Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 9/8/2002 2:37:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2002 3:27:26 AM EDT by Teltech]
On the extreme left wing of the Democratic Party, The Progressive Caucus is affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America, which, in turn, is the American affiliate of the Socialist International. Congressional Caucus. Socialists believe in sovereignty eroding entanglements abroad and big-state socialism at home. They support high taxes on working people with the money transferred to bureaucracies staffed by their friends. They support a welfare state that oppresses poor people, especially minorities, who then become their constituents. They support left-wing judges who are willing to subvert the democratic power of Congress by making laws from the bench. While they support mandatory public education, mandatory labor unions, mandatory racial quotas, land-grabbing environmental regulation, and thought control in the form of hate speech legislation, they turn around and become downright libertarian when it comes to pornography, abortion, sex, drugs, homosexuality, and other agendas that debauch the citizenry. 59 Socialists in Congress - 2002 Following is the Sept. 2002 membership list of the Progressive Caucus: Contact Congress - by Juan E. Cabanela Neil Abercrombie ­ Hawaii Tammy Baldwin ­ Wisconsin Xavier Becerra ­ California David Bonior ­ Michigan Corrine Brown ­ Florida Sherron Brown ­ Ohio Michael Capuano ­ Mass. Julia Carson ­ Indiana William "Lacy" Clay ­ Missouri John Conyers ­ Michigan Danny Davis ­ Illinois Peter DeFazio ­ Oregon Rosa DeLauro ­ Conn. Lane Evans ­ Illinois Eni Faleomavaega ­ Am Samoa Sam Farr ­ California Chaka Fattah ­ Penn. Bob Filner ­ California Barney Frank ­ Mass. Luis Gutierrez ­ Illinois Earl Hilliard ­ Alabama Maurice Hinchey ­ New York Jesse Jackson Jr. ­ Illinois Sheila Jackson-Lee ­ Texas Stephanie Tubbs Jones ­ Ohio Marcy Kaptur ­ Ohio Dennis Kucinich ­ Ohio Tom Lantos ­ California Barbara Lee ­ California John Lewis ­ Georgia Jim McDermott ­ Washington James P. McGovern ­ Mass. Cynthia McKinney ­ Georgia (GONE - 58 TO GO!!!!)Thanks GeorgaCop Carrie Meek ­ Florida George Miller ­ California Patsy Mink ­ Hawaii Jerry Nadler ­ New York Eleanor Holmes Norton ­ D.C. John Olver ­ Mass. Major Owens ­ New York Ed Pastor ­ Arizona Donald Payne ­ New Jersey Nancy Pelosi ­ California Bobby Rush ­ Illinois Bernie Sanders ­ Vermont Jan Schakowsky ­ Illinois Jose Serrano ­ New York Hilda Solis ­ California Pete Stark ­ California Bennie Thompson ­ Miss. John Tierney ­ Mass. Tom Udall ­ New Mexico Nydia Velazquez ­ New York Maxine Waters ­ California Diane Watson ­ California Mel Watt ­ North Carolina Henry Waxman ­ California Paul Wellstone ­ Minnesota Lynn Woolsey - California _____________________________ We have got to vote to get these people out of our government. They are the ones that are destroying this country. Read the entire article here: [url]http://www.chuckmorse.com/59_socialists_in_congress.html[/url] BTW: Notice that the states with the most draconian gun laws are those that are best represented by these cock roaches.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 2:43:33 AM EDT
You can scratch Cynthia Mckinney off the list. She got her ass handed to her in the primary.[spank]
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 2:56:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Teltech: 59 Socialists in Congress - 2002
View Quote
Constitution of the United States Article IV Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of government, The Founding Fathers gave us the power of law, even a mandate, to defend against these scum. However, finding a leader that will not imprison his followers, us, once the democRAT-Criminal-Socialists are in reeducation camps is a problem. Still, the need to act against these scum who would disarm and imprison us is extant and nigh. We need a leader to cause the Sh*t to Hit The Fan pointing in the direction of the democRAT-Criminal-Socialists.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 3:02:08 AM EDT
That's why I voted for Bush. He's moving a little too slow for me though. At least he's not taking any grief from the U.N. I think that has been his strong point in his Presidency so far.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 4:21:49 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Teltech: That's why I voted for Bush. He's moving a little too slow for me though. At least he's not taking any grief from the U.N. I think that has been his strong point in his Presidency so far.
View Quote
President is doing a good job. He has not banned guns. He is fighting real enemies of the US. He is struggling with a Senate that was stolen from the control of the GOP. We are lucky to have President Bush. We need someone in the mold of President Reagan in 2008.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 4:33:43 AM EDT
I agree. I think Regan was a better President than most people give him credit for.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 5:11:03 AM EDT
Oh yeah, that 86 import ban was a real good thing huh? I agree that we need to get rid of the roaches. We have already done that here in Ky. The rest of you guys need to get busy! [:)]
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 5:25:36 AM EDT
I have to admit I wasn't paying as close attention to gun issues at that time.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 5:27:16 AM EDT
Things could be a lot worse fellas....that goofball nimrod Al Gore could be our President...COULD YOU IMAGINE THAT!!!!!
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 5:31:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By AR15forfun: Oh yeah, that 86 import ban was a real good thing huh?
View Quote
I think you are referring to Reagan closing the machine gun ATF book so that we civilians can never get a new machine gun. I never even knew about that until last year. My guess is most gun owners don't know about it. The FBI was traumatized by the death of a couple of agents in the infamous Miami shootout. Reagan was put under duress, is my guess. Reagan was "one of us", and that order was an aberration and inconsistent with his years of public service. Reagan also campaigned saying he would abolish the Education Department. The ED Dept. was created just two years earlier by Carter. President Reagan was unable to abolish the Ed. Dept. Too much pressure, is my guess.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 6:12:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 10:47:58 AM EDT
Wasn't the 86 ban snuck in at the last minute? [?]
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 11:00:59 AM EDT
OK, we have Ron Paul. Anyone else?
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 11:20:51 AM EDT
It would be far better to have 100 socialists in congress than 1 of those election disrupting libertarian worshippers of the outdated Constitution. It should be a criminal offense in this democracy for people who do not agree with what the government tells us.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 11:35:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Goad:
Originally Posted By AR15forfun: Oh yeah, that 86 import ban was a real good thing huh?
View Quote
I think you are referring to Reagan closing the machine gun ATF book so that we civilians can never get a new machine gun. I never even knew about that until last year. My guess is most gun owners don't know about it. The FBI was traumatized by the death of a couple of agents in the infamous Miami shootout. Reagan was put under duress, is my guess. Reagan was "one of us", and that order was an aberration and inconsistent with his years of public service. Reagan also campaigned saying he would abolish the Education Department. The ED Dept. was created just two years earlier by Carter. President Reagan was unable to abolish the Ed. Dept. Too much pressure, is my guess.
View Quote
God you guys kill me... The only Import Ban was in 89. The ban on new machine guns in 86' was "part" of a Firearm Owners Rights Bill. Included in in was the "importation of surplus weapons" (previously banned in 68) and the direct mailing of ammunition which was ALSO banned in 68. So gun owners collectively made a CHOICE. They decided they'd rather have surplus SKS rifles and be able to mail order ammunition than be able to have NEW registered machine guns. They then basically voiced that opinion and Reagan REPRESENTED them in office. Ronald Reagan did NOT have a line item veto. So he could either sign it or refuse it. Had he refused it you guys would be pissed about not being able to get a $100 SKS rifle.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 11:38:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Teltech: Eni Faleomavaega ­ Am Samoa
View Quote
Since when does American Samoa have representation in the congress? Since it doesn't, it makes me question the entire article.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 11:40:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: The only Import Ban was in 89.
View Quote
You're forgetting Clinton's 98 ban.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:33:29 PM EDT
So if there's only 59 socialists in Congress, why all the socialist legislation?? (that gets signed by the president) Why do we have GWB praising Ted Kennedy over the education bill? Thank goodness we don't have AL Gore! He would have signed bills, even while saying they were Un-constitutional. Ooopsss, GWB did that!!!
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:36:05 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zak:
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: The only Import Ban was in 89.
View Quote
You're forgetting Clinton's 98 ban.
View Quote
True, but the Democrat ones are to be expected. Back on topic, I spread the word to my local board. Please do the same for your local shooting boards. [url]http://pub49.ezboard.com/ffloridashootersnetworkfrm1.showMessage?topicID=1866.topic[/url]
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:40:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2002 12:40:51 PM EDT by The_Macallan]
"Ed Pastor ­ Arizona" On behalf of all of Arizona, I apologize profusely for this. (and for that nutcase McCain)[V] Both of them owe their positions to the liberal wackjobs that congregate in Tucson, that lone liberal zit of a city on the otherwise marvelously conservative state of Arizona.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:40:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: True, but the Democrat ones are to be expected.
View Quote
Not to stay offtopic, but have you ever read the text of the 98 ban? The 89 ban is cited as one of the main reasons why BATF had the power to ban what they did.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:45:21 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Zak:
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: True, but the Democrat ones are to be expected.
View Quote
Not to stay offtopic, but have you ever read the text of the 98 ban? The 89 ban is cited as one of the main reasons why BATF had the power to ban what they did.
View Quote
I'm assuming you are referring to the ATF ability to decree certain weapons "unsuitable for sporting purposes."
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:47:47 PM EDT
Zak, I'm sure that they meant that she was a member of the Socialist party, not necessarily a memeber of congress. (although she could be some sort of representative) The rest I assume are. I don't think the article loses any credibility??? It is something that I would imagine is public knowledge, or could be checked easily enough.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:55:43 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: I'm assuming you are referring to the ATF ability to decree certain weapons "unsuitable for sporting purposes."
View Quote
More or less, though that little gem was given to them by GCA68. What their 98 "finding" (or ruling, or whatever they wantto call it) stated was that the phrase "unsuitable for sporting purposes" was absolutely meaningless, and what congress REALLY meant when they said that was "any firearm at all." They then went on to point at the 89 import ban as an example, then extrapolated that (referencing the crime bill) to include any weapon with a single "evil feature."
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 12:59:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2002 1:01:21 PM EDT by Zak]
Originally Posted By Teltech: Zak, I'm sure that they meant that she was a member of the Socialist party, not necessarily a memeber of congress.
View Quote
The title of the article was "59 Socialists in Congress." Exactly how could they mean anything else?
I don't think the article loses any credibility??
View Quote
Of course it does. When you sensationalize something in order to enhance the point you're trying to make--and its proven to be taken out of context, or a flat out lie--you absolutely, positively impeach your argument as a whole. That's one thing I've learned from arguing with EricThe(ShowMeYourFacts)Hun. (edited for clarity)
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 1:12:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/8/2002 1:14:28 PM EDT by Teltech]
O.K. I'll make the title less sensational. 58 Socialists in Congress - 2002 Is that better? What is so hard to believe about the article? I had a question about the Samoan rep too. I'll check it out for you if it will help my credibility any.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 1:19:00 PM EDT
I hate to break it to you Zak, but there is a Congressional Representative from American Samoa.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 1:25:52 PM EDT
Open Mouth. Insert Foot. Echo Internationally. I hate being wrong, but admit when I am. Apparently, American Samoa has a congressional delegate (which is a non-voting office, that differs from a member of congress.) The following was obtained from [url]http://clerk.house.gov/members/memFAQ.php[/url]
The Office of Delegate was established by ordinance from the Continental Congress (1774-1789) and confirmed by a law of Congress. From the beginning of the Republic, accordingly, the House has admitted delegates from Territories or districts organized by law. Congress created the post of resident commissioner in 1904 to apply to Puerto Rico and the Philippines. Since 1946, only Puerto Rico has had a resident commissioner. Delegates and the resident commissioner may participate in House debate but they are not permitted to vote on the floor. Delegates and resident commissioners have no vote in the Committee of the Whole. All serve on committees of the House and possess powers and privileges equal to other Members in committee. Currently, there is one delegate for each of the following: the District of Columbia, the Virgin Islands, Guam and America Samoa; as well as a resident commissioner from Puerto Rico. The formal duties of the delegates and the resident commissioner are identical, however, a delegate serves a two-year term while a resident commissioner serves a four-year term.
View Quote
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 1:27:24 PM EDT
BTW, Teltech, sorry about that.
Link Posted: 9/8/2002 1:28:49 PM EDT
No problem. I didn't know it either. It's just not hard for me to believe that these people have infiltrated our government. It's easy enough to do, and they have the will to do it.
Top Top