Chavez Dead, Finally

[-The-Artist-]

Yet again, another leftist chimes in

http://twitchy.com/2013/03/05/michael-moore-r...

You think that Sherrod isn't buddies with him...

I've been told by many a leftist that when ever Rush Limbaugh says something they don't like, that prominent Rs must condemn him.

Time to hold the leftists to the same standard.

I want Sherrod and the Ohio House Ds to condemn Moore, Serrano and Carter. Otherwise they are dictator-enablers

Waiting...

[Duke for Mayor]

-The-Artist- wrote:

<quoted text>
Eat it Marxist, your hero will face judgement for his crimes
http://dailycaller.com/2013/03/05/jimmy-carte...
And yet again, why Jimmah was bad, and why you cannot elect Democrats.

Wow I didn't know I was a marxist. Ya learn somethin new everyday, I guess.

woof

[-The-Artist-]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
He's a Venezualan. I'm fairly certain the CIA tried to kill him.
Of course, being a strict Constitutionalist, I'm sure you approve of that sort of intervention in the internal political affairs of sovereign nations.
woof

The Constitution is silent as to whether or not assassinations are illegal.

Oh, and BTW, you have now met Che's standard of "paranoid conspiracy theorist"

Enjoy defending a dirty, Jew hating, Iran loving dictator who dramatically increased inflation, ran huge budget deficits even with 100/bbl oil, rampantly increased military spending, and needlessly increased regional tensions. Not to mention a far higher crime rate.

Or that Chavez was interfering in the internal affairs of Colombia...

You gotta realize, dog, that I know Communism, I know why it fails, and "Los Gringos Imperialisimo" is not the answer.

Senor Chavez was a brutal tyrant, a second rate thug.

That progressives would defend him, speaks volumes, considering their historical grief over Pinochet, a leader who actually achieved progress at the cost of his tyranny.

[-The-Artist-]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
Wow I didn't know I was a marxist. Ya learn somethin new everyday, I guess.
woof

You are easily the forum's most far-left poster, you express rapid anti-capitalist views and favor nationalizations, you also express visible self hatred of your own people, a component of Marxist internationalism. Not to mention that you support many points of the Communist Manifesto.

I've never seen you reject dialectical materialism, anyone who accepts that idea, is a marxist.

[Hugh Victor Thompson III]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
He's a Venezualan. I'm fairly certain the CIA tried to kill him.
Of course, being a strict Constitutionalist, I'm sure you approve of that sort of intervention in the internal political affairs of sovereign nations.
woof

I approve of what's in the best interest of OUR nation. A pity you lefties never think like that.
The CIA had its balls cut off by Frank Church 40 years ago. That's how we got stuck having to send an Army into Iraq instead of Mitch Rapp.

[Enzyte Bob]

NICK GILLESPIE ON THE (LITERALLY COMMIE-LOVING) REP. JOSE SERRANO (D-NY):“In case you thought that only useful idiots like actor Sean Penn were willing to overlook the tyrant Hugo Chavez’s willingness to tyrannize his own people in the pursuit of ‘social justice’ and self-aggrandizement, there’s always Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.)... It’s stunning what people will excuse if the right magic words are sprinkled over the repression.”

A man who “cared about the poor,” Chavez amassed a net worth of over $1 billion while in power.

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-poli...

[-The-Artist-]

Enzyte Bob wrote:

NICK GILLESPIE ON THE (LITERALLY COMMIE-LOVING) REP. JOSE SERRANO (D-NY):“In case you thought that only useful idiots like actor Sean Penn were willing to overlook the tyrant Hugo Chavez’s willingness to tyrannize his own people in the pursuit of ‘social justice’ and self-aggrandizement, there’s always Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.)... It’s stunning what people will excuse if the right magic words are sprinkled over the repression.”
A man who “cared about the poor,” Chavez amassed a net worth of over $1 billion while in power.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-poli...

The US left is showing how disgusting it is.

When Pinochet died, no one here on the right was lionizing him.

[Duke for Mayor]

-The-Artist- wrote:

<quoted text>
You are easily the forum's most far-left poster, you express rapid anti-capitalist views and favor nationalizations, you also express visible self hatred of your own people, a component of Marxist internationalism. Not to mention that you support many points of the Communist Manifesto.
I've never seen you reject dialectical materialism, anyone who accepts that idea, is a marxist.

You don't have a clue about me. You think you do, because apparently you believe that anyone who sees things differently than you do must be either a marxist, communist, or socialist.

Sorry Karl. That's not the way it works.

woof

[Che Reagan Christ]

-The-Artist- wrote:

<quoted text>

Oh, and BTW, you have now met Che's standard of "paranoid conspiracy theorist"

No, he hasn't.

[Che Reagan Christ]

-The-Artist- wrote:

<quoted text>
You are easily the forum's most far-left poster, you express rapid anti-capitalist views and favor nationalizations, you also express visible self hatred of your own people, a component of Marxist internationalism. Not to mention that you support many points of the Communist Manifesto.
I've never seen you reject dialectical materialism, anyone who accepts that idea, is a marxist.

I've never seen you reject dialectical materialism either. Uh oh.

[Duke for Mayor]

Che Reagan Christ wrote:

<quoted text>
I've never seen you reject dialectical materialism either. Uh oh.

My personal favorite was Karl's allegation that calling for nationalization (of the oil research and extraction industry) somehow makes one a marxist, socialist, or communist.

So the story I suppose is told like this: Nationalized interstate system, social security, space program, good. Nationalized Oil extraction bad.

Now I'm told I harbor "rapid anti-capitalist" views.

I just want the oil companies to stop making absurdly obscene profits off of a commodity that is essential to the economic security of the Nation and throw a little bit of that cash our way instead.

woof

[Duke for Mayor]

Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:

<quoted text>I approve of what's in the best interest of OUR nation. A pity you lefties never think like that.
The CIA had its balls cut off by Frank Church 40 years ago. That's how we got stuck having to send an Army into Iraq instead of Mitch Rapp.

Ok Paco, I'll bite.

How was deposing Hugo Chavez in 2002 in America's best interests?

woof

[Hugh Victor Thompson III]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
My personal favorite was Karl's allegation that calling for nationalization (of the oil research and extraction industry) somehow makes one a marxist, socialist, or communist.
So the story I suppose is told like this: Nationalized interstate system, social security, space program, good. Nationalized Oil extraction bad.
Now I'm told I harbor "rapid anti-capitalist" views.
I just want the oil companies to stop making absurdly obscene profits off of a commodity that is essential to the economic security of the Nation and throw a little bit of that cash our way instead.
woof

"So the story I suppose is told like this: Nationalized interstate system, social security, space program, good. Nationalized Oil extraction bad."

---Interstate Highway System: Build originally for defense. And road building by the federal government is covered in the Constitution.

---Social Security: Unconstitutional.

---Space Program: Originally developed and still partially used for military purposes. Constitutional. The civilian angle is political, created to create a contrast to the Soviet efforts of 50 years ago.(You realize Armstrong instead of Aldrin was the first to step on the moon's surface because he was a "civilian," right?)

Now, who discovered oil, developed the technology, constructed the refineries and grew the business into the industry as we know it today? Certainly not the government. No Dukie, the PRIVATE SECTOR did that, not your precious deity. Nationalization would be theft and nationalization is the hallmark of a socialist or Communist government. You can dress it up all you want (in Canada, such ventures are called "Crown Corporations") but it goes against everything this nation is supposed to stand for.

"I just want the oil companies to stop making absurdly obscene profits off of a commodity that is essential to the economic security of the Nation and throw a little bit of that cash our way instead."

You don't give a damn about this nation and its economic security. If you did you'd oppose this "president" and his party with every fiber of your being. The rest of your paragraph says it all...you're an envious mooch at heart. "Profit" (unless it's in your pocket) is a dirty word. You WANT...yet what have you done to deserve it? Not a bloody thing.

You're a disgrace as a citizen.

[Hugh Victor Thompson III]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok Paco, I'll bite.
How was deposing Hugo Chavez in 2002 in America's best interests?
woof

Obviously you approved of him allying with our enemies and having their influences spread even more in our backyard. And his takeover of US oil company assets no doubt warmed your heart.
Like I said, you're not much of an American.

[Kemosahbe]

Enzyte Bob wrote:

NICK GILLESPIE ON THE (LITERALLY COMMIE-LOVING) REP. JOSE SERRANO (D-NY):“In case you thought that only useful idiots like actor Sean Penn were willing to overlook the tyrant Hugo Chavez’s willingness to tyrannize his own people in the pursuit of ‘social justice’ and self-aggrandizement, there’s always Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.)... It’s stunning what people will excuse if the right magic words are sprinkled over the repression.”
A man who “cared about the poor,” Chavez amassed a net worth of over $1 billion while in power.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-poli...

In my opinion he was no different than Marcos or the Duvaliers. Disgusting when a national leader of a poor country gets rich while in office.

[Reality Speaks]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't have a clue about me. You think you do, because apparently you believe that anyone who sees things differently than you do must be either a marxist, communist, or socialist.
Sorry Karl. That's not the way it works.
woof

it does when it is true; and in this case it is

go back to your fantasy, today is the day you take the bar exam.

[Reality Speaks]

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
My personal favorite was Karl's allegation that calling for nationalization (of the oil research and extraction industry) somehow makes one a marxist, socialist, or communist.
So the story I suppose is told like this: Nationalized interstate system, social security, space program, good. Nationalized Oil extraction bad.
Now I'm told I harbor "rapid anti-capitalist" views.
I just want the oil companies to stop making absurdly obscene profits off of a commodity that is essential to the economic security of the Nation and throw a little bit of that cash our way instead.
woof

pure fantasy

[6was9]

Reality Speaks wrote:

<quoted text>
pure fantasy

Pure idiocy.

[Duke for Mayor]

Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:

<quoted text>
"So the story I suppose is told like this: Nationalized interstate system, social security, space program, good. Nationalized Oil extraction bad."
---Interstate Highway System: Build originally for defense. And road building by the federal government is covered in the Constitution.
---Social Security: Unconstitutional.
---Space Program: Originally developed and still partially used for military purposes. Constitutional. The civilian angle is political, created to create a contrast to the Soviet efforts of 50 years ago.(You realize Armstrong instead of Aldrin was the first to step on the moon's surface because he was a "civilian," right?)
Now, who discovered oil, developed the technology, constructed the refineries and grew the business into the industry as we know it today? Certainly not the government. No Dukie, the PRIVATE SECTOR did that, not your precious deity. Nationalization would be theft and nationalization is the hallmark of a socialist or Communist government. You can dress it up all you want (in Canada, such ventures are called "Crown Corporations") but it goes against everything this nation is supposed to stand for.
"I just want the oil companies to stop making absurdly obscene profits off of a commodity that is essential to the economic security of the Nation and throw a little bit of that cash our way instead."
You don't give a damn about this nation and its economic security. If you did you'd oppose this "president" and his party with every fiber of your being. The rest of your paragraph says it all...you're an envious mooch at heart. "Profit" (unless it's in your pocket) is a dirty word. You WANT...yet what have you done to deserve it? Not a bloody thing.
You're a disgrace as a citizen.

I am a "disgrace as a citizen" huh? Why? Because I hold position which you disagree with? Chew on that for a while Paco, while you ponder what it means to be an "American".

Let me ask you these two simple questions:

Would the US government be able to defend itself without the exploration of, research on, extraction of, or refining of oil?

Would the US economy continue whirling without those things?

You and I see things differently. I'm just as "American as you Paco...maybe more so. I don't view those that I disagree with as enemies of the state. You do.

Maybe someday you'll actually grow into and fully understand the rights of citizenship you've been granted as a result of your parents' copulation.

woof

[Duke for Mayor]

Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:

<quoted text>Obviously you approved of him allying with our enemies and having their influences spread even more in our backyard. And his takeover of US oil company assets no doubt warmed your heart.
Like I said, you're not much of an American.

Why do you so oppose the principle of national sovereignty?

woof