CODE RED, White and Blue

[rinoHUNTER]

Are you one of the MILLIONS of American Patriots sick
of the never ending attack on We The People, by your
own Party TRAITORS? Tired of the Repukelicans and the
Dimocraps? Thinking there is nothing you can do?
WHY NOT FIGHT THE PARTIES WE HAVE IN PLACE???
Both have been BOUGHT out by TRAITORS.
Seeking a return to FOUNDING PRINCIPLES?
Willing to FIGHT for CONSERVATISM?
Sick to death of Code Stink(pink)?
Well friend, you may be ready for CODE RED, WHITE and
BLUE. We will fight for the end of treason from within.
We will promote only those in ANY party who will ACT!
on OUR behalf, and return forever those principles upon
which this once GREAT NATION was founded. Party labels
are gone, and Patriotism will return, if we ACT NOW!
What say you, Patriot, ready for a return to GREATNESS?
LET'S TAKE ON THESE COMMUNISTS!
CODE RED, White and Blue... We can do it, together.
[glow=red,2,300]THESE COLORS DON'T RUN.[/glow]

Join in and help beat the sick minds @ www.actblue.com/
It's the BATTLE OF THE sick vs THE WELL. Let's WIN.

[creationist]

Happy Flag Day!

[rayman]

Happy Flag Day indeed. Happy Code RED, WHITE and BLUE DAY.

[uuebmeister]

Thanks HUNTER, for empazing that we're all together in this.

I find it hard to caricaturize (sic) my impression of this actblue P.A.C. other to say how sad it is that there's such effort to raise money from people to fill the coffers of media in order to elect people whose goal is to levy even more money to fund the nannystate. Talk about double taxation!

[rinoHUNTER]

Thank you, meister. We all need to stay together,
IMHO, and show the Socialists in ANY party, that
they can change diapers if they want, but not with
American Citizens. PoliticalRevolution, is a must.
Both parties need to be cleared out... PERIOD.

[krell]

I just want to make sure nobody misses it.

Just 17% Say Federal Government Represents Will of the People

Just 17% of voters say that the federal government represents the will of the American people. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 68% disagree and 15% are not sure

These views are consistent across partisan and demographic lines. Men, women, young, old, Republican, Democrat, conservative, liberal, all offer a bleak assessment of what is supposed to be a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Sixty-seven percent (67%) of voters say that the federal government has become a special interest group that looks out primarily for its own interest. Just 15% disagree with that assessment.

www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c....l_of_the_people

No pie-in-the-sky stay with the Republican party with lack of statistical substantiation. We the people are fed up with Democrats and Republicans alike. The move is on folks:

Voters Ready For Baldwin

[rinoHUNTER]

Voters

[creationist]

Voters need to stop letting FOX's newest poll determine whether a candidate is good or not. I really don't know yet how involved I'll get with the Constitution Party, but I'm definitely going to try to promote it verbally!

[sbenn]

Jun 16, 2008 22:34:25 GMT -5 creationist said:

Voters need to stop letting FOX's newest poll determine whether a candidate is good or not. I really don't know yet how involved I'll get with the Constitution Party, but I'm definitely going to try to promote it verbally!

I cannot get involved with the Constituion Party for the same reason that I could not support Ron Paul. As Paul, they are niave about the war and about the need to fight off of American soil instead of waiting for the war to come here. Like Ron Paul they believe we should get rid of our nuclear defense system. They have their heads in the sand when they think if we disarm our enemies will disarm also. China, N Korea, Iran, etc all have nuclear power and will wipe us out if we were to get rid of ours.
www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/
www.nowpublic.com/environment/nuclear-war-threat-never-went-away-declan-butler

Ronald Reagan believed in being armed as set forth in this speech.

www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/22/documents/starwars.speech/


The following is copied directly for their site.

The goal of the United States military is to defend the nation and our allies from attacks by foreign nations. The Constitutionalist Party does not see a rationale that supports the idea that America must outspend every other nation by such a huge amount in order to fulfill this obligation. The CP advocates more fiscal efficiency when it comes to new military technologies and maintaining our defenses. Too many weapons programs wind up being more political than practical, and they wind up wasting millions and millions of taxpayer dollars that would be better left in the pockets of the taxpayer in the first place. The CP does support the development of useful new weapons to augment our military capabilities, but the current situation is too wasteful and politically manipulated.

The Constitutionalist Party advocates continuing negotiations towards nuclear reduction and disarmament with other nations. Nuclear weapons serve as a threat to the security and safety of all nations on Earth, and working towards replacing them with smaller-scale weapons that will cause less long-term environmental damage and will cause fewer civilian casualties is a policy that works in the best interests of all nations.

The Constitutionalist Party calls for an immediate cap on the number of American soldiers stationed abroad. The CP acknowledges previous commitments with other nations and will not betray the compacts made, but the CP does not support the use of more troops for foreign assignments. If new situations arise, the soldiers will have to be drawn from other existing foreign duties and not from our home troops. The CP advocates working towards reducing America's foreign military involvement in the future. The CP also opposes the use of American troops by the United Nations to fight conflicts that America has no business being involved in, and opposes the use of American troops to fight aggressive wars against countries that have not committed aggression against the United States first.
The Constitutionalist Party opposes the use of Conscription except when American soil (excluding embassies) is attacked directly.
The Constitutionalist Party opposes the establishment of a national missile defense system. Despite common conception, the United States does not face a significant threat of missile attack. Rogue nations are far more likely to employ a more clandestine method of attack should they obtain nuclear capability, and accidental launches are too small a threat to warrant such a large expenditure of money and effort. In addition, work toward a missile defense system will only serve to engender hostility and distrust from Russia and China, even as such a system would fail to amount to much protection against a possible future conflict with either.

[krell]

So, sbenn, would you suggest that we are better off with the two parties that are leaving us brankrupt, persuing their own agenda toward communism, devaluing the American dollar to the point where a working person cannot buy a tank of gas to drive to work? Are you suggesting, really, that the Democrats and Republicans have given us a better choice?

Let's see missle defense systems??? How many balistic missles are there in the world? How many systems will we have to build to defend ourselves from all those ballistic missles??? It is rather impossible to build an adequate system. I guess, since 9-11, we should also build an anti-commercial airliner defense system.

It is clear that you buy into the Republican/Democrat brainwashing. Funny that alleged Conservatives can call other groups of people "Brainwashed" without seeing their own brainwashing.

Are you suggesting that George Bush eavsdropping on you is for your own good? Do you mean that McCain-Kennedy is for your own good? Do you mean McCain-Lieberman is for your own good?
I think it is time for many people to retool their view of reality.

[creationist]

What GWB is doing is no different from the Wilson Administration, and the FDR Administration. The government expands its programs so it can increase surveillance on Americans, because they COULD be traitors. Actually, the government KNOWS we're not traitors, and just wants to increase its control over us by pretending there is national emergency. I like MacArthur's quote (now on YouTube on Globalization Page 3), in which he says the media and government keep us in a national state of emergency at all times, an unhealthy state. And after WW2, the "Commies" were the "threat", and yet who would have expected that the CIA and FBI, scaring Americans to death with interrogations, were riddled with Commies themselves? The least expected place to find a traitor is in a government that looks for traitors, right? WRONG. GWB is obsessed with the occult, and I wouldn't be surprised if we someday learn that Huckabee was at the Bohemian Grove, too . . .

[creationist]

One thing to keep in mind is that a retreat from the Middle East is not the same as burying our heads in the sand. Our military is able to defend our homeland, but the problem is that our economic independence is gone. It can be redeveloped if government does its job. I posted some good suggestions in "Conservatism and Its Future", "Traditonal Values and Globalization" yesterday, from a blogger elsewhere. That's backward, which is okay, because forward only leads to economic and political (and spiritual) ruin.

[krell]

We all talk about the Constitution and how the Federal government is pursuing it's own agenda contrary to the Constitution. Then there is all these assinine comments defending your fears that have been s p o o n fed to you by the Democrats and Republicans.

Okay, show me where in the Constitution:

That the president or congress are authorized to send our troops to fight somebody elses war.

That the president or congress are authorized to commit the military beyond "Defense of the several states".

That the president or congress are authorized to give away our money to foreign nations - even those that seek our destruction; to people that refuse to work for a living; to fund abortions for people that chose not to use contraception; for an agency called FEMA to people that have been hit by a natural disaster.

That the president or congress are authorized to ignore our laws and give amnesty to people that have entered our country illegally.

That the president or congress can put any American citizen under survailence and ignore the right to privacy.

That the president or congress can authorize holding people against their will without charges or establishing guilt under the law.

Does this list really need to go any further? You b i t c h and complain and b i t c h and complain about this government and how much you know about the Constitution. Then you open your mouth and demonstrate how little you know, much less understand, about the Constitution. How can you demand that the government get back to the Constitution when you have so little understanding of it, then turn around and defend every un-Constitutional thing the government does based upon the irrational rationale of the fear and b. s. that has been s p o o n fed to you by the Democrats and Republicans.

You are either for or you are against the Constitution. You cannot have both. So stop b i t c h i n g, complaining and whining about what the government has done unless you are willing to read and understand the Constitution and take a stand for it.

And, sbenn, all you have done in your above post is recite your dislike for Ron Paul (which we have all pretty much done at one point or another). What I would like you to do, is go through the points you want to make, above, and critique them item by item to demonstrate how any of it is out of line with the Constitution. Back up what you want to say with FACTS. And let's find out who really has there head burried in the sand.

[creationist]

Krell, I really appreciate how you made the Guantanamo issue clear for me. Conservatives are saying it'll be the death blow to Constitution to grant terrorists rights, but you showed the Geneva Accords and explained the REAL reason GWB doesn't want court hearings for "terrorists". Terrorists exist, but largely because it's tit for tat from BURYING 12,000 IRAQIS ALIVE IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR! George Bush's orders, you know.

[krell]

Jun 17, 2008 12:44:48 GMT -5 creationist said:

Krell, I really appreciate how you made the Guantanamo issue clear for me. Conservatives are saying it'll be the death blow to Constitution to grant terrorists rights, but you showed the Geneva Accords and explained the REAL reason GWB doesn't want court hearings for "terrorists". Terrorists exist, but largely because it's tit for tat from BURYING 12,000 IRAQIS ALIVE IN THE PERSIAN GULF WAR! George Bush's orders, you know.

I don't know about the 12,000 Iraqis issue. A very major part of the terrorist issue is that Saudi Arabia chose the U.S. military as a defense buffer rather than choosing Bin Laden's group.

Bin Laden offered protection, to the Saudis, against Saddam Hussein. When the Saudis chose the US Bin Laden was offended and humiliated... And that fomented his ranting about infidels occupying Muslim countries. But those loons will find any excuse for killing people.