Presidential Elections
Much of the popular media has focused on Presidential election campaigns recently. It is one issue that they can talk about that is germane to all Americans, so they talk endlessly. We are mostly sick of it but they talk on and on.
Bob is a cyber libertarian. Bob wants the government to get off our backs and out of our pockets. There are some legitimate government functions. The most important ones are listed in the US Constitution. Provide for the common defense. Establish immigration and border security. Facilitate interstate commerce. Most of the US Federal government is unconstitutional. Several of it's major divisions are illegal because they have no justifiable basis in constitutional powers of the government, the “Education” department, for example. Bob wants power returned to the people. Unfortunately for the people, most politicians and most government workers want power, and to expand government power.
Bob has noticed that the web pages loudly proclaiming support for “Women's Issues” are gone from several candidate's official sites. Before the 2004 elections such pages were everywhere. That seems to be changing, though some candidates may still practice blatant sexism. The candidates still put support “women's issues” into specific causes, but the bold front page support seems to have been toned down. I haven't seen any major candidate of either party that claims so support fathers and men yet. When I see one I'll vote for him.
Bob can't really recommend voting for any of the political scum. None of them will publicly support families and fathers, nor oppose the police state oppression of men.
Bob is a cyber libertarian. Bob wants the government to get off our backs and out of our pockets. There are some legitimate government functions. The most important ones are listed in the US Constitution. Provide for the common defense. Establish immigration and border security. Facilitate interstate commerce. Most of the US Federal government is unconstitutional. Several of it's major divisions are illegal because they have no justifiable basis in constitutional powers of the government, the “Education” department, for example. Bob wants power returned to the people. Unfortunately for the people, most politicians and most government workers want power, and to expand government power.
Bob has noticed that the web pages loudly proclaiming support for “Women's Issues” are gone from several candidate's official sites. Before the 2004 elections such pages were everywhere. That seems to be changing, though some candidates may still practice blatant sexism. The candidates still put support “women's issues” into specific causes, but the bold front page support seems to have been toned down. I haven't seen any major candidate of either party that claims so support fathers and men yet. When I see one I'll vote for him.
On the Republican Side.
The major media loves John McCain because he's a supporter and sponsor of Open Borders and Amnesty for illegal aliens. Among Republicans he's sided with the Democrats in the Senate several times. He's about as close to a Democrat one can find who still hasn't switched parties.
Rudy Giuliani is a NYC liberal who ran a “sanctuary city” and pushed massive criminal attacks by some of the worst of the blue gun thugs. It's in his NYC where an unarmed man can be shot in the back 42 times. He favors gay marriage and “rights for women.” I'd rather vote for a desert rattler.
Fred Thompson is a former star of a fictional NYC pig show, pandering to the grossest “men are criminals” media whoring.
Mike Huckabee supports protecting the borders, ending amnesty cities, and punishing illegal aliens. He generally supports most conservative positions. Bob is concerned because his prior employment was that of a Baptist Preacher, and a theocracy is always dangerous. But, at least he's not a lieyer.
Mitt Romney is a big city liberal who recently “found conservatism.” He supports increasing the blue gun thugs war on men. He is a member of a “weird” secretive religious cult. Bob doesn't trust him.
Ron Paul is a libertarian who is generally good on most issues. His international policies leave a lot to be desired. One important purpose of government is national defense, and Paul has no clue.
On the Democrat side,
Hitllary is a cunt, and left wing feminazi. No cunt ever represents men's interests. No sane man votes for a cunt.
B. Hussein Obama is a Muslim infiltrator who would divert the USA onto the side of Al-Queda and radical Islam. If anyone ever saw a fiction called “The Manchurian Candidate,” it's coming to Washington. If you haven't seen it, this would be a good time.
John Edwards is a loser trial lieyer who made a fortune by raising the price of maternity care in the US by about 25%.
Bill Richardson is the only Dem candidate with any smarts. He has impeccable credentials in international politics. He single handedly rescued Americans in several hostage situations over several decades. When the North Koreans came to Washington to meet with the Bush Administration, they stopped first to visit Governor Richardson in Santa Fe, NM, for advice and counsel. He was also the first Governor to declare a “State of Emergency” on the US Border. Among Democrats he's the only one who would make a good President. Of course the major media hates him, which is another endorsement.
Bob can't really recommend voting for any of the political scum. None of them will publicly support families and fathers, nor oppose the police state oppression of men.
posted by Bob | Wednesday, January 02, 2008
11 Comments:
You spoke of healthcare before.
Yesterday my mom was visiting my grandma (paternal side) at the hospital (she (grandmother) is in and out of it (hospital), she lives in a nursing home :/). The female doctor starts talking of how "they don't know what her mental state is" etc etc etc basically saying that she (the female doctor) wanted to just kill my grandmother. Today my uncle calls up and tells me that they have put her on "confort care" AKA: doing nothing and letting her die (she has a bedsore, they were supposed to bandage, fix it, you get them when lying in bed for long periods). First they blaimed billy, then they blaimed my mom, then finally (when that didn't work) they blaimed the hospital. Now we have to get a lawer and the next time she can get her bedsore fixed is 1 week from now. They are trying to kill her.
Also my grandpa (maternal side) was brought by my relatives to a hospital because he had a chest ache. The hospital proceeded to give him a respitory bacterial infection and a blood infection of staff. He is recovering from that now. His heart is the same as it has been for 3 years since the bypass surgery so the only reason he's I'll is because of medical care.
If you ever have a pain anywhere, don't tell your relatives, they may try to get you saved. Just hope God grants you more life. That is all you can do.
We need a revolution. It needs to be the most brutal in history. We need to burn the witches that opress us and kill our own.
Speaking of maternity care, who in their right mind would have a child in a hospital? That is like having a child in a septic tank guarded by pro-eugenics nazis.
"We need to burn the witches that opress us and kill our own."
(meaning the witches both opress us and they kill our relatives)
Note to anonymous;
Now you are insulting the witches again. Let's just burn the feminazi and Dr. Frankenstein.
Bob, read about this sick family court judge:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080103/ap_on_re_us/judge_fantasy_tape
Tinyurl:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2arqee
Ask prostitutes, call-girls, hookers, escorts, etc. who their freakiest/strangest customers are and they'll tell you it's .... judges.
Judges apparently love being dominated and tortured by women ... perhaps this explains why they rule so harshly against men. They want to see them tortured!
Sickos!
Cheers
Huckabee is a CFR stooge. Enough said.
Duncan Hunter.
May I respectfully take exception to your characterization of presidential candidate Dr. Ron Paul as “clueless about foreign affairs.?” As I understand his platform, he seems adamant about ending the stupid, arrogant treachery of using our young men to fight other people’s wars in other people’s lands– wars which benefit the likes of the Bush-Cheney-Wolfowitz gang, wars which destroy the lives of men in other countries as well as our own. Paul has repeatedly emphasized that our country needs to mind its own damn business, bring our fighting men home, and deploy them along our own borders. He opposes the notion that America should be a global “blue gun thug.” I have also heard Paul say repeatedly that he would terminate all transfers of taxpayer’s hard-earned money in the form of foreign aid to the rich and politically connected of other nations, no matter who the recipients are - Muslim or Jewish. (Israel is a major nuclear power for God’s sake.)
I see no spiritual, moral, economic, or political reason why hundreds of thousands of American men’s lives be put in harms way in more than 100 foreign countries, such as Korea for more than fifty years or Germany whose standard of living is higher than our own. Why must we indebt our sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons by more than a trillion dollars, as of the latest accounting, to the world’s most powerful Communist regime in order to fund a military confiscation of another country’s oil? It would have been more honorable, more prosperous for all parties concerned, and cheaper by many orders of magnitude simply to buy our oil on the open market. Why do we sanction the bribery, extortion, assassinations, torture, and other black op atrocities that America’s power elitists and their political minions use to meddle in other country’s affairs. This should be repugnant to proud, free men everywhere who respect the responsibility of other men to determine their own fates and to lead their lives as they see fit. This is the insanity that Ron Paul seems to home in on, and I must say that everything I heard from him on this issue resonates with me – as it has apparently with millions of other fed-up, hard-working American men of modest means along the entire political spectrum who have generated a spontaneous groundswell of financial support for his campaign.
As an aside, I have definitely observed that far fewer women than men agree with or even understand libertarian principles. They are far more likely to support collectivist, “I-know-what’s-best-for-you-and-everybody-else” agendas backed by the iron fist and surveillance technology of a police state.
Given the lethargy of the American public – conditioned as they are from too many years in public schooling and from too many decades of vapid political propaganda - to rely on the nanny state for their notions of right and wrong, are Dr. Paul’s objectives Quixotic? Maybe so. Radical? I suppose so, given how far we have strayed from the ideals of our founding fathers. But to call them “clueless” seems unmanly.
I have never heard Paul advocate commercial or cultural isolationism. There would be nothing in the foreign policy of a Paul administration that would restrict the right of free men to trade with whomever they wanted or to contribute their own money to whatever cause they favored, domestic or foreign. I also have heard him say explicitly that a bonafide defense of our borders is a proper use of military force, but preemptive aggressions against other countries that pose no realistic threat to us and the use of our young men to defend other countries that are capable of defending themselves are improper.
He also seeks to abolish the evil IRS. This move alone would go a long way toward enabling productive men to keep the fruits of their own labor, support their families, and retake control of their own lives. He seeks to abolish bloated, intrusive, bossy, maternal, unconstitutional bureaucracies like the Departments of HHS, Education, Agriculture, Energy, and Commerce. He unequivocally supports the Second Amendment, exactly as worded. Overall, as a freedom-loving, tyranny-hating, admittedly simple-minded man, I must say that Ron Paul makes a lot of sense to me.
No, he has not proposed special government programs for men or boys. But he opposes all special interest programs - whether affirmative action, special treatment for women, minority quotas, corporate welfare, hate crime legislation, subsidies to big agribusiness, and the countless other parasitic infections which have weakened the corpus of our once lean, vigorous, and masculine republic. Now we are a fat, emasculated, unproductive, hopelessly indebted, ignorant, arrogant, psuedo-democratic, over-extended empire run by an immature, coddled, ivy-league-cheer-leader adolescent who was afforded little, if any, manly upbringing, who never worked an honest day in his life, and who can manipulate at his whim intruments of mass destruction and the lives of hundreds of thousands of young men in uniform.
Let free-thinking men remember that there is nothing – absolutely nothing - that government can give one class of people that it does not take from another class of people. Strong, noble men do not seek handouts or special consideration at other people’s expense - more often than not at other men’s expense. It is far better for men to tolerate no dependency on bureaucratic programs of any kind (other than those within the confines of the Constitution), but instead to live proudly and self-reliantly and to teach their sons how to do so. I see this as the only rational and sensible way to freedom.
Anyway, that’s my rant. Thanks, Bob, for your good work.
Note to rally:
Isolationism was popular in the early part of the 20th century, before the two great wars. Since the 2nd great war America has maintained a worldwide military presence with bases in every area. The Ron Paul platform wants to return to isolationism. I don't see that as benefiting American interests.
Although conquest and empire has been politically unpopulare in the last half of the 20th century, it has enjoyed a great deal of success throughout history. When men CHOOSE to join the military and fight in wars and conflicts, it is done with the knowledge that some will perish. I have always opposed a drafted military except in dire threat, however a voluntary military is just that, voluntary. Neither you nor me is forced to join the army and serve in foreign lands. I do not see any moral gain from denying that opportunity to men who choose to do so when it will also result in world wide political stability and economic benefits for Americans.
Bob:
I will be you $100,000 that Barack Hussein Obama will win the Presidency.
Thus demonstrating again the inverse probability of sane outcome and what happens in a political arena. The more sane, the less likely. The more nuts, the more likely.
And that fucking cunt John McCain! He is the one that wants to silence speech and blogs such as this one you are reading now!
Fuck -you McCain you Manchurian boot licker!
Post a Comment
<< Home