Lois Lerner Caught Helping the Muslim Brotherhood’s US Front Groups

a reply to: Gryphon66

In response to your thoughts about progressives, I was lucky enough to hear lectures from progressives at a major university back in the early 80s. They called themselves the Progressives and at the time their primary goal was to take control of the Democrat Party. Their impetus was that the Democrat Party was moving to slowly and was to clustered with to many conservative leaning people, old school dems ect. The primary gain from taking over the party from a political mechanics position is that it would take to long, if it were even possible, to start a 3rd part from the ground up. That's how out of sorts they were even with old school Dems. And that came from, as they say, from the horses mouth and long before any of the current day well known watchdogs were talking about it.

One thing the progressives were good at early on, after taking control of the Democratic Party was keeping up the façade of being born out of next generation Democrats, so as not to alert most folks out there in la la land that the lunatic fringe had come into its own.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Progressive meant one thing in the early 20th century. e.g. the incarnations of The Progressive Party. Think Teddy Roosevelt,

Teddy Roosevelt.

Ah yes, possibly one of the very first true RINOs

He made the rich even richer with his onslaught "against" the evil Trusts !!

The Rothschilds were proud of his good work !!

a reply to: Logarock

Why not name some names? Who did you hear speak? That way we can know who you're talking about, trace what they said and what they're saying, and can verify your claims rather than just "taking your word for it."

Lacking that kind of evidence, you're providing anecdotal evidence that very likely meshes more with your current political beliefs than provide the most accurate recitation of what you heard in the 1980s, truly no disrespect intended.

The professional Democrats are, by-and-large, corporatists. As are the Republicans.

As is anyone involved in politics particularly at the national level.

All the rest is window dressing, for the most part, and a matter of personal taste, really.

I tend to favor the ones who at least claim to champion education, science, the environment, civil rights, feeding the hungry and caring for the sick, as compared with those who favor religion, profits over people, and pretending that the answer to every social malady is to "pull oneself up by the bootstraps" when they're not claiming that there are no social problems in this country.

That's just me, YMMV.

But, on a different note, what evidence is there that "the Progressives" have taken control of the DP? There's only 76 members total of the CPC out of 253 Congressional Democrats ... unless of course you're referring to the shadowy, menacing hidden-from-view Progressives that only a few true Republicans or Right-wingers can detect.

Again, /shrug. What's your evidence?

a reply to: xuenchen

Don't tell us you've got a problem with the rich getting richer Xuenchen ... that's what your party of preference is all about!

C'mon, you've got something better than that about Teddy ... wasn't the whole Teddy Bear thing a secret plot to inculcate the Children of America into some dark and devious Progressive (communist/socialist/fascist/other-ist) plot?

You can do better with the vague pointless innuendo than that! I've seen you! LOL

a reply to: Gryphon66



How many tangents is this now?

At least 6.

The Libertarian Right (very Right) isn't about the rich getting richer.



Lois Lerner's mistakes and arrogance has exposed the Progressives and She has failed Her Masters.

She will be a scapegoat soon.

a reply to: xuenchen

It's your thread X, you can start as many tangents as you want I guess.

The Libertarian Right, eh? I'd love to know more but I don't want to add tangents ... suffice it to say that I haven't met a Right-Winger of any variety that's not also a corporatist. Anecdotal I know ...

What Lois Lerner mistake has exposed what Progressive or which Progressives? Who are her Masters?

You can't drop a bomb like that and not tell us the whole story, Foxy ... c'mon, give.

What in the world are you talking about? May I admit that I will be STUNNED if you provide anything like a straight answer.

(PS, no one is obsessing over LL except Fox and the Right Wing Machine. I know you're pinning high hopes on Mr. Gowdy, but I think even you would admit that's just bread-and-circuses to distract the electorate in light of the November elections.)

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Logarock

Why not name some names? Who did you hear speak? That way we can know who you're talking about, trace what they said and what they're saying, and can verify your claims rather than just "taking your word for it."

Lacking that kind of evidence, you're providing anecdotal evidence that very likely meshes more with your current political beliefs than provide the most accurate recitation of what you heard in the 1980s, truly no disrespect intended.

Oh yes and we are all to be sure that everything you have said comes from a totally neutral observation then?

Just as note I am not registered with any party and never have been.

No folks wake up. Not pulling your leg or shading what I have heard with my own political view. The progressives neo didn't just rise out of nothing and some of us were there to witness it back at its beginning. Trust, if you are to young to have been there, some historical witness.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Logarock



I tend to favor the ones who at least claim to champion education, science, the environment, civil rights, feeding the hungry and caring for the sick, as compared with those who favor religion, profits over people, and pretending that the answer to every social malady is to "pull oneself up by the bootstraps" when they're not claiming that there are no social problems in this country.

Here you just sound like a true believer. A sucker for anyone wearing these rags on public street corners. Anyone who has fairly observed the american political picture understands what a load of nonsense operates behind these positions and platforms even though they be fair goals. No politician ever stands behind say feeding the poor for example that isn't looking for a political payoff down the road for doing so.

Your list above is simply the platform mouthing's that many creeps operate behind, blinding the eyes, pulling the wool and trying to represent themselves from pure motives but yet whore out science, whore out the needs of the poor ect. As far as education and civil rights they recognized years ago the possibilities of advancing a hidden agenda by championing these issues. Look at all the civil rights whores running around! Need a list?

a reply to: Logarock

A brief note, and then I'm done with this "conversation" as you obviously have nothing in the way of support for your position and our continuing sniping brings nothing to the topic.

Why are you concentrating on what you believe I believe, or my gullibility, rather than the issues at hand?

That's rhetorical. I know why.

You're doing it to distract from the issues at hand, i.e., whether there is any real proof that Lois Lerner is involved in some deep, decade-spanning plot. I sound like a true believer? Right back at you, Loggy.

You're so blinded by your own ideology that you apparently didn't detect that I very clearly stated my position that both political "parties" in this country are essentially corporatist shills who are, in the final analysis, only CLAIMING to support the items enumerated in their platforms. That doesn't stop you from trying to evangelize that that I'm misled, that someone (i.e. Democrats) is misusing science, or caring for the poor or focusing on education ... but what's the alternative?

People who openly advocate for superstition over reason, who don't display even rhetorically any concern for their fellow humans, who openly prostitute for big business as they OPENLY continue to work to accomplish the decimation of the middle class in this country? To more easily establish a majority class of wage slaves tap-dancing for their corporate masters?

You sound like a recruiting poster for the Young Republicans, Loggy. Yeah, I'm the gullible one here all right.

~~~~~~

Now, specifically, wading back through all the hoo-hah about progressives etc., it has been the assertion in the original "article" that Lois Lerner is supporting the Muslim Brotherhood as far back as 2005 is quite simply BS. A group of Muslims started a mosque in Alpharetta, GA. The rest is innuendo at best and propaganda at worst. (Hint: it's propaganda.)

Do you have any evidence to the contrary regarding the Hamzah Islamic Center in Alpharetta GA, or are we done here?

a reply to: Gryphon66


It sure looks to me like you are doing the opposite. You are basically taking a position, from which a great deal of chicanery has operated, without offering a solution as to how we are to rescue these noble positions from the clutches of fronting radical idealists.


Solution to Global Warming, after whoring science......tax. Solutions to education.....tax. Solution to all social and civil enquires....tax. Oh and then just toss out the gold into the streets like Robin Hood.

It should be no wonder then that the IRS would be used as a tool to stifle opposition and promote fellow travelers.

a reply to: Logarock

... and yet, you (continue to) offer no proof, no evidence, no facts to back up either your claim or the claim of the OP, which has been demonstrated to be in error.

But somehow, I'm the simple-minded ideologue. Right.

Again, do you have any evidence, at all that corroborates that the Hamzah Islamic Center in Alpharetta GA is a) in league with the Muslim Brotherhood or that b) Lois Lerner did anything but her job in 2005 when approving their 501(c) app?

If not, enjoy your day. That's the topic I'm here to discuss.