Comments on: Socialist Party USA: Vote No on Obamacare http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/ Covering America's third parties and independent candidates since May 2008 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:40:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Libertaryan Pride http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-147151 Libertaryan Pride Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:40:25 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-147151 That's HOTT, Carl! [ Hot Carl/Karl A Hot Carl is the act of defacating on someones face. A Warm Carl is defacating on their face whilst covered by plastic wrap. A Cold Carl is defacating on a glass table while someone lies below. Suzie prefered Warm Carl's. "Less clean up afterward.", she said knowingly. John prefered giving Hot Carl's. "If there's no mess, what's the point?" Lucy liked the added security of the glass provided during a Cold Carl. "I just like watching it come out! Fascinating!" by Brownson Pincheau Jan 7, 2005 2. Hot Carl/Karl 1. an enema with cheap red wine, usually Carlo Rossi Merlot. 2. squirting a red wine enema into another's face for one or both person's sexual gratification. 1- John: Man I am pooped I really need a drink. Dan: Drink, nah I think what you need is a Hot Carl/Karl. John: Hot dag, get the turkey baster bartender Hot Carls for the house! House: Yeaaah ] How HOTT? Well, not as HOTT as Bruce Cohen, who is the HOTTest HOTTie in all HOTTdom, but still pretty damn HOTT! How HOTT is Bruce Cohen? He is so HOTT that I would have a threeway whith him and his dog Ginger! Yeah! Maybe we could even do a Hot Carl! LOL. That’s HOTT, Carl!

[ Hot Carl/Karl A Hot Carl is the act of defacating on someones face. A Warm Carl is defacating on their face whilst covered by plastic wrap. A Cold Carl is defacating on a glass table while someone lies below.

Suzie prefered Warm Carl's. "Less clean up afterward.", she said knowingly. John prefered giving Hot Carl's. "If there's no mess, what's the point?" Lucy liked the added security of the glass provided during a Cold Carl. "I just like watching it come out! Fascinating!"
by Brownson Pincheau Jan 7, 2005

2. Hot Carl/Karl 1. an enema with cheap red wine, usually Carlo Rossi Merlot.

2. squirting a red wine enema into another's face for one or both person's sexual gratification.
1- John: Man I am pooped I really need a drink.
Dan: Drink, nah I think what you need is a Hot Carl/Karl.
John: Hot dag, get the turkey baster bartender Hot Carls for the house!
House: Yeaaah ]

How HOTT? Well, not as HOTT as Bruce Cohen, who is the HOTTest HOTTie in all HOTTdom, but still pretty damn HOTT!

How HOTT is Bruce Cohen? He is so HOTT that I would have a threeway whith him and his dog Ginger! Yeah!

Maybe we could even do a Hot Carl! LOL.

]]> By: Carl http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-147148 Carl Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:28:07 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-147148 To What Are You Loyal? by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. December 31, 2009 With the crafting of the Hitler-like “IMAB” conditionality in the Senate health-care bill, President Barack Obama’s faction within the Democratic Party has gone over, not only, to the side of the enemies of our Federal Constitution’s most fundamental principle, but, by lending aid to such implicitly treasonous action, has given support to that which is fairly described as the principle of Satanic evil expressed in the usurpatious, and, frankly pro-satanic policies of Britain’s former Prime Minister Tony Blair who has led in reviving Adolf Hitler’s war-time health-care policies, with the active prompting of him by the leading figures of the present British royal house. Under these conditions, when our republic is under a presently existential threat to its continued moral, and also its physical existence as a free republic, our patriots must make a principled break with the presently incumbent British monarchy. Patriotic Democrats, in or out of the Federal Congress, will prove themselves patriots by breaking themselves free of the control recently exerted by that corrupted administration and its leading accomplices within the Presidency and the Congress. They, for the very soul’s sake, must join with other patriots in summarily ridding this nation of that evil which is represented by those who have acted to support the frankly Satanic evil which the President has come to represent through policies of practice such as the present, implicitly pro-Satanic, version of the draft health-care legislation introduced under the present Senate leader. By his actions in this matter, especially those offenses represented by his so-called “health-care reforms,” this President and those elements of his Administration and Party which have crafted the hideous, Hitler-like policies represented by the content of the present Senate draft of that bill, have made themselves complicit, whether wittingly or not, with a policy which is tantamount to that of the Nuremberg crimes traced to Hitler’s health-care measures introduced as those "Nazi Tiergarten 4" health-care policy under the war-time Nazi law which led to the great genocide for which leading physicians and others were condemned to death in the so-called “Nuremberg” proceedings. We must join with those nations of the world which had led in defeating the evil scheme which the present British imperial monarchy had brought to the recent Copenhagen “summit.” We must align ourselves with those nations which share the principle which was defended against the evil, long associated with her consort, the Duke of Edinburgh, the which Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, had assigned to that Copenhagen “summit,” the Duke’s intention to reduce a world population of a currently estimated 6.7 billions living human souls, to two or less, that at a rapid rate. We would hope that our sane and honorable “cousins” within the population of the United Kingdom would lend support to what should be, morally, our common cause against the monstrously great evil which the recent Senate action in support of President Obama’s and former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s evil scheme represents as a currently immediate, implicitly pro-Satanic, Hitler-like, threat to all humanity. www.larouchepac.com To What Are You Loyal?
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
December 31, 2009
With the crafting of the Hitler-like “IMAB” conditionality in the Senate health-care bill, President Barack Obama’s faction within the Democratic Party has gone over, not only, to the side of the enemies of our Federal Constitution’s most fundamental principle, but, by lending aid to such implicitly treasonous action, has given support to that which is fairly described as the principle of Satanic evil expressed in the usurpatious, and, frankly pro-satanic policies of Britain’s former Prime Minister Tony Blair who has led in reviving Adolf Hitler’s war-time health-care policies, with the active prompting of him by the leading figures of the present British royal house.
Under these conditions, when our republic is under a presently existential threat to its continued moral, and also its physical existence as a free republic, our patriots must make a principled break with the presently incumbent British monarchy. Patriotic Democrats, in or out of the Federal Congress, will prove themselves patriots by breaking themselves free of the control recently exerted by that corrupted administration and its leading accomplices within the Presidency and the Congress.
They, for the very soul’s sake, must join with other patriots in summarily ridding this nation of that evil which is represented by those who have acted to support the frankly Satanic evil which the President has come to represent through policies of practice such as the present, implicitly pro-Satanic, version of the draft health-care legislation introduced under the present Senate leader.
By his actions in this matter, especially those offenses represented by his so-called “health-care reforms,” this President and those elements of his Administration and Party which have crafted the hideous, Hitler-like policies represented by the content of the present Senate draft of that bill, have made themselves complicit, whether wittingly or not, with a policy which is tantamount to that of the Nuremberg crimes traced to Hitler’s health-care measures introduced as those “Nazi Tiergarten 4″ health-care policy under the war-time Nazi law which led to the great genocide for which leading physicians and others were condemned to death in the so-called “Nuremberg” proceedings.
We must join with those nations of the world which had led in defeating the evil scheme which the present British imperial monarchy had brought to the recent Copenhagen “summit.” We must align ourselves with those nations which share the principle which was defended against the evil, long associated with her consort, the Duke of Edinburgh, the which Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, had assigned to that Copenhagen “summit,” the Duke’s intention to reduce a world population of a currently estimated 6.7 billions living human souls, to two or less, that at a rapid rate.
We would hope that our sane and honorable “cousins” within the population of the United Kingdom would lend support to what should be, morally, our common cause against the monstrously great evil which the recent Senate action in support of President Obama’s and former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s evil scheme represents as a currently immediate, implicitly pro-Satanic, Hitler-like, threat to all humanity.

http://www.larouchepac.com

]]> By: Steve http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146435 Steve Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:33:17 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146435 "necessary items such as exercise programs for seniors"? I'll agree with you that seniors need to exercise, but why in the world would anyone think this is a federal necessity? I think seniors are perfectly capable of performing calisthenics on their own. Or maybe I should join with the socialists and also point out the grave injustice of my recent 10-pound weight gain which is directly attributable to Congress's failure to purchase a new treadmill for me. “necessary items such as exercise programs for seniors”? I’ll agree with you that seniors need to exercise, but why in the world would anyone think this is a federal necessity? I think seniors are perfectly capable of performing calisthenics on their own.

Or maybe I should join with the socialists and also point out the grave injustice of my recent 10-pound weight gain which is directly attributable to Congress’s failure to purchase a new treadmill for me.

]]> By: paulie http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146289 paulie Tue, 29 Dec 2009 06:41:46 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146289 I think that was actually directed at Seebeck. As for me, I don't listen to Glenn Beck at all. I think that was actually directed at Seebeck.

As for me, I don’t listen to Glenn Beck at all.

]]> By: Mathew "RennDawg" Renner http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146288 Mathew "RennDawg" Renner Tue, 29 Dec 2009 06:38:22 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146288 Why do you assume I listen to Glenn Beck. I do sometimes, I admit it. However, I have had my views and beliefs long before I ever heard of him. Why do you assume I listen to Glenn Beck. I do sometimes, I admit it. However, I have had my views and beliefs long before I ever heard of him.

]]> By: paulie http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146168 paulie Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:14:30 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146168 <blockquote>“Anti-Freedom”? You obviously have a limited knowledge of US history. </blockquote> It doesn't take knowledge of US history to realize that opposing individual economic freedom is anti-freedom. <blockquote>It was the SP and US Left that originaly opposed segregation, opposed the 1919 Red scare, it was the Leftists that stood up for free speech.</blockquote> Well, yes, civil liberties and social freedom is important - but so is economic freedom. <blockquote>So-calledd” libertarian capitalism</blockquote> Who's doing the calling? In political terms, "capitalism" is a term popularized by Karl Marx. It is meant deliberately to conflate and confuse completely separate and distinct concepts - free markets (a subspecies of free association) and individual liberty on the one hand, plutocracy and corporatism on the other. The purpose is to fool those who oppose plutocracy and corporatism into also opposing free markets, as well as to fool those who support free markets into supporting plutocracy and corporatism and the statism they are intertwined with. <blockquote>is an ideology that’s only been around for 30 some years. </blockquote> Not so. Libertarianism goes back to at least Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism: http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/lao-tzu.html http://mises.org/story/1967 http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/06/06/libertarian-wisdom-from-lao-tzu/ Other names you should look up include Frederic Bastiat and Lysander Spooner. Bastiat, an early 19th century French libertarian, sat on the left in the French parliament (where the terms left and right originate), but he was no socialist. The original left supported equal opportunity for poor and working class people, freedom of speech, religion, assembly, etc., and opposed big government. It supported the rights and interests of independent small business owners, workers, farmers, and opposed the state-abetted domination of the politically-connected big business class. It upheld reason and the ability of the individual to think independently and self-actualize. The original right supported a powerful state, church, military, and business establishment, all tied together and supported by tradition. It was only in the early 20th century that the original left split - between those who chose rightist (statist) means to achieve leftist goals, and those who reacted against the reality of oppression achieved by statist means to make common cause with big business interests (and thus came to be seen by most as actually being on the right). Before that, and still today in much of the world, these newer concepts of left and right would correctly be seen as absurd and self-contradictory. See http://mises.org/story/2099 and references therein for more of the history on this.

“Anti-Freedom”? You obviously have a limited knowledge of US history.

It doesn’t take knowledge of US history to realize that opposing individual economic freedom is anti-freedom.

It was the SP and US Left that originaly opposed segregation, opposed the 1919 Red scare, it was the Leftists that stood up for free speech.

Well, yes, civil liberties and social freedom is important – but so is economic freedom.

So-calledd” libertarian capitalism

Who’s doing the calling? In political terms, “capitalism” is a term popularized by Karl Marx. It is meant deliberately to conflate and confuse completely separate and distinct concepts – free markets (a subspecies of free association) and individual liberty on the one hand, plutocracy and corporatism on the other. The purpose is to fool those who oppose plutocracy and corporatism into also opposing free markets, as well as to fool those who support free markets into supporting plutocracy and corporatism and the statism they are intertwined with.

is an ideology that’s only been around for 30 some years.

Not so. Libertarianism goes back to at least Lao Tzu, the founder of Taoism:

http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/lao-tzu.html

http://mises.org/story/1967

http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2006/06/06/libertarian-wisdom-from-lao-tzu/

Other names you should look up include Frederic Bastiat and Lysander Spooner.

Bastiat, an early 19th century French libertarian, sat on the left in the French parliament (where the terms left and right originate), but he was no socialist.

The original left supported equal opportunity for poor and working class people, freedom of speech, religion, assembly, etc., and opposed big government. It supported the rights and interests of independent small business owners, workers, farmers, and opposed the state-abetted domination of the politically-connected big business class. It upheld reason and the ability of the individual to think independently and self-actualize.

The original right supported a powerful state, church, military, and business establishment, all tied together and supported by tradition.

It was only in the early 20th century that the original left split – between those who chose rightist (statist) means to achieve leftist goals, and those who reacted against the reality of oppression achieved by statist means to make common cause with big business interests (and thus came to be seen by most as actually being on the right). Before that, and still today in much of the world, these newer concepts of left and right would correctly be seen as absurd and self-contradictory.

See http://mises.org/story/2099 and references therein for more of the history on this.

]]> By: Deran http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146160 Deran Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:27:16 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146160 "Anti-Freedom"? You obviously have a limited knowledge of US history. It was the SP and US Left that originaly opposed segregation, opposed the 1919 Red scare, it was the Leftists that stood up for free speech. So-calledd" libertarian capitalism is an ideology that's only been around for 30 some years. The SP and the US Left have been fighting for people's civil and personal rights for over a hundred years. Get a grip, and stop listening the Glen Beck, he's an ill-formed demagogue. “Anti-Freedom”? You obviously have a limited knowledge of US history. It was the SP and US Left that originaly opposed segregation, opposed the 1919 Red scare, it was the Leftists that stood up for free speech. So-calledd” libertarian capitalism is an ideology that’s only been around for 30 some years. The SP and the US Left have been fighting for people’s civil and personal rights for over a hundred years. Get a grip, and stop listening the Glen Beck, he’s an ill-formed demagogue.

]]> By: Mathew "RennDawg" Renner http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146071 Mathew "RennDawg" Renner Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:26:57 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146071 I will go to prison before I live under goverment health care. It is anti-liberty and unconstitutional. I will go to prison before I live under goverment health care. It is anti-liberty and unconstitutional.

]]> By: Catholic Trotskyist http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146057 Catholic Trotskyist Mon, 28 Dec 2009 10:49:25 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146057 My heart bleeds for you, Seebeck and Jason. I look forward to seeing the shock and anger on your faces when our holy Revolutionary General Barack Obama brings forth the Catholic Trotskyist revolution, of complete socialized medicine, Christian family values, and world government. Please pray for the Pope and please pray for our great senator Ben Nelson, amen. My heart bleeds for you, Seebeck and Jason. I look forward to seeing the shock and anger on your faces when our holy Revolutionary General Barack Obama brings forth the Catholic Trotskyist revolution, of complete socialized medicine, Christian family values, and world government.

Please pray for the Pope and please pray for our great senator Ben Nelson, amen.

]]> By: Michael Seebeck http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146038 Michael Seebeck Mon, 28 Dec 2009 07:33:33 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146038 Ironic, yet typical. Freedom-loving Americans, starting with libertarians, oppose Obamacare because it goes too far, while the freedom-hating socialists oppose it because it doesn't go far enough! If that isn't enough to show Obamacare is a stinker, then what is? Ironic, yet typical. Freedom-loving Americans, starting with libertarians, oppose Obamacare because it goes too far, while the freedom-hating socialists oppose it because it doesn’t go far enough!

If that isn’t enough to show Obamacare is a stinker, then what is?

]]> By: jason http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/socialist-party-usa-vote-no-on-obamacare/comment-page-1/#comment-146020 jason Mon, 28 Dec 2009 05:44:49 +0000 http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=11887#comment-146020 Amen brother. Amen brother.

]]>