Congresswoman Bachmann Moves To Block One World Currency!
Hannity will always allow anything to stand as long as it amounts to an attack on Obama, but even he seems to be pushing the envelope when he allows Michele Bachmann's tin-foil-hat-level conspiracy theory about a One World Currency on to the airwaves.
Michelle Bachmann has already proved, many times, that she is simply bat shit crazy. Hannity has already proved, many times, that he will allow anyone on to his show as long as they will attack the Democrats. But I also feel that Hannity, along with Limbaugh, Coulter etc, are becoming the perfect representatives of the current GOP.Bachmann, with the kind of glazed look in her eyes one sees in members of a religious cult, said there's a “question” about “moving the United States off of the dollar and onto a global currency, like Russia and China are calling for.” I'm not sure what Bachmann meant with regard to Russia, but China called for something completely different, as Matthew Yglesias explains and, in any event, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has made it clear that while he's open to a change in the IMF's use of the dollar with regard to international reserves, he's opposed to replacing the dollar as the U.S. currency. But I'll-go-along-with-anything-so-long-as-it-smears-Democrats Hannity either didn't care to correct Bachmann or else didn't know she was pulling something out of thin air.
Staking her claim to Patrick Henry-type glory, Bachmann announced grandly, “Americans have to suit up and realize what's at stake right now. We have to fight for freedom and the future of our country.”
In that noble vein, Hannity added that Geithner had said earlier in the week that, as Hannity mischaracterized it, “(Geithner) would be open to the possibility or consider the possibility of a global currency as it was first advanced by all people, the communist Chinese.”
Wrong. As Politico reports, it was interpreted by some that Geithner had said he was open to an international currency but Geithner, himself, explained that he meant he was open to "the possibility of increasing the use of International Monetary Fund's special drawing rights -- shares in the body held by its members -- not creating a new currency in the literal sense."
It's like we are witnessing an entire political movement losing it's collective mind. They are all going totally insane.
15 comments:
When the Republicans held power, the Democrats talked about organization, they talked about education, they talked about pulling heads out of asses, they talked about all sorts of things, but they almost never talked about armed insurrection, which is a theme that seems to come out of calls to action by Republicans far too often now that Democrats hold the power.
I agree Dave. The Republicans simply sound insane now that they are no longer in office. They don't seem to like the democratic process when it yields results they disagree with.
So they call for armed insurrection.
First, I would like to say that I voted for neither Obama or Obama-Lite this last election. That said, you and the two previous commentators are so out of touch with the reality of middle America, it is scary. But you got your guy elected. How's that change working for you now? Don't feel bad, you are useful. As in useful idiot (what YOUR founding father Lenin called you guys).
I agree that Bush was abysmal for this country, but to think Obama is the answer makes you not worthy of voting. The answer is "We The People".
Read the writings of Jefferson, Adams, Madison. For more contemporary words, read Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin (ooops, they and their followers were marked as militia cooks!)
How's that change working for you now?
Speaking as a citizen of the world rather than as an American, I have to say that the change is working out very well. Iran have responded positively to his advances, he has promised to close Guantanamo Bay and has announced that the US will no longer torture.
I agree that Bush was abysmal for this country, but to think Obama is the answer makes you not worthy of voting. The answer is "We The People".
I agree that the answer is, "we the people" and that Bush was abysmal for your country, but are you seriously arguing that John McCain would have been a better choice? After all, he was going to continue most of Bush's policies.
but are you seriously arguing that John McCain would have been a better choice?
Socialism or Socialism-Lite. I mentioned neither as who I voted for. I voted on principle. I did not vote for the lesser of two evils. But, how any sane person could think that Comrade Obama is good for this country's long term survival, is beyond me.
And, sir, I am disappointed to inform you that UNTIL you and your ilk finish gutting the US Constitution, you are NOT a citizen of the world, but of the United States of America, and more specifically of the individual State you live in. But, alas, we may be world citizens soon, comrade Kel, eh?
And, sir, I am disappointed to inform you that UNTIL you and your ilk finish gutting the US Constitution, you are NOT a citizen of the world, but of the United States of America, and more specifically of the individual State you live in. But, alas, we may be world citizens soon, comrade Kel, eh?
No, I really meant that I am not an American, I am British and that was the context in which I referred to myself as a citizen of the world.
And, as someone who thinks Dave and I are out of touch with "the reality of Middle America", I am afraid that Obama's rating in every poll which I have seen is above sixty percent approving his actions. Perhaps you are out of touch with how the majority of your countrymen feel?
Alas, I had no idea you you were from Britain. Anyone who wants to see where America is headed should look to the roadmap of Europe
And, as someone who thinks Dave and I are out of touch with "the reality of Middle America", I am afraid that Obama's rating in every poll which I have seen is above sixty percent approving his actionsPolls, especially when you control the media, are easily manipulated.
Perhaps you are out of touch with how the majority of your countrymen feel? Sir, I beg to differ. Honest Americans are tired of this country. I think they stuck with Bush and his ilk because they were afraid of the lesser of two evils. The other side was a bunch of ignoramuses (or is it ignorami?!?!). Useful idiots. But let me not discount the fact that the McCain voters were also useful idiots in that they went along with what was pushed down their throats. And perhaps my crowd (those who voted on principle) were the biggest useful idiots since it was our fractured votes for third part candidates that got that usurper into the White House.
But, as far as ideals, we do not want socialsim here. At least those of us with brains.
If you think that government can solve all our problems, I recommend you read the short work by Frederic Bastiat, The Law, at:
http://www.constitution.org/law/bastiat.htm
It is a short, but powerful read that might enlighten you.
So you dismiss all polls as biased and call the democratically elected leader "a usurper".
I don't think you like democracy at all unless it gives the results that YOU want it to give.
And, speaking as a European progressive, I don't need to be "enlightened" thank you very much.
I actually like living in a country where we have a sense of social responsibility towards all of our citizens and where our health care and our education systems are mostly free.
I actually like living in a country where we have a sense of social responsibility towards all of our citizensA sense of social responsibility should come from the Church, not the barrel of a gun (government).
where our health care and our education systems are mostly free Are they really free? Who pays for it? I believe you do in the form of confiscatory taxes. But pay you must because doctors don't work for free. And the ones that do work for peanuts... maybe you might want to avoid them for health care.
That's why people come here for health care. Oh, and how do I know so much about the health care system.... you guessed it. I am a health care provider!
My dad was born in Italy under Mussolini's time. To him, the State is all powerful. I told him, Pops, in a "free" health care system, you would be one of the first who they tell, "Sorry, sir, there is just not enough care to go around, and well, you have led a good life now haven't you? I think you'd agree sir, it's time to move over!"
I don't think you like democracy at all unless it gives the results that YOU want it to give.This country was founded on the ideal of self-determination (that's how we kind of broke free from you blokes, remember). But, alas, we have seem to have lost our way and have come anyway, right mate?
I do not know why I am going to ask this, but something is telling me I should. Can you please read that short read I recommended above? If for nothing else, to tell me I am wrong. Maybe, though, it will plant a seed.
A sense of social responsibility should come from the Church, not the barrel of a gun (government).Our country's really couldn't be any more different. The church is of no use to anyone as it is simply superstitious nonsense.
Are they really free? Who pays for it.I meant free at the point of entry, we obviously pay for it out of taxes with those of us who can afford to pay more doing so and all receiving equal treatment according to need.
I told him, Pops, in a "free" health care system, you would be one of the first who they tell, "Sorry, sir, there is just not enough care to go around, and well, you have led a good life now haven't you?It's nothing like that here. No-one is turned away and certainly not because of their age.
Can you please read that short read I recommended above?I tried to read it but switched off as soon as it made the claim that life was a gift from God. I'm an atheist so he was never going to win me over after he made that claim.
And the bits of I did read seem obsessed with individual rights. I honestly think this is where Europeans and Americans end up coming from different planets.
Europeans lived for centuries under King's which developed within us a strong sense of "we, the people" as opposed to us all of us as individuals, which I know is inherent in the American system where most of your laws are tied to individual property rights etc, much more than European law where the notion of the collective is emphasised much more than it is in your system.
And I disagree with his point regarding the rights of children to vote. Parents look after their children because they are too small to understand the ways of the world and it stands to reason that no parent would vote for anything which they thought was not in their child's interests.
Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.
Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals.This is where I most disagree with his way of thinking.
Sometimes a redistribution of wealth is carried out as a way of maintaining order for the very sense of fairness which he described earlier in his work.
When people perceive that they are being treated unfairly then they react, sometimes with violence. And when the gap between the rich and the poor becomes too wide society begins to break. There are various studies which examine this correlation. Riots broke out in both the US and Britain during the time of Reagan and Thatcher, and this was no coincidence, as both oversaw periods when the gap between the rich and the poor grew at alarming levels.
If we want to continue to enjoy the privileged lifestyles we enjoy then it is important that all members of society, especially the poorest members of society, feel that the system is treating them fairly.
To ensure this we are asked to give a higher percentage of our incomes in taxation. I personally have no problem with that. In fact I really like the fact that some of my money helps to pay for schools and hospitals that everyone in society can benefit from.
I honestly think that everyone living in Britain deserves to enjoy a certain lifestyle simply based on the fact that they live within the fourth largest economy in the world.
We try to ensure that through our health and education systems. Social housing and other things also help.
But I honestly believe these things exist for the good of all of us in society. The principle thing which most of us seek is order. And that can't be maintained if the poorest members of society are disenfranchised.
But I honestly believe these things exist for the good of all of us in society. The principle thing which most of us seek is order. And that can't be maintained if the poorest members of society are disenfranchisedI think the flaw in that logic is succintly addressed by this wise man:
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries." -Your own Winston Churchill.It sounds good. I know. I used to be "enlightened". I even voted for Slick Willy twice (sorry, that's Bill Clinton for those on the other side of the pond).
But my enlightenment slipped away when I started having children and also when I became a doctor.
In the case of the former, you realize that life is not all about me. In the case of the latter, spending 4 years in a library studying to 1am every morning only to have the government strip me of the fruits of my labor.
Too many people in the cart, not enough people pushing.... I might as well jump in the cart too!
PS- I really enjoyed your last entry. It was well-thought out and worded carefully and with deep consideration. Usually, all I ever get is "change" blurted out like a baaaahh from a sheep!
Ah dear Winston! But he's only one of mine in as much as we are both Brits, he was after all a Tory.
I think some on the left seem to find it impossible to be remotely critical of Obama, which I find odd. One of the things which most irked me during the Bush years was the knee jerk support he enjoyed from the Republicans, even when he was heading towards disaster.
Obama, and don't get me wrong, I support him and wish him well, will only stay on track if enough people keep pressuring him to do the right thing.
Politicians only ever respond to pressure and applauding Obama no matter what he does is suicidal in my opinion.
during the Bush years was the knee jerk support he enjoyed from the Republicans, even when he was heading towards disasterI was one of those people, but when he started acting like he was a Democrat, I jumped off. Actually from the whole Peublican party too. It was Dec 2007 and the Republican party was doing its primaries. I heard Ron Paul speak for the first time. I like everything he had to say, expect when he talked about the Iraq War. I 'bout burst an artery when he said that. You see, I was one of those Republican followers. I have since come to see his (and the Founding Fathers') wisdom regarding getting involved. Although I am still tempted to say bomb Iran (sorry) before they bomb us.
My change came when I saw even Fox News starting to disparage him and cut him out of the debates. Something told me that they must be hiding something. So I dug a little deeper and now I see why.
Politicians only ever respond to pressureAhhh, that used to be the case here in America. Until they rammed that bailout down our throats when 98% of people opposed it.
Hey you need to send that Daniel Hannan guy over the pond. We could sure use his support. I love watching that video of him tearing the PM a new one. What to the enlightened peoples of Europe (specifically England)think of his speech to the PM?
I heard Ron Paul speak for the first time. I like everything he had to say, expect when he talked about the Iraq War. I 'bout burst an artery when he said that. You see, I was one of those Republican followers. I have since come to see his (and the Founding Fathers') wisdom regarding getting involved. Although I am still tempted to say bomb Iran (sorry) before they bomb us.Why do Americans think Iran would have any interest in bombing them? That always confuses me.
Ahhh, that used to be the case here in America. Until they rammed that bailout down our throats when 98% of people opposed it.Obviously none of us welcome bailing out banks and huge financial consortium's, but even very right wing people appeared to be saying that the entire financial system was on the verge of collapsing.
Hey you need to send that Daniel Hannan guy over the pond. We could sure use his support. I love watching that video of him tearing the PM a new one. What to the enlightened peoples of Europe (specifically England)think of his speech to the PM?I wrote about this at the time. None of us took him very seriously as he is a sort of well known Euro nutter and had spent years telling us how we all had to mimic the Icelandic economy, before Iceland promptly went bankrupt. So, as you can imagine, his stock ain't that high here.
Ohhhh boy! Your country just stepped in it big time. Actually, I should say your Home Secretary Jacqui Smith stepped in it.
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97127
That my friend was a blunder of unbelievable proportions.
True, I do not agree with 1% of the things he speaks about, but his message rings true with conservative Americans.
Ohhhhhhhhhh Boy! I haven't listened to him in weeks, but I will be tuned in tonight!!!!! Do they block him out or can your countrymen listen to him online?
Honestly, this is going to whip conservatives into a frenzy and will have the complete opposite effect.
Post a Comment