Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

host · 11-10-2007, 04:01 PM

rb, it is relevant in that exactly the opposite of what Ustwo asserts is an ancillary problem, is closer to the truth. The DOJ was subverted to devote huge resources to ferret out a partsinized "bogeyman", organized "illegal voting", that does not exist.

It is dark comedy, watching people vote for politicians who are committed, along with the people who vote for them, to the idea that government "cannot do anything right".

They are on record as having an entrenched belief that government is only effective in areas where their perceived interests and concerns lie. Why do they spend so much more money, compared to prior office holders who were committed to making government work better, then, on government that they don't believe in and are indifferent to the continuation or improvement of, even as they furiously partisanize it to here to fore unexperienced extremes?

They would not cotton to promoting generals who do not believe that the military can be an effective force, but they enthusiastically support the notion of people "running" the government who want to loot it as they dismantle it and make it look as if it is grossly incompetent in it's downward spiral that they've championed.

11-10-2007, 04:01 PM	#56 (permalink)
host Banned	rb, it is relevant in that exactly the opposite of what Ustwo asserts is an ancillary problem, is closer to the truth. The DOJ was subverted to devote huge resources to ferret out a partsinized "bogeyman", organized "illegal voting", that does not exist. It is dark comedy, watching people vote for politicians who are committed, along with the people who vote for them, to the idea that government "cannot do anything right". They are on record as having an entrenched belief that government is only effective in areas where their perceived interests and concerns lie. Why do they spend so much more money, compared to prior office holders who were committed to making government work better, then, on government that they don't believe in and are indifferent to the continuation or improvement of, even as they furiously partisanize it to here to fore unexperienced extremes? They would not cotton to promoting generals who do not believe that the military can be an effective force, but they enthusiastically support the notion of people "running" the government who want to loot it as they dismantle it and make it look as if it is grossly incompetent in it's downward spiral that they've championed. Last edited by host; 11-10-2007 at 04:03 PM..