It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Tea Party Joe Miller Wins Alaska Senate Primary

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 07:15 PM
I don’t trust this neocon any further than I could throw him.

This guy graduated from West Point with a BS, graduated from UA Fairbanks with a masters in economics, and graduated from Yale Law School with a law degree and then went on to serve as both a federal and state judge.

Yale only graduates statists.

West Point only graduates statists (although Lee and Jackson graduated from there).

NO ONE gets appointed to the position of a federal judge without being a total statist of supreme power.

Of course, here is the reactionary Miller declaring we must have unlimited spending for unlimited war and that we must act quickly to blow up more countries that pose fake threats to our sovereignty.

Miller said he believes the defense budget could be run more efficiently, but the combat veteran of the first Gulf War does not think the defense budget should be cut, especially when facing possible threats from countries like Iran.

“If we have one nuclear bomb or one chemical weapon go off in one of our cities overnight, it changes the face of this nation and in a horrific way, not just in loss of life, but in loss of freedom, the impact financially,” Miller said. “We still haven’t recovered from 9/11. We can’t afford to have a military that isn’t that strong, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have efficiencies, and I think that’s what the secretary is trying to build.”

Invokes Iran, 9/11, and unlimited defense spending all in one breath – I think its safe to say this guy is a hard core neocon of ultimate statist imperial power.

The fact that he had Huckabee, Levin and Ingram endorsements plastered across his website was a pretty big clue even before I started digging. He makes no mention of his pro-imperial war plans stance on his supposedly conservative issues page.

Anyone that can acknowledge that we are broke, yet in the same breath say we need to have unlimited war with yet another country is a two faced morally bankrupt imperialist dog.

[edit on 1-9-2010 by mnemeth1]

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 07:25 PM
You know who really pisses me off as a two faced pig?

Mike Huckabee

Here's a former pastor who just loves blowing up kids in the name of imperial freedom.

This is for you Mr. Huckabee.

The War Prayer, by Mark Twain.

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing and spluttering; on every hand and far down the receding and fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by; nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts, and which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and invoked the God of Battles beseeching His aid in our good cause in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener. It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came -- next day the battalions would leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were there, their young faces alight with martial dreams -- visions of the stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! Then home from the war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud, happy, and envied by the neighbors and friends who had no sons and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for the flag, or, failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose, with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that tremendous invocation

*God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest! Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!*
Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language. The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable honor and glory --

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister, his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the preacher's side and stood there waiting. With shut lids the preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued with his moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in fervent appeal, "Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step aside -- which the startled minister did -- and took his place. During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep voice he said:

"I come from the Throne -- bearing a message from Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained to you its import -- that is to say, its full import. For it is like unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than he who utters it is aware of -- except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two -- one uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him Who heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder this -- keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer -- the uttered part of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other part of it -- that part which the pastor -- and also you in your hearts -- fervently prayed silently. And ignorantly and unthinkingly? God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. the *whole* of the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words. Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which follow victory--*must* follow it, cannot help but follow it. Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our hearts, go forth to battle -- be Thou near them! With them -- in spirit -- we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst, sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter, broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge of the grave and denied it -- for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord, blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet! We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts. Amen.

(*After a pause.*) "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits!"

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic, because there was no sense in what he said.

[edit on 1-9-2010 by mnemeth1]

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:28 PM
I'm not surprised at all. Of course, he's not actually a believer or follower of the Tea Party - he just jumped on the bandwagon like almost every other conservative out there, when he saw how popular it was becoming.

Then almost as surely as if the result of a centralized plan, his insane policies begin to tarnish the name of the Tea Party. Rand Paul may have some dubious ideas about our defense budget, as Miller does, but Miller is a complete loon. I've not seen one of his political stances that seems to represent what the Tea Party REALLY stands for - a return to Constitutional values and responsible fiscal policy.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:40 PM
reply to post by mnemeth1

The first tea party event was Ron Paul's presidential fund-raiser that raised a record amount (something like 7 million) for a one-day fundraiser where the money is essentially collected on that day December 17 (the day of the Boston tea party). I believe that was in 2007.

Very quickly the tea party was side-tracked by neoconservatives, and ever since then most tea party events are hypocrisy parties celebrating the hypocrisy of claiming they want a smaller government but then supporting trillion dollar wars. I question whether people are literally mentally insane to actually say the US should be spending about the same as the rest of the world combined on our military. Ummm, no. We should be spending whatever the average per capita rate is at most because if we are not planning to cause trouble then we don't need a big military. Big militaries are for people who want to cause trouble, unless of course they are about to be invaded.

Edit: I should add that there is a distinction between tea party members and tea party leaders. The "leaders" tend to be neoconservatives, but most (but not nearly all) of the actual members seem to want smaller government even when it comes to the US military.

[edit on 1-9-2010 by truthquest]

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 09:48 PM
reply to post by Son of Will

I've studied Rand very carefully and I'm convinced that he is at least a minarchist, most likely an anarchist.

Rand is just far more politically astute than his father.

His father speaks the blunt truth that no one wants to hear.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 10:15 PM
reply to post by mnemeth1

Where did you graduate from?

And are you for or against the Constitution of the United States of America?

It's far too easy in this day and age to mis-type United to spell UNTIED.

That's mine...I might copyright it... : )

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 10:22 PM
reply to post by cryingindian


If I'm arguing with a democrat I'm for it, if I'm talking to another libertarian I'm against it.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 10:40 PM
reply to post by truthquest

Right on, truthquest!

I gave to that donation drive, even looking at losing my job! It was the first time I'd ever donated to a politician!

We need to bring back a government for the people by the people.

The weird thing is, as a registered republican, I've used the unemployment funds provided by my tax dollars. So as a fiscal conservative, I have to say that some of the government programs are helpful and do work. My pride was broken by having to use it as a last resort, but I worked my butt off trying to keep my family afloat through the recession, which was NOT the fault of any taxpayer, because the current form of government is to big to keep track of, let alone fight! If things were smaller and simpler, we'd be able to keep better track of what government is doing, because most of the decisions would be more localized.

I'm not an anarchist by any stretch. That would be bad...although I and my family would still survive ; )

Democrats care for people without labeling them. I get that. But what I don't get is the argument against fiscal conservatism vs. where we are now. I care about people, too. That's part of what makes America GREAT! What democrats don't realize is that there was a man in the last election that would have helped their cause, because he wanted to make government more localized and accountable.

Let's reduce government size and expenditures. Let's bring back our troops to protect our borders. Let's reel in the corruption. Let's restore America to it's status of strength and respect.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:26 PM
reply to post by cryingindian

I've used unemployment too, that doesn't mean there isn't a better way.

The better way would be for government not to take the money from me in the first place there by leaving me free to buy my own unemployment insurance.

The better way would be for government not to raid my earnings so I could save up enough of a fund on my own to carry me through an unemployment period without having to rely on anyone.

The better way would be to have government out of the monetary system and markets, thereby creating so many jobs that unemployment would be for such a short period it wouldn't even matter.

We used to FIGHT to have immigrants move to this country because we needed labor so bad.

Remember Ellis Island?

That's how plentiful jobs could be if government got the hell out of the way. You wouldn't even need to worry about unemployment because we'd be demanding Mexico give us all of their citizens.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:34 PM
reply to post by mnemeth1

I really don't understand why we're arguing, then.

Thanks for your post and reply.

So you're FOR the "Tea Party?" I've made posts on here that suggest that the Tea Party is just another vehicle for "neo-cons" to regain majority...

I'm against the term Tea Party. And I haven't been paying attention to the Alaska races.

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 11:36 PM
reply to post by cryingindian

I'm FOR liberty

I'm AGAINST anyone that feels entitled to use me as personal slave labor.

top topics


log in