When Threatened by Black Men, Offer Oral Sex: State Rep Allen's (R) Lesson

mykevermin

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
TITUSVILLE - State Rep. Bob Allen told police he was just playing along when a undercover officer suggested in a public restroom that the legislator give him oral sex and $20 because he was intimidated, according to a taped statement and other documents released Thursday.

Allen has already denied any wrongdoing, but the recordings and documents offered new details about what he and police say happened on July 11 inside the men's room at Veterans Memorial Park.

"I certainly wasn't there to have sex with anybody and certainly wasn't there to exchange money for it," said Allen, R-Merritt Island, who was arrested on charges of soliciting prostitution.

"This was a pretty stocky black guy, and there was nothing but other black guys around in the park," Allen, who is white, told police in a taped statement after his arrest. Allen said he feared he "was about to be a statistic" and would have said anything just to get away.

Allen, who couldn't be reached for comment Thursday, has repeatedly declared his innocence, his intention to fight the charges and his desire to stay in office.

Three undercover officers said they were staking out a nearby condo hoping to catch a burglar when Allen entered a park bathroom at about 3:30 p.m.

The officers, who didn't recognize the seven-year legislator, said they thought he was behaving suspiciously and thought that he was looking for a sexual partner, according to the reports released by the Brevard-Seminole State Attorney's Office.

In a written statement released Thursday, Titusville Officer Danny Kavanaugh recalled entering the restroom twice and said he was drying his hands in a stall when Allen peered over the stall door.

After peering over the stall a second time, Allen pushed open the door and joined Kavanaugh inside, the officer wrote. Allen muttered " 'hi,' " and then said, " 'this is kind of a public place, isn't it,' " the report said.

The officer said he asked Allen about going somewhere else and that the legislator suggested going "across the bridge, it's quieter over there."

"Well look, man, I'm trying to make some money; you think you can hook me up with 20 bucks?" Kavanaugh asked Allen.

The officer said Allen responded, "Sure, I can do that, but this place is too public."

Then Kavanaugh said he told Allen, "I wanna know what I gotta do for 20 bucks before we leave.' " He said Allen replied: "I don't know what you're into."

According to Kavanaugh's statement, the officer said, "do you want just [oral sex]?" and Allen replied, "I was thinking you would want one."

The officer said he then asked Allen, "but you'll still give me the 20 bucks for that . . . and that the legislator said, "yeah, I wouldn't argue with that."

As Allen turned and motioned for the officer to follow him to his car, Kavanaugh identified himself as a police officer by raising his shirt and exposing his badge.

When Allen was being placed in a marked patrol car, he asked whether "it would help" if he was a state legislator, according to a police report. The officer replied, "No."

Laurin Sellers can be reached at [email protected] or 321-795-3251.
Click to expand...

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...07aug03,0,1892734.story?coll=orl_tab01_layout

Another Republican, another sex scandal.
Another Republican, another racist.
Another Republican, another hypocrite.
Another Republican, another liar.

:rofl: There's just something so pathetic about the whole affair, really. "I was scared by all the black men so I offered to suck a man's cock!" is his public excuse. He actually thought through things, and this was the best he could muster.

Oh, boy. There's also the "would it help me if I said I was a state legislator?" question. :rofl: Class fuckin' act, right there.
 
I feel kind of sorry for the guy. I mean, he wants to smoke pole so badly, but his political affiliations force him otherwise. Is he so ashamed of being gay (or, bi anyway) that'd he'd rather come off as a corrupt racist?
 
In response to RollingSkull's inevitable attempt to distract people by pointing out a liberal who has done something similar in the past, liberals don't claim to be 'Holier than thou'. Republicans do. That is why they deserve to fall harder than anyone else.
 
Reality's Fringe;3209131 said:
I feel kind of sorry for the guy. I mean, he wants to smoke pole so badly, but his political affiliations force him otherwise. Is he so ashamed of being gay (or, bi anyway) that'd he'd rather come off as a corrupt racist?
Click to expand...

I hope this is a joke.
 
.. Damn, I was wondering how that hypocrite would weasel out of this. Boy, maybe everyone who gets arrested oughta blame it on black people. :O

I was intimidated by black people into building this meth lab and selling ice to teenagers, I swear! They bullied me into taking drugs and stealing junk, I'm really innocent! :roll:
 
[quote name='dragonreborn23']In response to RollingSkull's inevitable attempt to distract people by pointing out a liberal who has done something similar in the past, liberals don't claim to be 'Holier than thou'. Republicans do. That is why they deserve to fall harder than anyone else.[/quote]

WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, CARICATURE YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS

Just so long as you don't whine about the cheapening of the political discourse. Because then... you know... you just might be a hypocrite.

Personally, the only thing I find detestable here is that sort of childish logic. It enforces a sort of moral nihilism, where the greatest sin is hypocrisy and the best course of action is to simply have no standards whatsoever.

Not to mention the confusion so many have about what falling short of one's standards constitutes...

Which raises another question: Why do most of you even come here? Only two or so folks here even show the pretense of being interested in debate. The rest of you seem quite comfortable in your caricaturing of roughly half the population.
 
When the D.C. Madame went on The Alex Jones Show, Alex said something to her along the lines of: "Y' know..... if you were serving up homosexual males instead of straight females, you'd have half of the core republican party as your clientele...."

Asked if Palfrey agreed with the observation that Republicans favored gay male prostitutes over women, Palfrey responded, "I don't know about that, I seem to think that as well by reading news reports."

As we have highlighted before, mainly Republican self-proclaimed Christian attendees to the annual Bohemian Grove retreat - a kind of summer camp for the elite where policy is formulated without oversight - are routinely "serviced" by gay male porn stars, who are transported in to work as valets, according to a report in the New York Post .

The D.C. Madame scandal is important for several reasons but the core issue is the fact that the majority of high-level public and government officials are embroiled in these kinds of activities, along with even seedier pursuits, and this ensures they are completely compromised and can be politically blackmailed to maintain the status quo, because if it was to fall then they would go down with it.

This strikes at the very root of why the majority in Congress consistently oppose immediate withdrawal from Iraq, a new investigation into 9/11 and the impeachment of Bush and Cheney - because to lend support to such actions would leave them vulnerable to a brutal exposé of whatever skeletons are in their closet.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, CARICATURE YOUR POLITICAL OPPONENTS
.[/QUOTE]


They don't need our help, they are doing just fine on their own making "caricatures" of themselves.
 
Reality's Fringe;3210107]Yes. Apaprently a lame one =(. Well said:
LoL - I didn't mean to rag on you. Just you'd be surprised at some of the contortions my Repub friends go to when justifying this kind of destructive hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Personally, the only thing I find detestable here is that sort of childish logic. It enforces a sort of moral nihilism, where the greatest sin is hypocrisy and the best course of action is to simply have no standards whatsoever.[/quote]

Yes, because we all know that tolerance for homosexuals is the first step in the slippery slope to moral nihilism.
 
These entrapment methods of criminal justice are despicable.

The undercover agents should suffer the same consequence as the victim they lured into the crime.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']These entrapment methods of criminal justice are despicable.

The undercover agents should suffer the same consequence as the victim they lured into the crime.[/quote]
You think so? I've seen episodes of COPS where they leave a bike out, and when it gets stolen, they pounce on the guy. Same with fake drug deals. Do you oppose those examples, too? I could see how they seem rather unfair, but they're not forcing you to break the law.
 
[quote name='Hex']You think so? I've seen episodes of COPS where they leave a bike out, and when it gets stolen, they pounce on the guy. Same with fake drug deals. Do you oppose those examples, too? I could see how they seem rather unfair, but they're not forcing you to break the law.[/QUOTE]
Why don't they watch someone else's bike for real? Seems alot more productive.

As for fake drug deals: despicable.


[quote name='RollingSkull']Personally, the only thing I find detestable here is that sort of childish logic. It enforces a sort of moral nihilism, where the greatest sin is hypocrisy and the best course of action is to simply have no standards whatsoever.[/QUOTE]
Ah yes, tolerating gays = positively amoral.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Why don't they watch someone else's bike for real? Seems alot more productive.

As for fake drug deals: despicable.[/quote]

Why do you think so?

I can't really decide one way or the other, since it gets thieves off the streets, but at the same time, it just feels like cheating. But then again, life isn't fair, is it? :lol:

I gotta admit I hate watching prostitution stings, but that's because I'm against the illegality of it. I'm perfectly fine with theft being illegal.
 
[quote name='PyroGamer']Ah yes, tolerating gays = positively amoral.[/quote]

I rest my case.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go unchain another homo from the basement for his daily beatings.

JUST LIKE ALL REPUBLICANS

BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY!
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I rest my case.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go unchain another homo from the basement for his daily beatings.

JUST LIKE ALL REPUBLICANS

BECAUSE OF THE HYPOCRISY![/QUOTE]

Don't be daft. There's no equally distributed hypocrisy to point out. This is a Republican issue.

And another "don't be daft." Don't go stretching homophobia to suggest "daily beatings" (funny you mention that whilst dancing around the notion of hate crimes in another thread). The citizenry benefits associated with marriage, denied to willing homosexuals (and not by choice; it is a de facto segregation) is exactly *how* different from Jim Crow laws? A matter of degrees, indeed; but "degrees" and "night and day" are, well, "night and day."

You and yours support and pushing forth legislation creating homosexuals as a second-class citizen as identified in our lawbooks - your glorious president went so far to, on many, many occasions, suggest a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

So, find me a Democrat like Allen, or Mark Foley, or Ted Haggard (and that's just the past nine months, shecky!). While you're at it, find me an out-and-proud high-profile Republican like Barney Frank.

Or, you can stammer and bray, instead, throw out some tired and inaccurate tag line as if it is a suitable substitution for engaging the issues, and obfuscate and use Republican-ninja smoke bombs to somehow blame Allen on Bill Clinton.

Now, go search "Red State Blog." They have your talking points ready to compete with the issues!
 
You have an amazing knack for bluster, taking up an entire post of red-faced rage... and missing the thrust of my point by such a wide swath, I have to begin to suspect intentional misreading.

At least the kids around here like Msut have an excuse when they do it. Your screeds smell too much of literacy and a certain amount of thought put into your positions; it is such a pity that they all seem to be based on caricaturing your opponents.

EDIT: Looking back, I should not be so surprised. Or rather, my surprise is misplaced; I should be shocked that you are the one with the ridiculous amount of gall to be lecturing me about talking points. But, don't worry about it. What I have to say isn't important. Really, Republicans don't disagree in good faith with you guys over legal interpretations of X or the proper place of government in affair Y. No, they're all closeted gays who power-trip off of the anti-Gay Gestapo. Not a single one of them can come to their positions through good faith reasoning; no, every one of them is a jackboot-clad party-line swilling hatemonger who only know what to think because Darth Rove told them to. Good Lord. Maybe I've just ignored your sheer arrogance, your complete and total disregard for anyone who disagrees with you, your intellectual unseriousness for so long because, unlike the vast majority of those who agree with you here, you at least pretended to be able to discuss issues beyond the barest minimum level. Either way, I've had more than enough of your preening intellectual masturbation masquerading as debate.

Keep fighting the good fight though, because you are the one true moral crusader, vanquishing those conservative hobgoblins oppressing the poor gay folk!

I remember when WE used to be the ones who had the monopoly on black-and-white prose.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Another Republican, another sex scandal.
Another Republican, another racist.
Another Republican, another hypocrite.
Another Republican, another liar.
...
Don't be daft. There's no equally distributed hypocrisy to point out. This is a Republican issue.[/QUOTE]

Becuase all republicans are dick sucking homo-haters, yadda, yadda, yadda. Surely you can't be serious, myke.

Although your deep seeded, irrational hatred for Republicans, conservatives, and the right to private property usually short circuits your rational center for your emotional, this type of commentary is droll and uncharacteristic of even you. It has to be part of some sociology experiment or drunken personal amusement.

So which is it? Is it a slow month for frivolous data scrutinization or are you just lonely for friendship in the hollow hallways of acedemia?
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Becuase all republicans are dick sucking homo-haters, yadda, yadda, yadda. Surely you can't be serious, myke.

Although your deep seeded, irrational hatred for Republicans, conservatives, and the right to private property usually short circuits your rational center for your emotional, this type of commentary is droll and uncharacteristic of even you. It has to be part of some sociology experiment or drunken personal amusement.

So which is it? Is it a slow month for frivolous data scrutinization or are you just lonely for friendship in the hollow hallways of acedemia?[/quote]

Shucks - and you almost got it right this time BMuls.

We are talking about rights - but not the "right to private property".

Go back to your survivalist shack in the woods Thoreau, I'll wake you the next time we are talking about imminent domain.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']Becuase all republicans are dick sucking homo-haters, yadda, yadda, yadda. Surely you can't be serious, myke.[/QUOTE]

Given state initiatives that have made homosexuals literally second-class citizens, let's get our priorities in order with regards to "irrational hatred." Okay? Do I hate Republicans? Mostly (I'll spare you my more nuanced view, since you wouldn't believe it and couldn't grasp it, given your boring and incorrect attempts to label me a Marxist), yes. Would I try to pass legislation taking away any rights of self-identified Republicans? Nope. Therein lies the ironic difference: I would not use government to oppress groups of people (if you want to turn this into an "OMG TAX IS SO OPPRESSIVE!" thread, start another thread and link it here, k?), whereas those who think government involvement should be limited at best, and tout an ideology of noninterference, have, in fact, done so.
 
Rollingskull has basically said that the wingnut version of morality is like Nirvana not many people should be expected to actually achieve it.

Therefore I suggest they STFU about it for 5 minutes and stop trying to legislate it and use it to get votes.
 
I think problem here, myke, is that you are unable to articulate the nuance of your opinion on republicans. I think this statement pretty much says it all:
Another Republican, another sex scandal.
Another Republican, another racist.
Another Republican, another hypocrite.
Another Republican, another liar.
Click to expand...

Leading me to believe that nuance, in your case, means : knee-jerk-reactionary-stuck in a black hole-biggot, like many of the non-thinkers on this board. I expected more from you since you are a so-called "educated" person.

And you already do want government to oppress groups of people of your own choosing. You simply choose people with wealth and property. We'll just change the principle of freedom to include only those groups Myke thinks deserve it. Anyone else is fair game.

The people of said states get a chance to petition their representatives on any state initiative and therefore, any legislation resulting is approved by the people by proxy. For someone who champions democracy, you certainly divorce yourself quickly from that principle when ever you disagree with the outcome. But, since you can morph your principles of freedom at any time to suit your needs, this isn't an unexpected revelation that democracy is only valid when you agree with their decisions.

Let's now talk about hypocracy, since you seem to belong to the same club.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']I think problem here, myke, is that you are unable to articulate the nuance of your opinion on republicans. I think this statement pretty much says it all:


Leading me to believe that nuance, in your case, means : knee-jerk-reactionary-stuck in a black hole-biggot, like many of the non-thinkers on this board. I expected more from you since you are a so-called "educated" person.[/quote]

I kinda want to respond to this in depth, but instead, I'll do this:

http://www.news-tribune.net/local/local_story_219210228.html

ANOTHER ONE!

[quote name='you again']And you already do want government to oppress groups of people of your own choosing. You simply choose people with wealth and property. We'll just change the principle of freedom to include only those groups Myke thinks deserve it. Anyone else is fair game.[/quote]

I said start another thread if you want to discuss this in depth, darlin'. I'd be more than happy to address this claim of yours, and how your argument is premised upon a logic that would make our country financially unsustainable via equal distribution of taxation (lest we dare oppress those poor, poor rich people).

The people of said states get a chance to petition their representatives on any state initiative and therefore, any legislation resulting is approved by the people by proxy. For someone who champions democracy, you certainly divorce yourself quickly from that principle when ever you disagree with the outcome. But, since you can morph your principles of freedom at any time to suit your needs, this isn't an unexpected revelation that democracy is only valid when you agree with their decisions.

Let's now talk about hypocracy, since you seem to belong to the same club.
Click to expand...

Well, here is where democracy is an interesting experiment. Let us, instead of championing the democratic response of those who wish to classify homosexuals as second-class citizens, take this a step further. Let's not even play the slippery slope game; let's just go back 40 years. 40 years ago, not through a declaration of its unconstitutionality, but via the Civil Rights Act, a piece of federal legislation, Jim Crow laws were rescinded. During the Jim Crow era (in which your parents, and perhaps even you, were a part of), blacks were quite objectively oppressed. Separate water fountains, back of the bus, no table service in restaurants. You know the story. This was of little consequence to whites at the time; they benefited from such legislated oppression. More spaces at the diner counter, you know? Shorter lines in the restrooms.

Public opinion during the Jim Crow era was predominantly in favor of the legislation (save for the very end, of course, but even *that* is contestable). So, since the public was happy with Jim Crow laws, shouldn't we have allowed them to remain in place? Why get rid of something the majority of the public supported? After all, "democracy" and all that. Right?

EDIT:

[quote name='mykevermin']So, find me a Democrat like Allen, or Mark Foley, or Ted Haggard (and that's just the past nine months, shecky!). While you're at it, find me an out-and-proud high-profile Republican like Barney Frank.[/QUOTE]

Still waitin' for a response to this one. You know, since being homophobic is a nonpartisan issue to some of you.
 
[quote name='lilboo']So wait, ALL I have to do is just tell a black guy I'm scared and that's it? I'm gettin laid?[/QUOTE]

No, no, you just tell him you voted democrat in the last 4 elections. Then he sucks YOUR dick AND you receive a get-out-of-jail-free card!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I kinda want to respond to this in depth, but instead, I'll do this:

http://www.news-tribune.net/local/local_story_219210228.html

ANOTHER ONE!
[/quote]

You just can't divorce hypocricy from republican, can you? You're unabashedly disdainful hate for a political ideology prevents you from seeing people as individuals as you parrot the left's mantra of republicanism equated to criminality. You enjoy propagating the causal myth when it suits your own personal vendetta.


I said start another thread if you want to discuss this in depth, darlin'. I'd be more than happy to address this claim of yours, and how your argument is premised upon a logic that would make our country financially unsustainable via equal distribution of taxation (lest we dare oppress those poor, poor rich people).
Click to expand...
As opposed to your plan for redistribution of wealth that would make our economy swing into production by eliminating that thing called "profit motive", right ? I guess America was doomed to eventual elimination before the income tax amendment. God only knows how we survived as a nation before the government decided to confiscate over 40% of the wealth we create every year from income.


Well, here is where democracy is an interesting experiment. Let us, instead of championing the democratic response of those who wish to classify homosexuals as second-class citizens, take this a step further. Let's not even play the slippery slope game; let's just go back 40 years. 40 years ago, not through a declaration of its unconstitutionality, but via the Civil Rights Act, a piece of federal legislation, Jim Crow laws were rescinded. ...
Click to expand...

Way to displace an argument with another subject. No one is displacing homosexuals. No one is denying them the right to vote(which doesn't really exist, by the way), the right to drink from whitey's fountains, or the right to enjoy freedoms any other individual can enjoy.

If you the crux of your whole rant is the rights of homosexuals to marry is being denied, then let's discuss the government's recognition of marriage in general instead of lambasting all republicans for the actions of a few shameful ones.

I would agree that no one should be granted special rights based on what group they belong to, married, unmarried, homo, or hetero-sexual. That there are no such things as group rights, only individual ones.

I agree that the christian right is leading the party into a reactionary position on this issue, but it does not follow that all republicans are homophobes and sex crazed perverts. I'm sorry to see your power of objective thought is handicapped. Perhaps you deserve special treatment because of your disability.
 
I would just like to thank all these hard-working Republicans in advance for making the '08 elections a Democratic blow-out. Really, you guys are doing a heckuva job.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']I agree that the christian right is leading the party into a reactionary position on this issue, but it does not follow that all republicans are homophobes and sex crazed perverts.[/quote]

Careful, careful, you're tipping your hand buddy!
 
[quote name='camoor']Careful, careful, you're tipping your hand buddy![/QUOTE]

Well, I may also be a sex-crazed pervert, but that doesn't make me a republican either !
 
shouldwe.jpg


:lol:
 
It just occurred to me that a republican giving a speech about family values is about the same as a democrat giving a lecture about "open and honest government", or abandoning the "politics of personal destruction."
 
Hey, the big kids are talking about issues specific to parties....

meanwhile the hits keep coming..

http://www.news-tribune.net/breakingnews/local_story_219210228.html

The chairman of the Clark County Republican Party [Glenn Murphy]— who last month was elected president of the Young Republican National Federation — has resigned both posts, apparently in the wake of a criminal investigation.

However, the Clark County Sheriff’s Department on Friday began investigating Murphy for alleged criminal deviate conduct — potentially a class B felony — after speaking with a 22-year-old man who claimed that on July 31, Murphy performed an unwanted sex act on him while the man slept in a relative’s Jeffersonville home

In 1998, a 21-year-old male filed a similar report with Clarksville police claiming Murphy attempted to perform a sex act on him while he was sleeping. Charges were never filed in that case.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's exactly the same as some dems talking about vague issues that all politicians talk about.
 
I don't understand why some folks turn this into a "Democrat vs Republican" debate?

The fact of the matter, is that many high level politicians are involved in lewd activities that are often times illegal.

Think about it, would the general public allow a pedophile to babysit their kids?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Then why would the people allow criminals to make economic and governmental descisions that affect their everyday lives?

It's time people stop bickering about political parties like sony/xbox fanboys, and realize that both parties are purposefully put there in place to neutralize each other, while working towards a unified goal.
 
I don't get why some of you folks turn this into a "Demo vs Repub" debate.

The fact of the matter, is that many high level politicians are involved in lewd activities that are often times illegal.

Think about it, would the general public allow a pedophile to babysit their kids?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

Then why would the people allow criminals to make economic and governmental descisions that affect their everyday lifes?

It's time people stop bickering about political parties like sony/xbox fanboys, and realize that both parties are purposefully put there in place to neutralize each other, while working towards a unified goal.
 
[quote name='level1online']working towards a unified goal.[/QUOTE]

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Sure thing, kid. How about sharing one example of what such a "unified goal" would look like?

Health care for children?
International relations?
Wiretapping and observation of citizens, domestic and international?
Social security?

Good luck with that "unified goal." Meanwhile, I'm gonna go listen to David Bowie's "Space Oddity" in your honor.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Sure thing, kid. How about sharing one example of what such a "unified goal" would look like?

Health care for children?
International relations?
Wiretapping and observation of citizens, domestic and international?
Social security?

Good luck with that "unified goal." Meanwhile, I'm gonna go listen to David Bowie's "Space Oddity" in your honor.[/quote]

uuuuuuh.... Shillary... I mean Hillary voted for the war.... dumbass
 
Why does everyone think the republicans are Satan's demons. Do you honestly think Barack or Hillary or Edwards are going to make a difference. Honestly, the only sensible one seems to the Mormon....
 
[quote name='mykevermin']:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Sure thing, kid. How about sharing one example of what such a "unified goal" would look like?

Health care for children?
International relations?
Wiretapping and observation of citizens, domestic and international?
Social security?

Good luck with that "unified goal." Meanwhile, I'm gonna go listen to David Bowie's "Space Oddity" in your honor.[/quote]

International Relations: see CFR - Council on Foreign Relations

John Edwards - CFR (D)
Rudy Giuliani - CFR (R)
Hillary Clinton - CFR (D)
John McCain -- CFR (R)
Barack Obama -- CFR (D)
Mitt Romney -- CFR (R)
Christopher Dodd -- CFR (D)
Fred Thompson -- CFR (R)
Bill Richardson -- CFR (D)
Jim Gilmore -- CFR (R)
Joseph Biden -- CFR (D)
Newt Gingrich -- CFR (R)

Why don't you pick up a book written by Zbigniew Brzezinski or David Rockefeller, where they openly admit the CFR is working towards a global economic and political system, while destroying the sovereignty of the United States.

Health Care, Surveillience, & Social Security all take a back seat compared to Foreign Relations aka Imperialism / War Economics. In other words, Health Care, Surveillence, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Education, etc are all minor issues, portrayed by the media as Major Issues. That's why they can take opposing sides to it, and have tunnel vision folks like you debate about it until the cows come home.

but hey... just keep spouting that tin foil hat non-sense, we'll see how far you get in a real debate with that one.
:applause:
 
Level1,

Dude you've been listening to too much Alex Jones. While it *seems* he presents real evidence, he actually distorts things just as much as the next guy (if you are willing to do a little research and be critical)
 
[quote name='usickenme']Level1,

Dude you've been listening to too much Alex Jones. While it *seems* he presents real evidence, he actually distorts things just as much as the next guy (if you are willing to do a little research and be critical)[/quote]


I picked up Memoirs by Rockefeller and The Grand Chessboard by Brzezinski. Those aren't written by Alex Jones! Those are written by CFR, Trilateral, Bilderburg folks.... mmmmmkay?

Now go find your original birth certificate, read it carefully, and find out who really owns you....:hot:

hint: it's the federal reserve. :whistle2:#
 
[quote name='level1online']International Relations: see CFR - Council on Foreign Relations

John Edwards - CFR (D)
Rudy Giuliani - CFR (R)
Hillary Clinton - CFR (D)
John McCain -- CFR (R)
Barack Obama -- CFR (D)
Mitt Romney -- CFR (R)
Christopher Dodd -- CFR (D)
Fred Thompson -- CFR (R)
Bill Richardson -- CFR (D)
Jim Gilmore -- CFR (R)
Joseph Biden -- CFR (D)
Newt Gingrich -- CFR (R)

Why don't you pick up a book written by Zbigniew Brzezinski or David Rockefeller, where they openly admit the CFR is working towards a global economic and political system, while destroying the sovereignty of the United States.

Health Care, Surveillience, & Social Security all take a back seat compared to Foreign Relations aka Imperialism / War Economics. In other words, Health Care, Surveillence, Gay Marriage, Abortion, Education, etc are all minor issues, portrayed by the media as Major Issues. That's why they can take opposing sides to it, and have tunnel vision folks like you debate about it until the cows come home.

but hey... just keep spouting that tin foil hat non-sense, we'll see how far you get in a real debate with that one.
:applause:[/QUOTE]

OH NOE3Z! TEH US IS IOMPERIALIST PIGS1!!!!111ONE. CHOKMSEE WUZ RIGHT!!!

Look. When you first mentioned your ideal "unified goal," you mentioned it in the context of going above and beyond the sorts of pithy type of partisanship that our politicians present. That's fine, and agreeable. We don't have politicians like Jean Marie Le Pen in the US (coughdaviddukecough), our socialists, communists, and other *genuinely* different politicians get fewer votes than Pee-Wee Herman write-ins. Some of the issues that we deal with often do feel like the same side of the same coin.

So, your abstracted "unified goal" was suggesting that the people, and not the politicians, working actively towards something (or against something?).

It's time people stop bickering about political parties like sony/xbox fanboys, and realize that both parties are purposefully put there in place to neutralize each other, while working towards a unified goal.
Click to expand...

That's what you said. That sentence is about as well thought out and meaningful as Miss America wishing for "world peace." It's so abstracted and meaningless that, when I point it out for being that, you respond bitterly with evidence of the CFR, which is GOVERNMENT BIPARTISAN ACTIVITY. It's the government's "unified goal" - doing what is necessary to ensure the US' status as the world's lone superpower. It is completely removed from your original point about a "unified goal".

What is that goal, anyway? Disbanding the WTO/TABD/IMF/whatever? Anarchist vegan potluck dinners? Free wristbands for the first 100,000 dissenters?

You can't even mentally separate what you want to see (your "unified goal" of the public against the bourgeoisie powers) and what you do see (the "unified goal" of ensuring the US' global power position).

Moreover, your entire "we are being lied to and used as pawns" just smacks of naive Marxist thinking. Keep waiting for Godot the Revolution. It's only a century late, give or take a few decades. It'll be here *ANY* day now, unless it's derailed again by this decade's version of beer and American Gladiators.
 
I don't mind the U.S. working to become the global leader. That's a good thing, it ensures a strong economy, and protection from outside invaders. What I do mind are the methods of deception used to achieve those aims and fool the American people.

And....what happened to the stock market on friday??? strong economy eh?
And... what terrorist group is now "stronger than ever"? strong military eh?

Answer me this, so how do the false flag attacks of OKC, 9/11, & 7/7 ensure our place as the global leader?

Forget it... Let's get back on topic. A republican wanted to give this other dude head in the men's room. Next time he should just use AOL. :bouncy:
 
[quote name='level1online']Gay Marriage, ... are all minor issues[/quote]
fuck you, it's a pretty fucking major issue to me. :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top