Obama Birth Certificate Rears Its Head - Again Article. Is he a citizen of the USA?

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

It's a joke, but the jokesters' faces are grimacing, not laughing.

Sucking sour grapes does that, you know.

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

I've found Snopes to be pretty reliable.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

Yup. Snopes!

I find Snopes's explanations far more rational and believable than the articles and links posted by my friend Mike.

Thanks for the compelling link, Jim.

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

It will be interesting to see if Phillip Berg has a smoking gun or he has been smoking gunja.

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Andy62]

I was wondering what Hillary's October surprise was. It was actually a December surprise - her Intelligence Net was working. Let's watch the game develop. I have always love complex strategies.

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Andy62]

The potential of this thing is tremendous. I don't think Obama will fire Fitzgerald. I think because of Fitzgerald's handling ot the Scooter Libby case he is pretty much bullet proof. The flip side of Obama's popularity worldwide is that the whole world is watching thiis situation. One of the TV Political analysts said the controlling group in Chicago is not a politcal party,but a tribe. I have worked Chicago and done commercial real estate deals there and it is an unbelievably corrupt environment. One of the major banks that I worked with there required a criminal profile report on all new borrowers. This thing will go on for years. Do you think that in the 2012 election it will be Hillary Clinton vs Sarah Palen for the Presidency?

[Free]

Yup. Snopes!

I find Snopes's explanations far more rational and believable than the articles and links posted by my friend Mike.

Thanks for the compelling link, Jim.

Regards,

Alan

I would not trust Snopes for anything political, since they have been shown to have a liberal bias.

I do tend to doubt that anything will come out of this though, because the golden child is pretty much untouchable.

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Andy62]

Fitzgerald is the smartest prosecutor in the US. He is ambitious and a bulldog with killer instinct and he is fair. This investigation will last for years. Fitzgerald is bullet proof because he has gone after Republicans in the past and is now going after Democrats. Because of the historical importance of this election the whole world is watching.

[MikeNY]

removed bu author

[Andy62]

http://www.redstate.com/ben_domenech/2008/12/11/the-short-honeymoon/?icid=200100397x1215191512x1200969492

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hello brothers and sisters,

Here are some interesting quotes by David Horowitz, noted far-right spokesperson, as published in the conservative National Review. Click here (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjQyOTgxM2M0YWMxOTdhZDcwMzlmMDU1ZGYxNzFkMmQ=) to see full article.

The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president are embarrassing and destructive. The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, a demagogue who lost a Senate election to the then-unknown Obama by 42 points, should be a warning in itself.
...........
The birth-certificate zealots are essentially arguing that 64 million voters should be disenfranchised because of a contested technicality as to whether Obama was born on U.S. soil. (McCain narrowly escaped the problem by being born in the Panama Canal zone, which is no longer American.)
..............
Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies. Ours has been riven by profound disagreements that have been deepening over many years. We are divided not only about political facts and social values, but also about what the Constitution itself means. The crusaders on this issue choose to ignore these problems and are proposing to deny the will of 64 million voters by appealing to five Supreme Court Justices (since no one is delusional enough to think that the four liberal justices are going to take the presidency away from Obama). What kind of conservatism is this?...

And.....

....It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country’s economy and defending its citizens, and — by the way — its Constitution. (my emphasis)

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hi All,

Check out the Wikipedia article entitled Barak Obama Citizenship Conspiracy Theories (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories). It has lots of links and lots of information.

When looking at the claims, it is wise to remember Carl Sagan's famous statement: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Regards,

Alan

[Free]

Well... if, according to Alan, we are supposed to ignore the constitution, and not enforce the citizenship rule, I guess Arnold can run in 4 years. :smile:

[Spiritual_Warrior]

this is a sad post--divine order will see this through---Obama cant be any worse than the last 8 yrs of darkness bush put this country through--we need to pray fro Obama that he will be guided and help save this country

[Nathan]

Hey Spiritual-warrior,

I personally think President Bush has done a pretty good job these last eight years. If you take into consideration that he has had to try and clean up everything that Clinton did. Anyway all the best.

---Nathan

P.S. But you are right we need to pray for Obama that he will be able to lead this country well.

[Spiritual_Warrior]

lol ok cleaning up all the jobs we had and a surplus of money he did a great job--not to mention 2 wars. anyway I will not get into a political fight here its to draining----just start praying I dont think anyone here is ready for what is coming in the next few months and or years--I thought this was a place of positive reinforcement I hope we see more positive posts here
Peace all

[Alan_OldStudent]

Well... if, according to Alan, we are supposed to ignore the constitution, and not enforce the citizenship rule, I guess Arnold can run in 4 years. :smile:

Hi Free,

I didn't say anywhere in any post that we are supposed to ignore the constitution. I don't understand where you got that idea.

However, yes, I do think that the constitution should be changed to allow any American citizen to become president, including "Ahhnold."

http://www.alanstancliff.com/images/divide4.gif

To those who say Obama is somehow not a "natural born citizen" under the constitution, you have a tough job to prove it.

That Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 of an American mother seems quite undeniable.

It seems to me that this notion is being peddled by those who just cannot accept that a guy with a degree from an ivy-league college, a background as a community organizer, a guy who has taken some liberal positions, a guy opposed the Iraq war as it was beginning, and a guy who is not a white man could ever have become president of the United States.

Their reaction is that something went drastically wrong with the process and that process just has to be stopped right now by (in the words of Malcolm X) any means necessary. David Horowitz is correct. This is "sore looserism."

http://www.alanstancliff.com/images/icons/cowblink.gif

They can't accept that the times are changing.

We likely are at the beginnings of a mass shift to the left, especially among the younger Americans. This mass shift could actually sweep past the Democrats as well as the Republicans, especially as more and more young working people figure out that Obama and the Democrats want to save capitalism instead of moving beyond it.

Yes Free, those chill winds you feel are the world of tomorrow blowing past us older folks. The type of social conservatism that has been so influential in our recent past is shuffling off center stage now, hands thrust deep in their pockets, with a sour look scowling up its deeply creased and weatherbeaten face.

All of yesterday's hand-wringing, tearing of hair, gnashing of teeth, wailing at the wall, will not restore the monochrome world of yesterday.

I leave you with a poem by Khalil Gibran:

On Children
Your children are not your children.
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them,
but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.

You are the bows from which your children
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite,
and He bends you with His might
that His arrows may go swift and far.
Let our bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
so He loves also the bow that is stable.


Regards,

Alan

[Free]

Alan, as usual, you are playing with semantics. Technically, you didn't say we should ignore the constitution, but posted a quote that said essentially that the votes of 64 million voters shouldn't be disenfranchised by a technicality. That technicality is our constitution. Then, you just said that the constitution should be changed, confirming that I heard you loud and clear. So as Ronald Reagan said.... "There you go again".

The notion, that Obama is not a citizen is "being peddled" by a democrat.

I, for one, would certainly like to see the details of Obama's "Ivy League Schooling" but unfortunately, all those details have also been hidden from the public. How did he get into that school? Who funded him? What was so awful about his thesis that it had to be hidden?

A guy who has taken a few liberal positions? Yeah, right, and bringing up the race card is always the way to deflect criticism. Everyone who asks any questions, must be a racist. That is always a sign of an inability to support ones side of the argument.

Something probably did go wrong with the system. Never has there been so much evidence of votor fraud. The democrats grumbled, because they lost the last election, argued that there were "hanging chads" tried to find every excuse, but had no evidence of fraud at all. Now there is huge, wide spread evidence of voter fraud with Acorn, and the democrats are crying "sore looserism".

Here are some interesting statistics about the election from Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000-

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million-

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

You are right, Alan, I can't accept that the times are changing, and I don't like the cold winds of Socialism. Freedom is our birth right, and the most important possession we can hold in this society, and life itself. It is sad that so many young people take their freedom for granted. This is not just an Obama, or a democrat issue. We have been loosing our freedoms for years, as both parties have increased the size of government, and our country has moved closer and closer to your beloved Socialism.

[Free]

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/097/ripoff0097773.htm

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[MikeNY]

Free when I used the Dynamite I meant explosive! taht 40% of the nation is dependent on the government could lead to a Civil War or a dictatorship, not a good thing.

[Spiritual_Warrior]

this entire post is a joke ---get over it Obama won he is Jsut as American as any of you here--so move on already please post some helpful info for a change

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Free]

What is happening to this country is no Joke, and it is sad that some people do not take this crisis seriously. Those that are too young to understand what this loss of freedom means for their future, will regret their decisions later on in life.

[Alan_OldStudent]

[QUOTE=MikeNY;6307...........Alan your a decent man what do you think about the massive voter fraud and voter surpression strident camapiagns, the republicans will soon follow suit and be doing the same. Moceon.org will spawn a Republican offshot. I think the 2008 Election was stolen and made the 2004 Election look decent and honest.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the kind words, Mike,

Next week, I hope to have a bit more time to post a thoughtful contribution to this thread. Right now, I'm being ordered to bed by "She Who Must Be Obeyed.":act-up::beauty:

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Spiritual_Warrior]

well the neo cons stole the last 2--so i guess the dems were due--i could post a bunch of links supporting what i said but what for ---get over it

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hi Mike,

I haven't had the time to reply to your charge that the Obama electoral victory was a result of massive voter fraud. As I will illustrate in a later posting, I suspect that the Obama victory was despite massive electoral fraud, not because of massive electoral fraud.

I also note that you poo-poo'd the notion of significant voter fraud in the 2000, 2002, and 2004 elections on behalf of the Republicans.

Here's an interesting story called "Rove's IT Guru Warned of Sabotage Before Fatal Plane Crash; Was Set to Testify." (http://www.alternet.org/election08/114674/rove%27s_it_guru_warned_of_sabotage_before_fatal_p lane_crash%3B_was_set_to_testify/) (That's a clickable link) This story shows that there is more than one way that an honest observer of good will might look at this.

Here are a few quotes from the article:

Mike Connell, the chief IT consultant to Karl Rove, reportedly asked for protective custody from the government before he died.

and

A top Republican internet strategist who was set to testify in a case alleging election tampering in 2004 in Ohio has died in a plane crash. Mike Connell was the chief IT consultant to Karl Rove and created websites for the Bush and McCain electoral campaigns. He also set up the official Ohio state election website reporting the 2004 presidential election returns.

Connell was reportedly an experienced pilot. He died instantly Friday night when his private plane crashed in a residential neighborhood near Akron, Ohio.

Michael Connell was deposed one day before the election this year by attorneys Cliff Arnebeck and Bob Fitrakis about his actions during the 2004 vote count and his access to Karl Rove's e-mail files and how they went missing.


continuing....

Velvet Revolution, a non-profit investigating Connell's activities, revealed this weekend that Connell had recently said he was afraid George Bush and Dick Cheney would "throw [him] under the bus." Cliff Arnebeck had also previously alerted Attorney General Michael Mukasey to alleged threats from Karl Rove to Connell if he refused to "take the fall."(emphasis added)

and then

He reported threats to his lawyer, Cliff Arnebeck, and Arnebeck -- also, Velvet Revolution heard from tipsters, as well, tipsters who also claimed that Connell's life was at risk. (emphasis added) Stephen Spoonamore, the whistleblower who was the first -- who was the one to name Connell in the first place, also had an ear to the inside. He's also very connected. And all these people were saying Rove is making threats, the White House is very worried about this case.

Having heard all this, Arnebeck contacted Mukasey, he contacted Nancy Rogers, who is the Ohio Attorney General, and he wrote a letter to the court, telling all of them that "This man should be in protective custody. He is an important witness in a RICO case. Please do something to look after him." And they didn't respond to this.

=================

Pretty interesting reading, all in all.

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

Alan very interesting, but everything depends on the word of Amy Goodman, a political left activist! Now I the sites I put up were from Media Sources and Newspeople rather than a Political blog or rightwing sites; I tend to think all political blogs right or left are slanted. I think the evidance is clear that Obama's ACORN is a Voter Fraud & Supression Group and even the Media (that are Obama Sycophant's) has reported on ACORN and it's Voter fraud Programs. The Majority of all American's think the Media favored Obama. I've read about Obama Hacker teams but didn't post those. I do think the Republicans will now be follow the path burnt into the political scene by the Democrats; that path will now be followed by the Right. That either Party steals an election seems wrong!

I see both Political Parties as co-joined, connected incestous creatures that do not care about the vast majority of Americans. The Republicans favored Obama and wanted him elected for Politicaly Correct Reasons, Nixon & the Republicans saved Affirmative Action when Congress would have killed that Racist Program. I think the majority of voter's now vote for the lesser of two evils. The Newsmedia has an agenda, open notorious, acting for a picticular purpose and obvious outcome, that spells trouble for the USA for when the media serves as the slave and propoganda outlet for the one Party (meaning the unified Democratic and Republicans) then truth is endangered. When you have a corrupt Government and corrupted political media the nation suffers.

I see the USA sliding into a lesser role in the World, and we shall have to reform or suffer economicly.

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hi Free,

In this post (http://www.transformetrics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=495&page=3#post_message_6230), where you somewhat indelicately state "Alan, as usual, you are playing with semantics," you cite the following:

Here are some interesting statistics about the election from Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota:

Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30

Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000-

Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million-

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

I did not see where you may have posted a reference to back that up. So I did a bit of googling.

It turns out that Professor Olson is at Hamline University, not Hemline University.

Moreover, on Professor Olson's web site, he disclaims writing that. Some "conservative" defender of the American values of truth in the democratic dialog put words into the good professor's mouth. Here is what Professor Olson says:

DISCLAIMER: There is an e-mail floating around the internet dealing with the 2008 Obama/McCain election and the 2000 Bush/Gore election, remarks of a Scottish philosopher named Alexander Tyler, etc. Part of it is attributed to me. It is entirely BOGUS as to my authorship. I've been trying to kill it since December 2000. For details see: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp.

Go ahead, Free. The good professor vouches for the accuracy of this particular story on the liberal Snopes web site.

And Free, you'll spare yourself a bit of embarrassment in the future by checking your sources a bit more carefully. That way, folks won't be able to throw the redoubtable Ronald Reagan's bon mot in your face, "there you go again."

Regards,

Alan

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hi Mike,

You wrote:
Alan very interesting, but everything depends on the word of Amy Goodman, a political left activist!

Darn! Mike! You noticed that! Curses! Foiled again!!!

But hey, Mike, did you notice that she also is an award-winning syndicated columnist whose "Democracy Now" runs in 750 venues?

Or that she has been awarded the 2008 Right Livelihood Award by the Swedish parliament.
The 2008 Communication for Peace Award from the World Association for Christian Communication
The 2007 Gracie Award for American Women in Radio and Television Public Broadcasting
The Alfred I. duPont-Columbia Award for Excellence in Broadcast Journalism.
And a host of other awards?

As you hate the way the media lies and covers up, you no doubt also realize that in 2004, she co-authored (along with her brother) the New York Times best seller The Exception to the Rulers: Exposing Oily Politicians, War Profiteers, and the Media That Love Them .

She and her brother in 2006 also wrote Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People who Fight Back.

These books really ought to be right up your alley, Mike, what with their exposing media bias and all that.

=========

But still and all, Mike, you're right. You definitely have a point.

Being as how Amy Goodman has been called a leftist, we must wonder if she (unlike those pillars of society and icons of decency such as Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush himself) is lying through her teeth.

So to help determine that, it's good to check out other news sources.

I trust you realize that PR Newswire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PR_Newswire) is a respectable middle-of-the-road well-established news source. If you click on the link above, you'll find a Wikipedia article concerning its bona fides.

Anyhow, here's a PR Newswire article on the events (http://news.prnewswire.com/DisplayReleaseContent.aspx?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/12-20-2008/0004945395&EDATE=) discussed by the not-to-be-trusted subversive Amy Goodman. I think you'll see that they back her up.

Also, you might find this Google News Source Search (http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&ncl=1282446734) on this topic enlightening.

Well Mike, you also write:
Now I the sites I put up were from Media Sources and Newspeople rather than a Political blog or rightwing sites; I tend to think all political blogs right or left are slanted.

Aw come on, Mike! I checked back through this thread, which really is not on whether Obama and the Democrats stole this election, but whether he's even a "natural born citizen." The references you quoted for your contention that the election was stolen basically all come down to this:

Election Fraud isn't a joke for the US. Here is John Fund in a video talking about Election Fraud and the ACORN Voter Fraud Group and Obama on Fox http://conservablogs.com/publiusforum/2008/09/25/john-fund-talks-acorn-vote-fraud/

Falsified registrations become votes: Article on the ACORN Voter fraud group http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15189.html

VOTER FRAUD EXPECTED TO BE RAMPANT article: http://www.nypost.com/seven/10052008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/voter_fraud_expected_to_be_rampant_132170.htm

Now Mike, that first reference comes from Conservablogs.com (http://conservablogs.com/2008/11/04/live-2008-election-results/). Surely you'll concede that this does not seem like the most disinterested source of political wisdom. Conservablog presents us with a Fox News infomercial (sheesh!) featuring John Fund, flogging his book "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy.", making predictions that the results of the elections would not be known for weeks as thousands of Democrat and Republican lawyers haggle over votes in dozens of states, resulting in chaos and disorder.

Most people looking at that today would not count John Fund as being particularly prescient. He forgot that old saying attributed to Yogi Barra "Making predictions is a tricky business, especially when it comes to the future." before opening his yap.

The other two links you provide lead to two pieces also written by the selfsame John Fund, pieces which rehash the same charges and make the same predictions.

Moreover, John Fund is the senior editor of The American Spectator and collaborated with Rush Limbaugh in writing the book "The Way Things Ought To Be.."

So your sources (actually source) is not exactly unbiased.

That's not to say such sources are to be automatically discounted. But one must examine what they say understanding that they do have an ax to grind.

http://www.alanstancliff.com/images/divide3.gif

Incidentally, Conservablogs.com (http://conservablogs.com/2008/11/04/live-2008-election-results/) appears to me to have been one of the main sites really thumping the tub about liberal vote stealing and pushing conspiracy theories such as John Fund's. But when Fund's predictions of electoral chaos did not pan out and it appeared that Obama had indeed decisively won the elections, this is what Consevablog (http://conservablogs.com/2008/11/04/live-2008-election-results/#contentleft) posted:
LIVE 2008 ELECTION RESULTS

ConservaBlogs.com is calling the 2008 Presidential Election for Barack Obama.

At this point we would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the Obama campaign for hosting one of the most brilliantly ran Presidential campaigns in History. Whether we agree with Obama’s policy and political views or not, we congratulate him for his win.

Now, we as a movement have serious work to do.

That's what I call a graceful concession. It is the statement of those who realize that what they want to happen is not always what comes to pass.


Merry Christmas

Regards,

Alan

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[MikeNY]

removed by author

[Alan_OldStudent]

Hi Mike.

Interesting comments on the left, there Mike.

As you analyze it, Bush, Cheney, probably Rumsfeld too are of the left?

(By the way, for other reading this posting, those dark blue words scattered throughout this post are clickable links to my references)

http://www.alanstancliff.com/images/icons/cowblink.gif

Mike! Mike!

When a political label like "left" encompasses such a broad spectrum of political thought that it covers people like Dick Cheney and Noam Chomsky
George Bush and Barak Obama
Bill Clinton and Bob Barr
George Soros and Bernie Sanders
Amy Goodman and Don Rumsfeld
Bill O'Reilly and myself doesn't it cease to have any useful meaning? Doesn't it instead just become name calling, a kind of foot-stamping name-calling tantrum, perhaps arising out of a sense of frustration and overwhelming feeling of powerlessness?

Bertrand Russell famously says:
Cynicism such as one finds very frequently among the most highly educated young men and women of the West, results from the combination of comfort and powerlessness.

So I put it to you, my friend. No offense intended. But just what in blazes do you mean when you say "the left"? I'd like a definition that is descriptive of political position as opposed to invective.

Equally astonishing is your statement "There is no real Right in the USA." I'd like to know just what your conception of "the right" is. Could it be that you do not consider an organization or tendency to be on the right unless it conforms to every jot and tittle of Mike's definition of the pure right, all others being somewhere on the spectrum of the left? To me, such a notion sounds a bit sectarian.

Let's look at 2 political parties who waged national campaigns for the presidency in 2008 against the Republicans and Democrats.

For example, do you consider the Libertarian Party (http://www.lp.org/), whose website banner proclaims it to be "the Party of Principle, Smaller Government, Lower Taxes, More Freedom" to be part of the left? Their presidential candidate Bob Barr might be a bit surprised to learn he's part of the vast left wing blight that is sapping America's vital juices. I have a dear friend who is a dedicated dues-paying member of the Libertarian party. Although he dearly loves me, he enjoys going out with my wife and me for pizza and screaming about how we leftists are ruining the world.

How about the Constitution Party (http://constitutionparty.com/)? Do you consider it to be part of the left? Oddly enough, and quite at odds with such a notion, Wikipedia describes this party as being "paleoconservative." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism) That's how I thought of it, too.

Here's how Wikipedia describes "paleoconservative."
Paleoconservatism (sometimes shortened to paleo or paleocon when the context is clear) is a term for an anti-communist and anti-authoritarian[1] right-wing movement in the United States that stresses tradition, civil society and anti-federalism, along with familial, religious, regional, national and Western identity.[2]

Would you consider paleoconservatism to be a left-wing current?(Incidentally, to others reading this thread, Wikipedia has a fascinating series of articles on the different strains of conservatism as manifested all over the world. Click here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism) for the gateway article.)Now the Constitution Party says of itself (http://constitutionparty.com/mission_statement.php): "It is our goal to limit the federal government to its delegated, enumerated, Constitutional functions and to restore American jurisprudence to its original Biblical common-law foundations.". (emphasis added)

Now, I'll grant you that this sounds like a lot of poppycock to me.

But truthfully now, Mike, does this R-E-A-L-L-Y sound like leftist drivel to you?


http://www.alanstancliff.com/images/divide4.gif

In times like these, Mike, if we wish to have intelligent political dialog, we need to fight the use of labels as epithets. Demagogues use labels as epithets to cloud precision and meaning, to confuse, stupefy, and intimidate. Labels can only be useful when they mean something and bring clarity.

Way back in 1946, that well-known socialist George Orwell, author of 1984 and Animal Farm, wrote an essay called Politics And The English Language (http://xahlee.org/p/george_orwell_english.html) to illustrate this very point. Here's a quote from that work:
This mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence is the most marked characteristic of modern English prose, and especially of any kind of political writing. As soon as certain topics are raised, the concrete melts into the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech that are not hackneyed: prose consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house.

and this:
Many political words are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no meaning except insofar as it signifies “something not desirable.” The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice, have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different.

Best wishes of the season,

Alan