Is The GOP Being Blackmailed?

Posted by $ allosaur 8 years, 10 months ago to Politics
31 comments | Share | Flag

I find this to be an interesting Obama crime family conspiracy theory.


I thought being blamed for government shutdowns was why the midterm victorious GOP completely lost its spine.

All Comments

  • Posted by freedomforall 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Perot had a genuine concern about his country.Perot built a company from the ground up without a big inheritance to get him started, similar to Sam Walton. He cared enough about his employees that he put together a team to rescue them from the Arabs holding them hostage. He embodied the American spirit of independence and self reliance.

    Trump is an ugly charicature of all the unintended consequences that corruption by power and wealth can bring. Trump would have been a perfect one to put on King George's crown and no one in the colonies would have noticed any change. Trump is an embarrassment to America He should be King of a backwater African tribe. (Apologies for offense to the tribe.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Maybe so, but he was shot with a .22 and the law he signed eliminated machine guns. I'm not sure I see the correlation.

    Edit: spelling
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Reagan got shot at. I can somewhat see how he might not be quite as enthusiastic for gun rights after that.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago
    Another way to put it is this: No but the country is. Either that or it's a protection racket.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Then had their snake in the grass Buchanan ready to destroy them. That wasn't the Democrats that was the Republicans.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    So you are saying he is a supporter of evil. Evil is evil. It's the opposite of good. Roberts then is an evil supporting enabler and so are his supporters.Spineless might work though.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago
    What government shutdowns. The government never shuts down. It's a hoax. They lay off a few of their un needed and threaten to shut down grand moms social security check. Security Forces both militry and civilian. Medicare, Social Security etc. etc. NEVER shut down. it's the oldest hoax i the books

    right uip there with budget cuts.

    As for the crime family conspiracy he's from America's only home grown criminal class. US Congress (Mark Twin said it first)

    Lost it's spine or just acting their part as a member in good standing of the Government Party?

    They offer two sets of two - four candidates and don't care who wins. They maintain control and their agenda moves forward.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    the government party or coalition at best is composed of the lefts left wing Democrats and the lefts right wing Republicans. Both are straight up left wing as they both believe in Government control of citizens. Their center is the spot between their two wings. As opposed to the true center which is the Constitution located to the right of the Government Party. And they did it by just quietly moving the signpost added a redefinition over the last 120 or 130 years. Never wondered why they say one thing and do another and give you that blank faced huuhhh stare if you ask why? Clinton ran as a neo democrat we are the party of the people we have changed. No more anti-civil rights etc. Bush ran on Reagans coat tails. Perot was a success in one thing. His group exposed the other two for what they are. A two party system heading towards a one party system. Bush Clinton Clinton Bush Bush Obama Obama You just read the answer all covering for each other and all making sure their iron grip on political power remains supreme. think not? Explain the Patriot Act and it's anti Civil Rights Bill of rights provisions. Left 'Wing, socialist fascists with a protective echelon in the making. On the important issues they the GOP consistently caves to the Democrats. That is what counts. What they say is meaningless. It doesn't matter which of their candidates win. Their agenda moves forward.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 8 years, 10 months ago
    Another great post from dino.

    Gives pause for thought.

    I am wondering if there is a combo going on here. Perhaps the depths of the Potomac poisoning is the very mechanism by which they are getting "blackmailed". And this is a major part of the problem. To even get there, they have had to compromise any principles they ever may have held already and are already fodder for exposure. There is no chance for a Mr Smith to even get close.

    The threat of a liberal media "piling on" and highlighting their hypocrisy then is enough to send these sunshine "patriots" running for cover.

    Kind of a literary Horse Head in the Bed.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 8 years, 10 months ago
    In Washington as elsewhere, we have a monoparty system. The Monoparty is like the twisted rocks of Canyon Lands National Park. It changes as you walk around it. You can't rely on it as a landmark because its aspect changes as you move from one point to another. Just when you think it is something you can rely on, it changes, leaving you confused and lost.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by RevJay4 8 years, 10 months ago
    That would certainly explain a lot. And, yes, I've been thinking along those same lines for quite some time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 8 years, 10 months ago
    I had the same thought after the ObamaCare win. Could not believe Roberts voted as he did, but perhaps as others are saying, he saw a reduction in total government power, and voted to keep ObamaCare a a lesser evil supporting power.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by InfamousEric 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I wholeheartedly agree Zen...

    I frequently try to show people how obvious this is by paraphrasing Rand's "Mystics of Muscle vs Mystics of Spirit" passage. Replacing muscle with democrats, & spirit with republicans.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Mitch 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Who is “they” that joined your “Government Party”?

    I take it you were for Perot at the time? I liked his message also and he wasn’t from the establishment. Just seems a little too perfect in the way it all went down. If I remember right, Pat Buchanan wasn’t even close, no need to go through the expense of financing an operative to destroy the opposition. Perot was making major head way at the time and pulled ahead of Clinton and Dole (or was forecasted to pull ahead)… Without Perot in both elections, arguably Clinton wouldn’t have been elected in ether the 1992 or 1996 elections.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    No they joined the Government Party of their own free will. Pat Buchanan was however a Republican plant to destroy the Perot effort especially after it's early successes. A similar Republican effort took care of the Tea Party. Al lthe Democrats had to do was distort it a bit in the FMSM. The Republicans have for some time been the right wing of the left. They have no excuse. Both halves which I refer to as the Government Party believe in government control of citizens by any means necessary. Forget what they say...watch what they do.

    We tried punishing them - and were ignored. They had their chance(s) for the last half century - and failed.

    Quid Pro Quo? It's called pork, including the right to do insider trading and retire as millionaires with 100% medical coverage for life.

    One difference between the two halves. The 18:1 death ration of Democrat Wars vs. Republican Wars.Of interest only to people in combat zones. Other that that it's just interchangeably corporatist, statist and laundering tax dollars in to campaign and other contributions. Ethanol and Davis-Bacon lead the way. They also take turns being the lightning rod for the excesses of the other and get the same agenda pushed forward as a reward.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Mitch 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I personally believe Perot was a Clinton plant, just nutty enough to pull only enough Republican votes to allow Bill to win. When he started to pull ahead in the polls, he left the race due to allegations of death threats. Who at this level hasn’t had to deal with that before? Then, right before the general election, he gets back in again. I’m sure if you look, you’ll find a quid pro quo somewhere.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks for the correction. I never can remember all those names of bills. Reagan's intent was apparently to lessen some of the bad effects of the 68 law, but he supposedly wasn't aware of the last minute Hughes Amendment passed with no debate and on a questionable voice vote. An effect was to ban any NFA registry of machine guns after that date and drive private development and innovators like Gene Stoner out of the business. But the major effect was to ban an entire class of personal weapons from the population in general.

    I guess Reagan might get some excuse, but he let a lot of things happen during his presidency that weren't great for freedom. Then you get Bush in 89, by Executive Action banning the import of semi-autos. I just haven't trusted any Republican since Ike and forget the rest of them.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo