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

How many Democrats advocated going over there in the first place, knowing the same information that Bush did?

No further questions, your honor.

 

That has nothing to do with anything, and you know it.

Or are people who advocated entering the revolutionary war still supposed to want to invade Britain?

 

Really? Hmmm. That's interesting. (ha, ha, ha. snicker, snicker) So you don't think communism would work on a large scale?

I was being totally serious, too.

Anyway, what about gay rights and illegal immigrants? I'm in favor of both. What do you think?

 

What's with "golem" popping up all over the place all of a sudden?

 

The history of all hitherto existing society [2] is the history of class struggles.

Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf, guild-master [3] and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.

In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of society into various orders, a manifold gradation of social rank. In ancient Rome we have patricians, knights, plebians, slaves; in the Middle Ages, feudal lords, vassals, guild-masters, journeymen, apprentices, serfs; in almost all of these classes, again, subordinate gradations.

The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.

Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other -- bourgeoisie and proletariat.

From the serfs of the Middle Ages sprang the chartered burghers of the earliest towns. From these burgesses the first elements of the bourgeoisie were developed.

The discovery of America, the rounding of the Cape, opened up fresh ground for the rising bourgeoisie. The East-Indian and Chinese markets, the colonisation of America, trade with the colonies, the increase in the means of exchange and in commodities generally, gave to commerce, to navigation, to industry, an impulse never before known, and thereby, to the revolutionary element in the tottering feudal society, a rapid development.

The feudal system of industry, in which industrial production was monopolized by closed guilds, now no longer suffices for the growing wants of the new markets. The manufacturing system took its place. The guild-masters were pushed aside by the manufacturing middle class; division of labor between the different corporate guilds vanished in the face of division of labor in each single workshop.

Meantime, the markets kept ever growing, the demand ever rising. Even manufacturers no longer sufficed. Thereupon, steam and machinery revolutionized industrial production. The place of manufacture was taken by the giant, MODERN INDUSTRY; the place of the industrial middle class by industrial millionaires, the leaders of the whole industrial armies, the modern bourgeois.

Modern industry has established the world market, for which the discovery of America paved the way. This market has given an immense development to commerce, to navigation, to communication by land. This development has, in turn, reacted on the extension of industry; and in proportion as industry, commerce, navigation, railways extended, in the same proportion the bourgeoisie developed, increased its capital, and pushed into the background every class handed down from the Middle Ages.

We see, therefore, how the modern bourgeoisie is itself the product of a long course of development, of a series of revolutions in the modes of production and of exchange.

 

Yawn, I hate pulling out the "I've done it and you haven't" card, but you're a worthy candidate. If you so fervently believe in the Republican cause, why are you on this board? And if you fervently believe in the Republican cause and the war in Iraq, why aren't you in uniform? Why aren't you supporting it? And if you had children old enough to serve, would you be as quick to let them go into harm's way?

Until you can answer either question, please to be shutting the fuck up.

 

Well then, why don't you take your struggling class of folk and go join Castro in his always-in-progress revolution?

 

BTW, andyouare is my new favorite poster...

 

Just keeping you on your toes, Wing.

Besides, "chickenfucker" gets tiresome.

 

Are you kidding? Kids serving in any armed conflict? The Army is a way to pay for an education, stupid. Not to serve our country. Wink, wink.

I would, and they would. Proudly. You know, there are those over there now who feel that way and would tell you bleeding hearts to shut the fuck up.

So I guess Lyman, Tony, and many others like them have no business on this board either?

People who happen to surf on here need to know that the stereotypical journalists aren't just liberal whackos. Maybe they're the minority - but they are out there.

 

I can't hold it in anymore. I was going to find the web site that has a copy of the communist manifesto and cut and paste some more, but I'm too lazy.

Yawn. You are an idiot. Do you seriously not see that I'm just fucking with you, playing on your "everyone is a commie" BS?

(Cartman's evil laugh) Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.