America loses yet again. A dark sinister day that will result in the narrow views of the few being forced upon too many.

God help America.

---

Trump is the military's reaction to the violent terrorist overthrow of the US government on Sept 11. FISAgate isn't a coincidence. The reason the FBI and "Clinton Campaign" TEAMED UP to spy on, unmask, entrap and frame a political candidate is because they were a function of the military dictatorship that was set up in place of the US government, through CoG.

Trump's bullshit is the opposite of destroying America.

Personally, I voted for Jill. She was the most conservative candidate, imo. Trump is an FDR socialist, who wants protectionism and isn't big on firearms. Hillary on the other hand, is a right wing extremist. Censorship of political speech, brownshirts violently assaulting people in the streets, flash mobs trying to "destroy the lives" of dissenters, like Kavanaugh.

Trump is Establishment, but not Imperial. He's not obsessed with the military conquest of Central Asia. He's making peace with all these nations. Look at Korea. That's what's gonna happen in Iran next. Just don't ask CNN.

---

It amazes me how over the top some people think.
“Oh no!!! The sky is falling!” Just because someone they don’t like gets elected. What great thing did 8 years of “the chosen one” Obama get us?
Liberalism always wants to take away our rights. They treat us like we are mindless children that can’t be trusted to make our own decisions without them controlling everything. We can’t have guns! We will be like the old west and just shoot everyone! Yet it’s ok to kill unwanted children.
Geez.... I don’t get it. I guess because I’m an unenlightened conservative.

---

Let's all return to 1954 when that good girl next door died in the basement of an unlicensed and less than sanitary clinic in an attempt to end an unwanted pregnancy.

President Obama took office from a (R) president that left office with the economy close to depression levels. Obama's hard work and common sense policies rescued America from the uncontrolled greed of corporate America. He lead the nation as his orders to take down Bin Laden were brilliantly carried out.
He signed the "Affordable Care Act" that has saved lives that otherwise would have been turned away from medical care. He never had a sex scandal that embarrassed the nation. He never got laughed at by the world at the United Nations.

As for the conservative minority, your repeating the message just as you've been taught. Congratulations, you're in precision goose step march with the rest of the me first and fuck everyone else assholes. Would you like a metal or a chest to hang it on ?

---

Obama's primary goal (which he failed to accomplish) was to push the TPP on an unwilling populace. I voted for Cynthia McKinney that yeaer, but I liked Obama way better than McCain. But let's keep it real.

Dude was George Dumbya 2.0. He won the Nobel Prize for "not being Dumbya," but it turned out he WAS Dumbya, just with more attractive packaging.

As for bin Ladin, as Benaszhir Bhutto stated in that BBC interview, he died in 2001. She was assassinated shortly thereafter for saying that.

---

An “unwanted pregnancy “.....gee, did you ever hear of GIRLS, keep your legs closed, or BOYS, keep your dick in your pants!
And if you are too much of an animal, put on a damn condom! Or are you too lazy to do that?
Yup, instead, let’s made baby murder a billion dollar business. Teach people there are no consequences for their actions. That will teach them self control, right?
Nah....why do that? Easier to just murder your “problem” and go on your way to your next bad life decision.

And Obama care has been a huge disappointment. Which by the way, he pushed through illegally. Liberalism at its finest.
And Obama never had a sex scandal. How do you know what he might have done 35 years ago?
And liberals NEVER have sex scandals that embarrassed our nation, right Mr. Clinton?
Keep your head in the liberalism sand. Keep “goose stepping” to what ever they tell you to think. Don’t bother trying to think for yourself, or your head might explode.

---

Now we’re getting somewhere!

Historical fact has been provided that PROVES the intent of the fore-fathers was to create a government where only rich white men could vote. By definition anyone believing this Intent was a good thing either doesn’t understand our history or is a misogynist, a racist and/or an oligarchist. But, you can be assured the Kochs and 1%ers, Scalia, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh do understand this Intent.

Your bold assertions about having a right to vote and slavery not in the Constitution PROVES that Koch Propaganda possesses your soul and spirit. Another trait of the Koch believer [Some don’t even realize this is what they are] is they meet scholarship with insults and spin. They’ll NEVER engage in scholarship and critical thinking.

First, how can a woman sing the praises of the fore-fathers? They made sure it was ILLEGAL for women to vote for 150 years. They were misogynist pig jagholes. I mean WTF could a woman be thinking in this regard?

Did you know that after the US Constitution’s ratification only New Jersey’s Constitution did not prohibit women the vote? And for the obvious social reasons women did not vote in great numbers until the very late 1790s. As the century turned, suddenly feeling the power of their voice, the women’s vote began to actually change the course to which the rich white man was heading. So, in 1807 New Jersey’s Constitution was changed, it criminalizes anyone other than white male property holders that voted.

The oligarchs didn’t just wake-up one day and decide women can vote; Patriotic, fearless women [and some men] risked life, limb and incarceration to decriminalize women voting. If all women continued to sit back and praise the forefathers, they still wouldn’t be able to vote.

On voting in general; the Constitution nor the Bill provide for voting rights because our Nation was conceived in oligarchy and the prospect that White rich Men are equal. We’ve had 60 Presidential administrations and 120 different Congresses and no Constitutional provisions that the Vote is a right. Who would object? It’s a universally agreed thing by the far right, the far left and everyone in between. You gotta wake-up! One man-one vote horrifies the Robberbaron, they realize 325M unified Americans could impose their will on them either thru the vote or job actions. This is the reason they love to see idiots calling themselves “right” or “left” throwing hate at one other…THEY LOVE IT!

The closest we came to Voting being a right was Reynolds [1964] and the series of Voter Rights Acts of the 1960s. These are being eroded by recent SCOTUS decisions [Valeo(1976); Citizen’s United (2010) and Husted (2018)]. FACT: You have no right to vote, never had one and Kavanaugh will work to further erode Reynolds and the VRAs of the 60's!

How dare you say slavery is not mentioned in the Constitution? What ignorant moron or deceptive clown are you relying on for this silliness? Art. 1 §2 states “other persons” are to be counted as 3/5 of “free persons.” “Other persons” than free persons are SLAVES!!!!! Art. 4 § 3states, “No Person held to Service or Labour in one State;” you understand this is describing slaves, right? Even this aside; slavery existed in EVERY state and surrounding territory that one could anticipate being part of the US, it was exhaustively discussed during the Convention, and the document on which our Nation is founded, didn’t mention ENDING slavery. That means the document ENDORSED slavery. Slavery occurred in EVERY state but [Vermont] up to 1860.

FACT: every single fore-father supported slavery with their actions, nonactions or lack of protest to it; even if some duplicitous lying assholes called themselves abolitionists. It wasn’t until 100 Years later, after all of our Founding Fathers, their kids and most grandkids were DEAD, that bondage slavery was supplanted by another 100 years of economic and social slavery [Jim Crow]. It is unconverted that our fore-father's intent was racism. So, tell me who wants to decide our laws today by their intent? HUH? I see 3 choices for you: Challenge the scholarship; admit their Intent should not be emulated or announce that you still agreed with their Intent.

If you have to argue things like slavery is not mentioned in Constitution to support the idea that our fore-fathers were great men; then even you know your beliefs can’t be intellectually supported. So why are you holding on to them so with such venom?

There is no slavery now. We as a country have grown in some ways. In some ways we have gone backwards.
But our forefathers wanted us to be free.

---

Read the 13th Amendment-It does not end all slavery!!!!!!!!!

Our forefathers just said they wanted "us to be free." Historical reality proves those words were propaganda designed to dupe us into being govern without representation unless you were White, Male and Rich. Until Jacksonian concepts came in; Nationally only delegates voted in about 1/3 of the states; in the other 2/3 you needed to own property, be White and Male to vote. And to vote for State offices you needed to own property, be White and be Male.

Your teachers have effed with your head!!!!




If someone thinks Kavanaugh will rule in a way that supports their wants; a real patriot will realize this should disqualify him from SCOTUS. A real patriot will put what's best for the Nation [a SCOTUS that rules with a clean unbiased mind] ahead of what's best for him.

And even if thinking selfishly, but long term, you dont want a person pigeon holed into radical thinking. For example, a SCOTUS guy that you know today will radically decide that a woman has no choice over her body, could radically decide tomorrow that no one has a choice over their reproduction capability. Or if he radically decides Trans dont exist or Muslims should be rounded up; he might one day decide you or your progeny have a characteristic that makes you irrelevant or requires you to be locked up.

Here's Kavanaugh's 1st question as a member of SCOTUS- The guy does not have a sharp legal mind!

JUSTICE KAVANAUGH: But -- but, counsel -- counsel, in Curtis Johnson, you rely heavily on the general statements of the Court, but the application of those general statements was to something very specific: Battery and a mere tap on the shoulder. And all Curtis Johnson seemed to hold was that that was excluded.

So why don't we follow what Curtis Johnson seemed to do in applying those general statements to the specific statute at issue here and why wouldn't that then encompass the Florida statute, which requires more than, say,
a tap on the shoulder?

Read the transcript [STOKELING v. US No. 17-5554], Kavanaugh simply does not have command of the case or a strong legal acumen!

MAGA

---