It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Is it good for any party to control all three branches?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by RockerDom
All this talk of the Democratic Party being dead, and beaten is pure hogwash. Out of approimately 115 million votes, Bush got roughly 59.5, Kerry about 56. Bush only won by 4 electoral votes, Regan won by over 500.
- Dom


What I cannot understand is how they could not find a candidate to beat a president with such low approvel ratings. This should have been a slam dunk. Most of the voters I have spoken to voted AGAINST the other guy not for their guy.

Both parties are in for problems if they dont start moving to the center its just the Democrats are a little further off then the Republicans




posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk

What I cannot understand is how they could not find a candidate to beat a president with such low approvel ratings. This should have been a slam dunk. Most of the voters I have spoken to voted AGAINST the other guy not for their guy.


indeed, the sheer number of voters indicates dissent. people don't show up in record numbers to 'go with the flow'. they were there to oust bush. if this had been an old fashioned paper vote, it would have been a landslide. the 'progressive' advent of technology, coupled with mass media brainwashing stops this nasty 'popular opinion' from mattering.

yay.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by Amuk

What I cannot understand is how they could not find a candidate to beat a president with such low approvel ratings. This should have been a slam dunk. Most of the voters I have spoken to voted AGAINST the other guy not for their guy.


indeed, the sheer number of voters indicates dissent. people don't show up in record numbers to 'go with the flow'. they were there to oust bush. if this had been an old fashioned paper vote, it would have been a landslide. the 'progressive' advent of technology, coupled with mass media brainwashing stops this nasty 'popular opinion' from mattering.

yay.


Actually, the sheer number of voters indicates the importance of this election. Like it or not, Bush won. "They" were not ther to oust Bush. "They" were there to elect a President.

How would this been a landslide for Kerry? This vote was less contested than the 2000 vote that Bush won. Can the Republicans really controll every state? Please don't say it came down to Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf

Actually, the sheer number of voters indicates the importance of this election. Like it or not, Bush won. "They" were not ther to oust Bush. "They" were there to elect a President.

How would this been a landslide for Kerry? This vote was less contested than the 2000 vote that Bush won. Can the Republicans really controll every state? Please don't say it came down to Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004.


first of all, i'd like to voiice my more relevent opinion that it wouldn't matter who was put into office. everything is carefully planned using "psychohistory', to borrow a term from asimov.
if kerry had 'won', i would be equally vitriolic. at least bush is the 'enemy you know'. they are both illuminati bloodline, related to the windsors and SKULL AND BONESmen, the 'germanic death cult" see prisonplanet.com for more info.

the exit polls indicate a kerry win. this alone should raise a few eyebrows.

kerry caving, when it wasn't clear that he need concede, that in fact he may have won, should raise a few more.

the voting machines did just that, ...you simply plug them in, and they vote for bush. no actual voters required.

it obviously DID come down to florida in 2000, and then some back pocket judges decided that bush should win. he didn't win, it was just decided by a few guys in gowns that he did. no actual voters required.

i tell you, if i was an american, i'd be chompin' at the bit.
of course, this is what 'they' want. they want you to start being violent, and running amok in the streets. that way, they can fill up all those huge interment camps they've spent so much time and effort to build. and 'they' can make use of all the fine totalitarian laws they have set up for 'the emergency'(civil war).
happy FEMA everyone of good conscience. i'll see you on the inside.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by dcgolf

Actually, the sheer number of voters indicates the importance of this election. Like it or not, Bush won. "They" were not ther to oust Bush. "They" were there to elect a President.

How would this been a landslide for Kerry? This vote was less contested than the 2000 vote that Bush won. Can the Republicans really controll every state? Please don't say it came down to Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004.


first of all, i'd like to voiice my more relevent opinion that it wouldn't matter who was put into office. everything is carefully planned using "psychohistory', to borrow a term from asimov.
if kerry had 'won', i would be equally vitriolic. at least bush is the 'enemy you know'. they are both illuminati bloodline, related to the windsors and SKULL AND BONESmen, the 'germanic death cult" see prisonplanet.com for more info.

the exit polls indicate a kerry win. this alone should raise a few eyebrows.

kerry caving, when it wasn't clear that he need concede, that in fact he may have won, should raise a few more.

the voting machines did just that, ...you simply plug them in, and they vote for bush. no actual voters required.

it obviously DID come down to florida in 2000, and then some back pocket judges decided that bush should win. he didn't win, it was just decided by a few guys in gowns that he did. no actual voters required.

i tell you, if i was an american, i'd be chompin' at the bit.
of course, this is what 'they' want. they want you to start being violent, and running amok in the streets. that way, they can fill up all those huge interment camps they've spent so much time and effort to build. and 'they' can make use of all the fine totalitarian laws they have set up for 'the emergency'(civil war).
happy FEMA everyone of good conscience. i'll see you on the inside.


I don't remeber us running amok in the streets. If the controllers of Bush wanted to run the country, why didn't they already take control? Good thing you aren't an American. I'd hate for you to be chompin' at the bit. Maybe you can come take pictures of the "internment" camps. We'd all like to see them.

That way we can be sure that Bush coasted through his first term and allowed an election so that he can take over the world in his second term. If the powers that be wanted to rule the earth, why not take over now? Answer is, too easy. All a farce!



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
Forget about WHICH party is in control, is it a good idea for ANY party to control all three branches?


No. And I said so about a thousand time before this election to Libertarians.



I dont really care that Bush was elected I would have been hard pressed to choose the bigger idiot, but I dont see this working out very well.


Ya think?
If EdSinger being thrilled Bush gets to appoint three or more Supreme Court Justices doesn't scare the life out of libertarian minded people nothing will.

But just like I thought would happen when so many Bush voters said leading up to the election, oh...Bush won't get to appoint that many Judges, and the Dems will stop them if they do so don't worry, vote your conscious
....now true colors are revealed just like I knew they would be.

YAY! We get to ban everything!!!

Question for you Amuk and LP'ers. Stopping some of these appointments will be difficult to impossible. An even smaller minority of Democrats (thanks to reverse coat-tails) will be forced to filibuster and obstruct.

Will you support these libertarian minded efforts or join the RNC bandwagon defaming Democrats as obstructionists?

Like it or not, the "Dems are just the same as Republicans" line will no longer float. Not with me anyway. The LP is great and all, but it's proven as effective as an umbrella in a hurricane. In a phrase, thanks for nothing.

Democrats are your last line of defense from a Theocracy. Support them in this fight or lose America. And if you haven't joined the ACLU it's beyond time. It's a little bigger than 400,000 LP voters and does good work.

I'm not trying to piss you off Amuk or any other LP voter, but it's time to get serious. The authoritarian theocracy threat is real.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by Amuk
Forget about WHICH party is in control, is it a good idea for ANY party to control all three branches?


No. And I said so about a thousand time before this election to Libertarians.



I dont really care that Bush was elected I would have been hard pressed to choose the bigger idiot, but I dont see this working out very well.


Just a question. If Bush were so intent on installing a theocracy, why wouldn't he have done it during his first term?

Ya think?
If EdSinger being thrilled Bush gets to appoint three or more Supreme Court Justices doesn't scare the life out of libertarian minded people nothing will.

But just like I thought would happen when so many Bush voters said leading up to the election, oh...Bush won't get to appoint that many Judges, and the Dems will stop them if they do so don't worry, vote your conscious
....now true colors are revealed just like I knew they would be.

YAY! We get to ban everything!!!

Question for you Amuk and LP'ers. Stopping some of these appointments will be difficult to impossible. An even smaller minority of Democrats (thanks to reverse coat-tails) will be forced to filibuster and obstruct.

Will you support these libertarian minded efforts or join the RNC bandwagon defaming Democrats as obstructionists?

Like it or not, the "Dems are just the same as Republicans" line will no longer float. Not with me anyway. The LP is great and all, but it's proven as effective as an umbrella in a hurricane. In a phrase, thanks for nothing.

Democrats are your last line of defense from a Theocracy. Support them in this fight or lose America. And if you haven't joined the ACLU it's beyond time. It's a little bigger than 400,000 LP voters and does good work.

I'm not trying to piss you off Amuk or any other LP voter, but it's time to get serious. The authoritarian theocracy threat is real.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 05:54 AM
link   
"Just a question. If Bush were so intent on installing a theocracy, why wouldn't he have done it during his first term? "

To me?


No. He wouldn't dare in a first term. But the issues isn't so much what Bush wants anyway. It's the 100 million evangelicals he just handed the keys. You think they'll just quietly go back to church and pray? Now they're a ruling special interest group in Washington.

And that Moonie money seems to never run out.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
"Just a question. If Bush were so intent on installing a theocracy, why wouldn't he have done it during his first term? "

To me?


No. He wouldn't dare in a first term. But the issues isn't so much what Bush wants anyway. It's the 100 million evangelicals he just handed the keys. You think they'll just quietly go back to church and pray? Now they're a ruling special interest group in Washington.

And that Moonie money seems to never run out.


Why wouldn't he dare in his first term? If it is as everyone says, he is just trying to rule the world.

Are there really 100 miliion evangelicals? Wow, that's a third of the country, counting children also.

Sorry, don't mean to quote too much.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf
Why wouldn't he dare in his first term? If it is as everyone says, he is just trying to rule the world.


he did dare in his first term. you must have slept through the patriot act. you must have been brushing your teeth when the farce war started. when everybody else was talking about the skull and bones, you must have had your walkman on full blast. you probably were watching sesame street when bush sr. declared the ushering in of "a new world order" in a speech on september eleventh, 1990, eleven years to the day. coincidence? sure, whatever. you can't tell a fish it lives in water. fish don't know what water is, ....until you drag them into the boat, that is.

why don't you just check out prisonplanet.com if you want to learn about internment camps. oh, right. you want everything handed to you on a mass media platter. it's not a conspiracy. it's in the records of congress. they're called 'emergency relocation centers', which is a polite word for prison camps.

while you're waiting for it(the takeover) to happen, it's already well under way. america is no longer free. it's bushtown(bush the corporate puppet).
the united states is strong, but it is no match for the combined military of the whole rest of the world. the boys are writing home for bullets and armour ALREADY, and that's just a little speck on the atlas that's been bombed into the stone age for the last 12 yrs.
luckily, wars are only to convince the public. the real decisions are made in boardrooms and secret enclaves by industry moguls. same as it ever was, same as it ever was......



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Question for you Amuk and LP'ers. Stopping some of these appointments will be difficult to impossible. An even smaller minority of Democrats (thanks to reverse coat-tails) will be forced to filibuster and obstruct.

Will you support these libertarian minded efforts or join the RNC bandwagon defaming Democrats as obstructionists?


It depends on the judge, I am with you on this one I think the choice for judges will have a lot more long term harm than control of any of the other two branches. Believe it or not I think the country needs Democrarts along with Republicans and Libertarian its just when any one party has all the power that I get a little worried. Even if EVERYONE who voted for Bush was a hardcore Republican it still only amouts to about 1/6 of the people, hardly a majority, the rest of us deserve a say in the future.

It is not just about Republicans/Democrats/Libertarian its about ONE party gaining too much power.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by dcgolf
Why wouldn't he dare in his first term? If it is as everyone says, he is just trying to rule the world.


he did dare in his first term. you must have slept through the patriot act. you must have been brushing your teeth when the farce war started. when everybody else was talking about the skull and bones, you must have had your walkman on full blast. you probably were watching sesame street when bush sr. declared the ushering in of "a new world order" in a speech on september eleventh, 1990, eleven years to the day. coincidence? sure, whatever. you can't tell a fish it lives in water. fish don't know what water is, ....until you drag them into the boat, that is.

why don't you just check out prisonplanet.com if you want to learn about internment camps. oh, right. you want everything handed to you on a mass media platter. it's not a conspiracy. it's in the records of congress. they're called 'emergency relocation centers', which is a polite word for prison camps.

while you're waiting for it(the takeover) to happen, it's already well under way. america is no longer free. it's bushtown(bush the corporate puppet).
the united states is strong, but it is no match for the combined military of the whole rest of the world. the boys are writing home for bullets and armour ALREADY, and that's just a little speck on the atlas that's been bombed into the stone age for the last 12 yrs.
luckily, wars are only to convince the public. the real decisions are made in boardrooms and secret enclaves by industry moguls. same as it ever was, same as it ever was......


I agree Bush is one of the worst things to ever happen to this country, but as far as imprisoning the population, that would not be possible, IMO. While abortion, gay rights, stem cell research, and anything else evangelical America disagrees with are gone, you're forgetting the one thing that keeps this administration in power, you said it yourself, corporations. Not alot of consuming to be done from an internment camp, the real people in power rely on us spending $$$$$. Civil war would probably not aid in the recovery of our economy, and money is the backbone of this administration. But look for plenty of death and destruction in other parts of the world.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcgolf

I don't remeber us running amok in the streets. If the controllers of Bush wanted to run the country, why didn't they already take control? Maybe you can come take pictures of the "internment" camps. We'd all like to see them.


like i'm going to walk into amerika with a camera, and go up to the gates of a nazi facility to expose it? i love americans, but hate what america has become. y'all are good people for the most part. too trusting of the political system, though. too divided into repub/dem. you'd think it was a black and white world or something. are you a christian fundamentalist or a hedonistic atheist? there are no christian dems, or atheist repubs you know. it's all black and white. this is how the ceasars have created empires for time immemorial, divide and conquer. apparently, the "land of the free, home of the brave" is now, "the land of the not so free, and the home of the nervous".
of course, only the girlie men dems are cowards. all spineless jellyfish with no stomach for war. there are no dems in the forces you know. there are no conservatives at peace protests. black and white.

just for you, though, here's a mainstream news article about the camps:www.prisonplanet.com...



Originally posted by dcgolfThat way we can be sure that Bush coasted through his first term and allowed an election so that he can take over the world in his second term. If the powers that be wanted to rule the earth, why not take over now? Answer is, too easy. All a farce!


the answer is even easier. they took over a long time ago, but just didn't tell anybody. they are busy building better mouse traps and smaller pens now.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

I agree Bush is one of the worst things to ever happen to this country, but as far as imprisoning the population, that would not be possible, IMO. While abortion, gay rights, stem cell research, and anything else evangelical America disagrees with are gone, you're forgetting the one thing that keeps this administration in power, you said it yourself, corporations. Not alot of consuming to be done from an internment camp, the real people in power rely on us spending $$$$$. Civil war would probably not aid in the recovery of our economy, and money is the backbone of this administration. But look for plenty of death and destruction in other parts of the world.


i wish it were not possible.
we have to remember that there's two things that make a corporation, ....the consumer(cause), and the labour(effects). inorder to best serve the cause, the effects must be minimalised. in other words, big brother loves a slave. here's a different perspective to see from, .....outsourcing. cheap labour from other countries is attractive to greedy industrialists. and then there's the american slave yards. forced labour in prisons not only equals slavery, but also takes the need for an honest worker on the outside, in turn making it more likely that this crowd of honest workers will turn into an unruly mob only fit for prison. nice cycle, eh? VERY profitable.
and speaking of corporations, the prisons themselves are corporations. 'justice' is now a business. the more criminals you can make, the more the government will line your coffers.
'satan' is the corporation. the word 'corporation' means that a business is actually a living entity. these nasty creatures have NO REGARD for humanity. they feed on human greed, desire and sweat and blood. they live in a virtual world, unworried by the physical condition of the ecosphere, unhindered by 'morals' or 'conscience'.

2% of the population holds ALL the money. they consume us. we are cattle to them, no more, no less.
moo. so, we don't really need many consumers, just a lot of produce.

these people no no borders. they are the border makers. they are not worried about money. they have it all, already. they have faced their biggest threat since jesus: the internet and cell phones. the cows got wired, and now the free flow of information and ideas within the collective conscious is revealing the 'man behind the curtain'.

that's why political protest is now a crime. that's why you can get arrested for wearing a t-shirt or putting a sign on your lawn.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Well, I hope you're wrong, but if you're not I know I won't be alive to be a slave.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
Well, I hope you're wrong, but if you're not I know I won't be alive to be a slave.


i wish i was wrong. i really do. take heart, the overwhelming majority of people are good people. it is the systems that are evil. it is the systems that are the REAL enemy. not, osama, not saddam, not bush, not kerry, not even the dark overlord rothchild himself. they have no power. to quote from jesus christ superstar, 'any power you have comes to you from far beyond, everything is fixed and you can't change it.'(did jesus say that, too?)
the far beyond in this case is public complicity. as long as people are in the dark, they will stumble and trip. once you step into the light, it is easy to see the locomotive bearing down on you. if everyone could see the light, the juggernaught of runaway elitism could be disappeared in the twinkling of an eye.

this earth can provide for each and everyone of us. we don't need to compete anymore. total cooperation would result in total prosperity. it is only a utopian pipedream because of the nature of evil. evil is NEVER going away. evil can be banished to the shadows, though. spread the word. that is the achilles heel of the beast. when people see that they are cooperating with a runaway corporate soul devouring monster, they will do EVERYTHING in their power to stop it. the more people who realise it, the less power the beast has.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:00 PM
link   
I agree, the only NWO should be total cooperation of the human race. I have always felt that way, nationalism be damned.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
No, amuk is not a good thing this has been planned for many years by certain " groups "and now finally happened we should be very afraid for the next four years American as we have learned to know and love may be gone for ever.

We need to keep an eye on new laws and constitutional amendments they government may do not even has to tell us the American people until is too late.

We the people of this country has finally can become excluded from political opinion after the elections.

Could be the begining of the government take over.

And by the way this is for all americans to knwo no just a few, is going to affect all of us.

[edit on 023030p://555 by marg6043]



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Is it good for any party to control all three branches?


- I doubt it very much......the only ray of light to it I can see is when we come election time there will be no-one left to blame but themselves when Eden has failed to materialise.



posted on Nov, 5 2004 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
I agree, the only NWO should be total cooperation of the human race. I have always felt that way, nationalism be damned.


the NWO is here. it started with the league of nations, the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. coincidence?

this new 'paradigm shift' is the problem. 'we the people'(ie. the global huddled masses)must not let the evil magicians to set the rules of the inevitable global village. it will be interesting to see how this pans out.

their way, prisonplanet.com...
our way, nesara.org...




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join