Madame Chairman, the GOP casts all its votes....

Mert continue to call the child gay. I'll happily pay the bills for a few months, although this does mean you'll have to move to Montana.

 

And now the really militant posters come out.

Incoming!

 

I see, we're moving on to the "playing dumb about our own inferences" portion of this little episode of "Yawn Baits the Lefties." I haven't read the script yet, so I'll have to opt out.

And chickie: HAVE to? Don't you mean I'd GET to move to Montana?

 

Oh yes, it's definitely GET to. Just figured having to live among Griz fans would make it a HAVE to for you.

 

Liberal Rule No. 1551b (otherwise known as the "Bill Clinton Law"
We're smart enough to read through implications.
Even if conservatives read ours, we can spin ourselves out of it. Even if our political opponents don't buy it, our dumbass followers will.

 

Chickie, you're awfully close to that central bastion of reactionary Republicanism, Idaho. How do you possibly survive?

 

Good God, you're delusional.

Where do you see spin? We all hate you. No one defends you.

We just tell you we hate you, in the feeble hope that you will go away.

Since you're friendless anywhere, any attention is enough to keep you coming back.

But there is no spin.

 

(For the benefit of readers who may have joined us late.)
The original post on this thread was a delusional rant about Hillary Clinton that someone found written on the bottom of their cereal bowl one morning, next to the picture of Sean Hannity in a bunny suit.
Carry on.

 

Anyone who thinks Hannity is an idiot leaves much to be desired...oh wait, we're talking about Fenian. That's like saying the earth is round.

It's people like you who help make Hannity who he is.

Zeke, never thought I asked for your friendship, sorry to disappoint you. All that energy exerted to hate me and for no real effect other than your own pitiful motivation. As for spin, that's easy - you guys have churned a We Hate Bush rally into a wholehearted endorsement of anything Democrat when the negative reaction to Iraq is by a large extent not because we're over there in the first place, but we're not winning. Democrats have offered no alternatives other than to cut and run. Those who advocated troop buildup are now running from that only because the Republican President called for it. Had he spoken of reduction, Pelosi would have led a group of people advocating troop buildup within the hour. It's all about Bush with you people, because you have no sellable ideas.

It's this kind of energy that makes Hannity who he is. I'm just having as much fun, only not making his kind of money.

 

Hey Yawn, I just had a few random thoughts. Let me know what you think:

Section II has made clear the relations of the Communists to the existing working-class parties, such as the Chartists in England and the Agrarian Reformers in America.

The Communists fight for the attainment of the immediate aims, for the enforcement of the momentary interests of the working class; but in the movement of the present, they also represent and take care of the future of that movement. In France, the Communists ally with the Social Democrats* against the conservative and radical bourgeoisie, reserving, however, the right to take up a critical position in regard to phases and illusions traditionally handed down from the Great Revolution.

In Switzerland, they support the Radicals, without losing sight of the fact that this party consists of antagonistic elements, partly of Democratic Socialists, in the French sense, partly of radical bourgeois.

In Poland, they support the party that insists on an agrarian revolution as the prime condition for national emancipation, that party which fomented the insurrection of Krakow in 1846.

In Germany, they fight with the bourgeoisie whenever it acts in a revolutionary way, against the absolute monarchy, the feudal squirearchy, and the petty-bourgeoisie.

But they never cease, for a single instant, to instill into the working class the clearest possible recognition of the hostile antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat, in order that the German workers may straightway use, as so many weapons against the bourgeoisie, the social and political conditions that the bourgeoisie must necessarily introduce along with its supremacy, and in order that, after the fall of the reactionary classes in Germany, the fight against the bourgeoisie itself may immediately begin.

The Communists turn their attention chiefly to Germany, because that country is on the eve of a bourgeois revolution that is bound to be carried out under more advanced conditions of European civilization and with a much more developed proletariat than that of England was in the seventeenth, and France in the eighteenth century, and because the bourgeois revolution in Germany will be but the prelude to an immediately following proletarian revolution.

In short, the Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things.

In all these movements, they bring to the front, as the leading question in each, the property question, no matter what its degree of development at the time.

Finally, they labor everywhere for the union and agreement of the democratic parties of all countries.

The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.

Proletarians of all countries, unite!

 

Yawn, you so virulently defend the Republican party, I fear, because it is the only group you've ever been a part of.

If you truly believe that if Bush wanted to leave Iraq that Democratic leaders would advocate escalation, I'm just sad for you.

You are Karl Rove's golem.

 

Communism would prevent you from owning your own house.

Communism says the government can take care of you better than you can.

Sound familiar? (I bet your heart is pounding with anticipation - even though you just realized "Hey, I own my own house!")

Meanwhile, the ruling class gets fat off the working class.

Hmmm. Now that could slice both ways, for there are career politicians who are Republicans who are doing that very thing; however, in doing so, they are faux conservatives and should be wiped out of leadership in the view of pure conservatives.

Anyway, the government with all the power learns the old adage that absolute power corrupts absolutely. So if you think your liberal leadership is the healthy alternative, giving power to the people, knock yourself out. There's no hope for you. Governments historically fail because they fail to be what government is supposed to be, and that is limited.