 1998]
mopsius 3 years ago
The Constitution is really simple on the subject as Paul knows.
Bring the charge in the House, try in the Senate.
Penalty: removal from office.
No protections of jury trial.
Procedure made by the House and Senate.
That's it folks. Paul is jive-assing.
mopsius 3 years ago 3
NO JUDICIAL APPEAL.
No need for testimony or invesitgation even.
You fuckers are talking out of both sides of your mouth.
mopsius 3 years ago 3
It's an idea so crazy, it may just work!
PiFan7 3 years ago
I don't think "...drifted so far to the center, that you have disenfranchised your left wing base" is either accurate, or a particularly wise attempt at a slur. To view the US political scene as a left/right dichotomy is false. It's not a case of left v right, progressive v conservative, or Democrat V Republican. It's a case of Us v THEM, or, more accurately, *THEM* v *US*. "THEM" being top-down oligarchical collectivists, "Us" being bottom-up grassroots individualism, seen as "We The People".
lastnymleft 3 years ago
They want us to keep voting....and voting....and voting....As our outlet to give us the feeling like we're contributing something. It's a distraction from the only action that will help us. Systematically dismantling the electoral system and removing all politicians from power. Gathering the greatest intellectuals we can muster to fasten together a temporary replacement system that will set forth necessary policies to make government completely transparent and restore power to the people.
TerranKyra 3 years ago
so kucinich fell thru (big surprise)and now you are the expert on realpolitics...
get over yourself.
you seem to have a lot of liberal social beliefs that i can agree with but you dont seem to have any sense of reality at all.
you are beginning to resemble a caricature rather than a real thoughtful person.
peace.
cambridgee 3 years ago
You inspired me to email her. I know she won't email back, but it feels good to get involved.
BohemianElectric 3 years ago
Fleetwood 3 votes '08!
TheKidFrom13thStreet 3 years ago
Come on Davis. You must realise who we all are dealing with here. They are all politicians. You have your beliefs and values. They believe in value. Meaning the value of money, and money brings power. They don't serve us any longer because they don't have to. As long as they are comfortable, they all, Republicans and Democrats, could give a rats ass about the rest of us. I love to sound pessimistic, but WTF is going on? We "vote" for change, but nothing ever does.
jailarson 3 years ago
Ah, come on, not following YOUR plan will spell the end of the Democratic party (as we know it)? First of all, that's arrogant and I'm disappointed, second of all, the Democratic party as we know it sucks. And McCain can be beaten. All you need is someone to actually make the case, which isn't happening. I'll be looking to you for that.
Brandt761 3 years ago
why'd you bleep out your telephone number? to keep the three people that would have called you from doing so?
czorbin 3 years ago
"The failure to hold impeachment hearings on what seems extremely solid grounds...amounts to complicity by Congress in this abrogation of the Constitution. Moreover we're seen as an outlaw state by the international community for ignoring international law on torture and on aggression. The attack on Iraq without authorization by the U.N. Security Council... means that we have committed and are in the process of committing a crime against the peace in the Nuremburg sense..."
mopsius 3 years ago 2
well said , mopsius ...
it is an outrage !....
bebop54 3 years ago
Davis. do you even read these comments?
one: you love very sauve, blazer man.
two: you must have a cheap mottarolla phone cuz it's makin your camera buzz just like mine makes my clock radio buzz when it rings. i suppose we're both broke.
bombednation 3 years ago
Blazer man is maintaining plausible deniablility.
Very wise.
Geezus, I'll have to get a three piece suit.
And new cowboy boots.
mopsius 3 years ago
I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS. Never Give up man
chris3443 3 years ago
When are people goin to realize that the superdelegates are a blatent, in your face proof that your vote DOES NOT COUNT ! If your voting for the dems. Another thing the people that we call "republicans" are now more liberal than the most left leaning dem. Thats why Ron Paul wasn't taken seriously, he's a real conservative. Please check out (Hillary the Movie). I've found it on youtube and googlevideo. It is riviting.
txflip29 3 years ago
Theo-Fascists and Neo-Fascists--the duopoly.
mopsius 3 years ago
Wexler and Kucinich have backed the Impeachment resolution.
Not a single Republican has signed on to this resolution;
Not even Big Talker Ron Paul... he is chicken when it comes to impeachment
Ralphdraw3 3 years ago 2
Exactly--Ron Paul--put up or shut up.
He supported impeachment of Clinton on trivial grounds and has nothing to say about two brutal crimianls as P and VP?
mopsius 3 years ago
He should be all for it, after all, a lot of his supporters are bring-down-the-government individual freedom types.
Brandt761 3 years ago
Brandt761 - Please read my other comments on this thread, re: Ron Paul and impeachment WHICH HE FAVORS, *IF DONE CONSTITUTIONALLY*.
And we don't want to "bring down the government". But we certainly do want to CONSTRAIN the government to act Constitutionally - something that hasn't happened in a long while, from EITHER side.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Please read Paul's own words on impeaching Clinton.
He's jive-assing, my friend.
mopsius 3 years ago
It's the PROCESS. If you move the impeachment forward in a CONSTITUTIONAL manner, he will support it.
The last vote was pushed down an UNCONSTITUTIONAL route, so he voted against it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
lastnymleft 3 years ago 3
That's bullshit and Paul knows it.
Read the fucking Constitution.
There is no procedure--the House and Senate define it by themselves.
Paul opposed Kucinich's initial motion.
He tepidly supported sending it to Judiciary.
That's NOT a constitutional issue.
Paul is jive-assing.
mopsius 3 years ago
Mopsius - Please see my other comment on this thread on that subject. Basically, Ron Paul is supportive of impeachment measures, but they must be done CONSTITUTIONALLY, as was done with Clinton. The intent - and successful actions - of the OTHER Republicans was to force DK to head down an UNCONSTITUTIONAL path, so Ron Paul voted against it. He is SUPPORTIVE of impeachment measures, provided they are done properly, as happened with Clinton.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
There's a proper process to take to lead to impeachment, and Ron Paul SUPPORTS such proper action. Kucinich's impeachment bill first needed to go through an investigative Committee, and for them to report back to congress PRIOR to taking the impeachment vote. That's the exact same procedure as happened with Bill Clinton
The OTHER Republicans, by forcing an early vote - prior to that investigative/reporting stage - successfully derailed the investigative stage.
Don't blame Ron Paul for that!
lastnymleft 3 years ago 2
He's jive-assing. Do I have to go get his own fucking quotation.
That's not what he said when Clinton was impeached.
mopsius 3 years ago
We're talking about Bush/Cheney impeachment process, as promoted by Kucinich. Stick to your own subject.
And, yes, if you think that what I have claimed Dr Paul's position to be is incorrect, you DO have to "go get his own fucking quotation". Because I have watched and read pretty much every word he has uttered in public in the last twelve months, and I know that he is supportive of Dennis's proposal PROVIDED IT IS DONE CONSTITUTIONALLY, as before.
You are deliberately misstating his position.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
There is no Constitutional procedure on impeachment beyond the House trying impeaching and the Senate trying by majority vote.
Paul said exactly that in supporting Clinton's impeachment.
He's jive-assing now.
He also initially opposed Kucinich's impeachment motion.
mopsius 3 years ago
Was there a Congressional investigation prior to the Clinton impeachment vote? Yes.
Was there a Congressional investigation prior to the Bush impeachment vote? No.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Slight problem--Paul in relation to Clinton's impeachment said, rightly, that consitutionally nothing was necessary but a majority vote of the House to impeach.
Not only the at, Paul said, also validly, that any charge the House said was a valid charge was a valid charge.
Got it?
Paul is arguing with himself.
Gee--wonder why?
Such a man of principle.
mopsius 3 years ago
So you are admitting that you want the Kucinich vote to go through without an investigation process, as happened with Clinton?
You are a double-standard hypocrite.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Huh?
You are clearly befuddled or a hypocrite, like Paul.
Paul was right in what he said during Clinton;s impeachment.
He is wrong now--since he is now talking about "constitutional procedure".
That is--he is jive-assing.
mopsius 3 years ago
This is not rocket science:
Clinton's impeachment procedure required an investigative committee step as part of the two-step process( (1 - An accusation or indictment, AND 2 - Trial). You seem to favor Bush's impeachment procedure to NOT do that SAME investigative step.
Why are you proposing special treatment for Bush?
And enough with this "jive-assing" crap. Does anyone actually use that phrase, other than yourself? I'm not even sure what the hell you mean, other than it being derogatory.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Paul noted at the time that Consitutionally no investigative committee or anything else is required save a majority vote by the house.
You are jive-assing now, along with Paul.
Paul was right then--he has sold out now.
Impeachment is simple. A House vote by simple majority to impach, a majority in the Senate to convict.
Penalkty--removal from office.
No judicial appeal or review.
Specifically excepted from the protections of jury trial.
mopsius 3 years ago
Constitutionally, there must be:
(1) an accusation or indictment, and
(2) a trial.
You are proposing that the charge be levied without Congressional investigation to see if it is justified, and you are saying that the trial should be had without presentation of evidence.
And you are suggesting that be done, CONTRARY to the fact that Clinton at least had a full investigation and trial?
Should we institute trial-without-evidence across the board?
Go away and stop bothering me with such crap.
lastnymleft 3 years ago
You have your head up your ass.
Kucincich already made the accusation and the motion.
The trial is up to the Senate--all they need do constitutionally is vote on the motion from the House majority vote.
NO JUDICIAL APPEAL.
NO JURY TRIAL PROTECTIONS.
NO CRIMINAL OR CIVIL PENALTY.
You are a jerk-off, and jive-assing like Paul is now.
mopsius 3 years ago
If you think that all the House of Reps has to do is vote and send it to Senate, then you're an ignoramus, you really are. Is that all they did for Clinton's impeachment? *NO*! Do some research. Ron Paul supports impeachment, and has done everything he needs to do to support Kucinich's resolution. Your problem is not with Dr Paul, but with the House Committee on the Judiciary. And guess what? It's Chaired and majority controlled by *23 DEMOCRATS over 17 Repubs*, as it has been SINCE NOV 06. Duh!
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Here's your dead-end:
judiciary. house. gov/newscenter. aspx?A=880
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Here's your dead-end:
judiciary. house. gov/newscenter. aspx?A=880
lastnymleft 3 years ago
Notice that Homeland Defnese Czar Chertoff is claiming the power to override all and every law and statute in the land to build the Border Fence?
Theoretically that means he could commit murder and is immune to prosecution.
mopsius 3 years ago
Hye, I just ovitted F-I-E-U-K-K-A.
Is that Welsh for "Fucking A"?
mopsius 3 years ago
Okay, it's the Russian Federation now--how about some Putinistas?
mopsius 3 years ago
Anyone heard the rumor G. Gordon Liddy took acid and turned Commie?
mopsius 3 years ago
Jesus H., I am getting nostalgic now--the Society of Jesus actually used to have semi-educated American fuckheads at one time.
Probably only one of ten thousand now could tell you who invented "solipism" without looking it up.
mopsius 3 years ago
I mean if we are going to have a new Cold War--what's a Cold War without a CP of A?
mopsius 3 years ago
"United Front"--has a ring.
mopsius 3 years ago
Might sober the lazy fucks up a bit.
The FBI will probably finance it.
The undercover guys always pay their dues on time and buy all the magazine subscriptions.
mopsius 3 years ago
Congressional district conventions are rigged and controlled by the unions and the party bosses.
In electing delegates, there is what is called a "unity slate" which is the list of people who have been pre-selected to go to the national convention.
Ralphdraw3 3 years ago
The Superdelegate issue is just ONE PROBLEM in the Democratic party. Local Democratic party organization - in the counties - are run by small cliques or, in the larger counties, by the various local union bosses. If you are not a member of a union or "the" inside clique, the average party member has virtually no say in their local party (let alone the state or national parties).
In my state, we have Congressional District Conventions which "elect" 5 delegates to the national convention.
Ralphdraw3 3 years ago
Why not start a local chapter of Bolsheviki?
mopsius 3 years ago
There was one small glimmer of democracy at my county level party in 2006. I was elected precinct delegate (very easy since few people bother to run). Being precinct delegate entitles one to the distinct privilege of attending the "county convention" of the party.
The county convention is able to pass resolutions and send them to the state party convention for consideration. In a room of about 60 to 70 delegates, we got a resolution passed (with only one dissenting vote).
Ralphdraw3 3 years ago
What was the resolution?
mopsius 3 years ago
It was in opposition to the war in Iraq and opposition to the occupation.
Ralphdraw3 3 years ago
Got it. Good sign. And it actually got passed on?
I am a great fan of upside down pyramids.
mopsius 3 years ago
DON'T VOTE FOR JUST DAVIS VOTE FOR YOURSELVES BY ENACTING THE NATIONAL INITIATIVE!
ni4d[.]us
oldhacks 3 years ago
VOTE FOR DAVIS FLEETWOOD! Don't elect him just vote for him.
myohomojo 3 years ago
"Party Elders"? Ahahahaha
Montagraph 3 years ago
Brilliant!
voyzovrezon 3 years ago
Intersting and compelling. I'm not ashamed of voting for McCain this time around, however I notice that all the people that I listen to in regards to politics on youtube are either Obama or Hilary supporters.
I think I know what it is...what it is that none of us democrats or republicans like what we have to choose from, once again. Word?
ShiekUrBooty 3 years ago
I've called my Senators KYL and McCain and House members Trent Franks over 2 dozens time and yet have had a personnel call from anyone.
ironladmr 3 years ago
I think you should find a few Super Delegates and campaign for their vote. Isn't Kucinich a Super Delegate? That might be one right there.
DangerousTalk 3 years ago
Yes Davis the democrats have alienated the left wing of their own party.
I was a democrat, my parents are democrats, my grandparents were democrats. I come from a long line of democrats going back at least a century and I am voting for:
Ralph Nader!
Peace and Impeachment!
nowellian 3 years ago
so first you criticize fringe candidates (by the way, ron paul, mike huckabee, and mccain were all once considered fringies) for making an effort to succeed, then you go ahead and try to make a fringe effort to succeed based on nothing but yourself? you're losing me, davis...
inkabinkaboo182 3 years ago
Davis for president?
What an unexpected turn of events. lol.
lizziethecreepy 3 years ago
Right on, Davis! Both the superdelegates & the electoral college are unfair and undemocratic.
proteanview 3 years ago 3
Cool. We're a republic so being "undemocratic" shouldn't be an issue, right?
naaf89 3 years ago
There will be no abolishing or termination of current systems. It was built by them and it is run by them.
Nothing will happen playing their game. Nothing. You can try but you're going to go crazy doing it.
The 2 major parties are just one party anyway.
I wonder who they're going to pick for your next puppet emperor.
morknmindl 3 years ago 3
The case of Senator Dole is pertinent as analogue. He was no coward, but stupid in the way he got himself shot. The Sergeant who risked his own life to save Dole's was the real hero, and he never got credit or office or anything like that for saving the little elite idiot's ass.
mopsius 3 years ago
McCain is a fraud even as a "war hero". An admiral's son, he was known as an incompetent by his classmates in Flight School, who called him "Ace" for the number of planes he crashed in training.
Some say he is running now because the last eyewitnesses who were prisoners with him in Hanoi are dead.
mopsius 3 years ago 2
"The failure to hold impeachment hearings on what seems extremely solid grounds...amounts to complicity by Congress in this abrogation of the Constitution. Moreover we're seen as an outlaw state by the international community for ignoring international law on torture and on aggression. The attack on Iraq without authorization by the U.N. Security Council... means that we have committed and are in the process of committing a crime against the peace in the Nuremburg sense..."
[Daniel Ellsberg]
mopsius 3 years ago
I hope they take you up on that as what is democracy if the people in power decide all seems like there will be a lot of back handers and it will get much more personal day by day.
ddrmegamixer 3 years ago
the more i think of it, the only "the people" can take back the country is through actual physical force. there will be a slim chance of the people winning. our only hope is that was decide to take back our country while the military is away and not so healthy.
orki1960 3 years ago
Actually, a good many in the military are fed up and ready to help get it back.
The military oath is to defend "the Constitution".
What a curious oversight that Bush and Cheney and the Neo-Cons and the Born Again Zionists haven't changed it yet.
Very dangerous idea.
mopsius 3 years ago
Davis - Don't listen to these trollers and flamers. And don't be beholden to your "party elders". I'm sorry, but this is a vein attempt you must know that Pelosi along with the rest of the establishment left would never go for such a radical action. This is a time for the rank and file to form up, not use their votes to make some kind of statement.
It's a shame we can't get a chance to think without all this noise. I think you have the right idea, but I think your execution lacks purpose.