[xerxes]

Thanos Thanos:

Turns out that some of them are also LaRouchies too:

http://washingtonindependent.com/55566/ ... -larouchie

It now looks like all the various tribes of moonbat worshippers are working together on this dereailment campaign. Batshit insane unite! All you have to lose are your tinfoil hats!

I can't wait to see what other obscure group is going to come out of the woodwork next. The Stoncutters maybe?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Uh oh, better keep a sharp eye out for Lenny and Carl, or even Steve Gutenberg

[N_Fiddledog]

Here's a little tidbit about LaRouchies...

$1:

In the U.S., however, they are active in the Democratic Party, and individuals associated with the movement have successfully sought party office in some elections, particularly Democratic County Central Committee posts. In 2006, LaRouche Youth Movement activist and Los Angeles County Democratic Central Committee member Cody Jones was honored as "Democrat of the Year" for the 43rd Assembly District of California, by the Los Angeles County Democratic Party.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaRouche_m ... supporters

They appear to like the party. They don't appear to like the leader. From what I hear they're not crazy about Jews either. I've heard them referred to as part of the "mad left".

But yeah, government protests attract fringe groups. Remember the anti-war protests of the Bush era with organizations like Code Pink

You won't see Code Pink at the townhall protests though. Apparently one of their co-founders is a fundraiser for Obama.

[Praxius]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Uh oh, better keep a sharp eye out for Lenny and Carl, or even Steve Gutenberg

Hey man, they exist, I was there:

[olla86]

You are politically activ persons!!Good for you!

[Akhenaten]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The debate down here centers on the fact that a key number of Democrats want a single-payer (meaning the government) system and they are not going to stray from that goal. These Democrats effectively derailed the current debate by saying that the current proposal is merely a gateway proposal meant to get to the single-payer plan which they are now calling the "public option". The Independent, conservative Democrat, and Republican opposition to the health care plan in general at this point is due to the fact that the Democrat leadership has said that this is a gateway proposal.

A key number of democrats want what? Ok but that's not actually what the health reform bill outlines is it? The bill from what I understand outlines a multi-teir system where patients have the choice (provided of course they have the money). So the question is are you going to debate/examine/protest the bill that's actually on the table or something that a few 'key democrats' apparently are saying?

$1:

The Obama-Biden plan both builds on and improves our current insurance system, which most Americans continue to rely upon, and leaves Medicare intact for older and disabled Americans. Under the Obama-Biden plan, Americans will be able to maintain their current coverage, have access to new affordable options, and see the quality of their health care improve and their costs go down. The Obama-Biden plan provides new affordable health insurance options by: (1) guaranteeing eligibility for all health insurance plans; (2) creating a National Health Insurance Exchange to help Americans and businesses purchase private health insurance; (3) providing new tax credits to families who can’t afford health insurance and to small businesses with a new Small Business Health Tax Credit; (4) requiring all large employers to contribute towards health coverage for their employees or towards the cost of the public plan; (5) requiring all children have health care coverage; (5) expanding eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs; and (6) allowing flexibility for state health reform plans.

Manifest Destiny Never Got Off The Ground Manifest Destiny Never Got Off The Ground:

Or much like Canada, The rich there dont use their own hospitals nor do their politicians they come to the US for that.

Setting aside for a moment the extreme propaganda (and outright lying) behind incidents like this I find it surprising that you support a system that lets any foreigner with the dough to come to your country and get ahead in line of other Americans with less money for critical treatment they need.

[Pseudonym]

olla86 olla86:

You are politically activ persons!!Good for you!

Why thank you!

[Pseudonym]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

A key number of democrats want what? Ok but that's not actually what the health reform bill outlines is it? The bill from what I understand outlines a multi-teir system where patients have the choice (provided of course they have the money). So the question is are you going to debate/examine/protest the bill that's actually on the table or something that a few 'key democrats' apparently are saying?

Obama, I believe, counts as a key Democrat. He is on record supporting a single payer system and using this public option as the means to work towards such a system. Sort of like how conservatives oppose Social Security but don't advocate its immediate dissolution, but rather a transition out of the system. Arguing against a group's long term goals is quite legitimate.

[Akhenaten]

$1:

He is on record supporting a single payer system and using this public option as the means to work towards such a system.

What does that mean? "On record"? Is that the bill he's proposing or not?

$1:

Arguing against a group's long term goals is quite legitimate.

Ah yes certainly it is, but we're not talking about 'arguing' are we? No we're talking about insinuating/planning/approving of armed uprisings or the threat of such....a FAR cry from 'arguing/debating'.

If you and I were neighbors we could 'argue' or 'debate' whether or not your tree crosses my property line, however if I show up to that 'debate' with a rifle well I'm making an alltogether different statement arn't I?

[martin14]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

$1:

He is on record supporting a single payer system and using this public option as the means to work towards such a system.

What does that mean? "On record"? Is that the bill he's proposing or not?

$1:

Arguing against a group's long term goals is quite legitimate.

Ah yes certainly it is, but we're not talking about 'arguing' are we? No we're talking about insinuating/planning/approving of armed uprisings or the threat of such....a FAR cry from 'arguing/debating'.

If you and I were neighbors we could 'argue' or 'debate' whether or not your tree crosses my property line, however if I show up to that 'debate' with a rifle well I'm making an alltogether different statement arn't I?

Oh Christ, not again


Stop with the rifle BS !! It was LEGAL !!!!!!!!!!!


I have reported this post as dragging it off topic again,
I think its had enough.....

[Akhenaten]

bump.

[ridenrain]

Why is this back? What purpose does it serve to bring it back? I'll need to compare it to my saved version before the swearing and edits by the mods.

[Akhenaten]

If it remains on topic like my posts then it should stay back.

[Mustang1]

Akhenaten Akhenaten:

If it remains on topic like my posts then it should stay back.

Agreed. No need to acknowledge the rampant hypocrisy of the parrot. If people don't like the content, IGNORE it.

[BeaverFever]

(Added emphasis mine)

$1:

Interview with AR-15-Toting Protester at Obama Rally was Staged
By Malia Politzer in NewsWednesday, Aug. 19 2009 @ 12:19PM

PHOENIX NEW TIMES

In case you missed it, about a dozen men with guns showed up at an Obama healthcare rally in Phoenix this Monday, at least one of them carrying a semi-automatic rifle.

The man packing the AR-15 (a really big gun)--identified only as "Chris B"--was interviewed by libertarian radio show host and publisher of libertarian site Freedoms Phoenix Ernie Hancock (pictured, who was also carrying a gun at the time of the interview). When asked why he was carrying a weapon, Chris B. responded, "Because I can do it. In Arizona, I still have some freedoms."

Chris B. also said that he "always carried a gun," except when showering, of course, when he'd "put it on the sink."

Eeek.

As it turns out, the entire interview was staged by Hancock, a long-time acquaintance of "Chris B," whom he'd met while working on presidential hopeful Ron Paul's campaign.

Hancock revealed to Rick Sanchez on CNN that he'd invited Chris to come to the protest with the gun for the explicit purpose of interviewing him. Though the rally was about health care, the conversation with Chris focused nearly entirely on gun rights.


Hancock fessed up quickly to the publicity stunt, and just as quickly justified his actions.
"We know what we're up against," Hancock said. "We're up against a tyrannical government that will rob the next generation as long as they can get away with it."

Hancock has also been a long-time advocate of the Arizona Viper Militia, a group convicted of conspiracy and weapons charges in the 90s for plotting to blow up a federal building. According to Hancock, the Viper Militia case was a fraud (he has also said that the government lied about the 9-11 attacks, according to investigative online site Talking Points Memo.)
We feel safer. Don't you?



Tags: Ernie Hancock, Freedoms Phoenix, Obama, publicity stunt

So lets recap:

1)The man who was supposedly protesting Obama's health strategy and simply using his weapon in some time-honoured-yet-never-seen-before symbolic gesture of protest was really there about guns and not about healthcare.

2)He was put up to it by a radical right-winger that openly supports domestic terrorist groups

3)He was black but the guy who put him up to it and staged the whole event was white.

Any questions?