ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
A Bigger Bang Tour 2007

Congratulations Cucho, a second edition! Now printed in Spain
[ ROCKSOFF.ORG ] [ IORR NEWS ] [ SETLISTS 1962-2006 ] [ FORO EN ESPAÑOL ] [ BIT TORRENT TRACKER ] [ BIT TORRENT HELP ] [ BIRTHDAY'S LIST ] [ MICK JAGGER ] [ KEITHFUCIUS ] [ CHARLIE WATTS ] [ RONNIE WOOD ] [ BRIAN JONES ] [ MICK TAYLOR ] [ BILL WYMAN ] [ IAN "STU" STEWART ] [ NICKY HOPKINS ] [ MERRY CLAYTON ] [ IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN ] [ LINKS ] [ PHOTOS ] [ JIMI HENDRIX ] [ TEMPLE ] [GUESTBOOK ] [ ADMIN ]
CHAT ROOM aka The Fun HOUSE Rest rooms last days
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: The Political Thread Return to archive Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
26th August 2007 01:14 PM
Chuck Well, you wonder why I always dress in black,
Why you never see bright colors on my back,
And why does my appearance seem to have a somber tone.
Well, there's a reason for the things that I have on.

I wear the black for the poor and the beaten down,
Livin' in the hopeless, hungry side of town,
I wear it for the prisoner who has long paid for his crime,
But is there because he's a victim of the times.

I wear the black for those who never read,
Or listened to the words that Jesus said,
About the road to happiness through love and charity,
Why, you'd think He's talking straight to you and me.

Well, we're doin' mighty fine, I do suppose,
In our streak of lightnin' cars and fancy clothes,
But just so we're reminded of the ones who are held back,
Up front there ought 'a be a Man In Black.

I wear it for the sick and lonely old,
For the reckless ones whose bad trip left them cold,
I wear the black in mournin' for the lives that could have been,
Each week we lose a hundred fine young men.

And, I wear it for the thousands who have died,
Believen' that the Lord was on their side,
I wear it for another hundred thousand who have died,
Believen' that we all were on their side.

Well, there's things that never will be right I know,
And things need changin' everywhere you go,
But 'til we start to make a move to make a few things right,
You'll never see me wear a suit of white.

Ah, I'd love to wear a rainbow every day,
And tell the world that everything's OK,
But I'll try to carry off a little darkness on my back,
'Till things are brighter, I'm the Man In Black
26th August 2007 01:18 PM
Chuck
quote:
Ten Thousand Motels wrote:
August 24, 2007
gunguys.com

Ted Nugent, NRA Board Member, Threatens to Kill Barack
Obama and Hillary Clinton During Vicious Onstage Rant

GunGuys.com is urgently demanding that the National Rifle Association immediately remove Ted Nugent from his position as a board member of the NRA after Nugent threatened United States Senators and Presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

This is the latest in a series of unacceptable extremist rhetoric -- and in this case a threat against the life of U.S. Senators -- from NRA role model and activist, Ted Nugent.

According to Rolling Stone magazine:

Renegade right-winger Ted Nugent recently went on a vicious onstage rant in which he threatened the lives of Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Decked out in full-on camouflage hunting gear, Nugent wielded two machine guns while raging, “Obama, he’s a piece of shit. I told him to suck on my machine gun. Hey Hillary,” he continued. “You might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch.” Nugent summed up his eloquent speech by screaming “freedom!”

This isn’t the first time Nugent has been caught spewing hatred. Last January, the guitarist caused a scandal for Republican Texas governor Rick Perry when he, among other abhorrent comments, wore a Confederate flag shirt and insulted immigrants at Perry’s inauguration event. In July, Nugent was quoted in a Wall Street Journal story blaming “stoned, dirty, stinky hippies” for “rising rates of divorce, high school drop-outs, drug use, abortion, sexual diseases and crime, not to mention the exponential expansion of government and taxes.”

Gun Guys.com will have more to say about this vile and disturbing rhetoric from the National Rifle Association soon. But for now, it is incumbent on the NRA to forcefully and categorically distance itself from its board member, Ted Nugent, by demanding his immediate resignation from the board of directors.

Second, Gun Guys.com is calling on the NRA to apologize both to Senators Obama and Clinton and pledge to disavow all forms of hate speech and threats to political candidates from individuals affiliated -- in this case as a member of its governing body -- with the National Rifle Association.

In the 2000 presidential election campaign, Charlton Heston, then head of the NRA, called for the lynching of Al Gore during a Michigan campaign rally for George W. Bush.

The NRA's failure to immediately remove Ted Nugent from the NRA's board will signal its complicity in these contintued threats and vile rhetoric.


[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels]



So old draft dodging Ted wants to kill him some bourgeois liberals does he? LOL.
26th August 2007 01:23 PM
Riffhard
quote:
Chuck wrote:


Well zippadeefreakindooda! Good for you.



Indeed it is good for me!!! It's very good for me, and for my kids as well! They will go to the best college that money can buy, or that I can afford!! Let those disillusioned by capitalism roll cigars for Fidel for 13 cents a day. In other words-fuck 'em!


Riffy
26th August 2007 01:25 PM
Chuck
quote:
Riffhard wrote:


Indeed it is good for me!!! It's very good for me, and for my kids as well! They will go to the best college that money can buy, or that I can afford!! Let those disillusioned by capitalism roll cigars for Fidel for 13 cents a day. In other words-fuck 'em!


Riffy



Well, at least you're honest. What do you think of Johnny's song 'The Man in Black'?
26th August 2007 01:32 PM
Riffhard
quote:
Chuck wrote:


Well, at least you're honest. What do you think of Johnny's song 'The Man in Black'?




I love Cash. That much is fairly obvious. He was a man who loved his country and understood it's importance, place, and value, in the world. He was also a very rich man, and a capitalist. [But], yeah I dig the tune. Why?



Riffy
26th August 2007 02:17 PM
the good
quote:
Chuck wrote:


LOL! You don't back up your claim that the FSU "collapsed" AND you retreat into an absolutist conception of human-nature to cover your religious devotion to capitalism!! Bourgeois ideologues are a predictable lot.

While some ruling classes have had the intellectual honesty to tell the ruled 'things are this way because we want them this way,' i.e., 'might makes right,' most ruling classes have appealed to a higher authority. In medieval times, when the mode of production was primitive, the ruling class asserted that an invisible deity supported the social relations. Today, when capital owns and controls science, the ruling class asserts that 'human nature,' scientifically 'proven,' supports today's social relations.

An appeal to 'human nature' has as its chief advantage, unyielding finality. If a certain behavior, such as the 'profit motive,' is as irresistible as a sun rise, then resistance is futile. If 'human nature' is 'hard-wired' into the central nervous system of every individual on the planet, then any attempts to socialize the means of production and inaugurate communist social relations are bound to fail. 'Human nature' is like gravity: get used to it.

Alan Greenspan: "The history of the 20th century has been a testing ground for innumerable theories of social and economic organization that have been tried and found wanting. The way people respond to incentives and rewards persists from generation to generation suggesting a deeply embedded set of stabilities in human nature. We see this, for example, in remarkable consistencies in the behavior of markets over time. Nonetheless, history is strewn with examples of economic and social systems that have tried to counter, or alter, human nature and failed... The lesson that appears to be emerging is that only free market systems exhibit the flexibility and robustness to accommodate human nature'

('Market Capitalism,' Vital Speeches of the Day, 1 May
1998, p. 419).

Such is the ideology of capitalism.

Although there certainly must be a 'human nature' that reflects the genetic endowment of all humans to some extent, it is unclear WHAT precisely that may be. After all, humans don't live in the natural world, they live in societies---and societies are man-made environments. These environments, history will confirm, have changed a great deal over the centuries.

Once, it was 'human nature' to own slaves (or to be a slave); now it is not. Either slave-owning WAS 'human nature' for hundreds of years or slave-owning DENIED 'human nature' for hundreds of years. History conclusively demonstrates, one way or the other, that 'human nature' is susceptible to cultural adaption. It is NOT fixed. Furthermore, the 'human nature' of the slave-owner is to exploit the slave while the 'human nature' of the slave is to end the conditions that enslave him: 'human nature' is subject to class differentiations.

After acknowledging the cultural impact upon 'human nature,' it must also be acknowledged that 'human nature' is as varied and as contradictory as individual human behavior itself.

The family unit is an example of primal co-operation (supporting unproductive members, for example); simultaneously, the family unit is an example of primal competition (sibling rivalry, for example). Both claims are correct only if accepted dialectically, as a unity of opposites, acknowledging that BOTH co-operation and competition are components of 'human nature.' (Furthermore, every family will evince differing ratios of each of these conflicting behaviors.)

To say that 'human nature' applies to all equally is to assert that it is absolute. This premise denies both individuality and free will. As it is clear that human behavior has a great range of distinctiveness and contradiction, not to mention a significant reliance upon cultural context, it is clear that any assessment of 'human nature' requires INTERPRETATION.

The emphasis of interpretation is largely a matter of ideological orientation---and helps demonstrate the folly of attempting to MONOPOLIZE such a wide-ranging phenomenon as 'human nature.'

Nevertheless, all ruling classes are in business to stay in business---and will use all the resources at their disposal to make a claim for an absolute 'human nature,' i.e. a 'human nature' that THEY define as characteristic of certain social relations.

For example: there are millions of crimes perpetrated yearly and millions of criminals locked up which attest to the tenacity of crime yet no ruling class has ever suggested that crime is 'human nature,' with its implication that whatever is 'human nature' must be accepted. After all, criminals are a statistically infinitesimal part of the population. But then again: so is the capitalist ruling class---and their rule, as they will tirelessly repeat, is in full accordance with 'human nature.'

What ultimately supports the hegemony of the claim to correctly interpret 'human nature'---as the final authority concerning all things human---is the material ABILITY to defend its interpretation. As offensive as it may sound, might ultimately DOES make right. NO monopoly on 'human nature,' not to mention its metaphysical twin 'morality' or its political twin 'freedom' is ever achieved without a monopoly on force.

Is THAT 'human nature'? No---I would say that that is a product of class conflict, a social custom. And customs, like societies, CAN be changed---indeed, as the forces of production evolve, societies MUST change; with these changes come fresh interpretations of 'human nature,' a 'human nature' that substantiates the new social relations.
[Edited by Chuck]



The issue of Soviet collapse has been dealt with and documented. Its been proven. You just don't want to believe it. Delusion once again.

Can I assume you would admit that capitalism works if the United Staes collapsed during a period of economic expansion? I suspect I can't.

Its not a retreat to say your economic theory was discredited because of tried and true principles of human behavior. Its an explanation. Its throwing dirt on the coffin. Thank you for quoting Greenspan. He's putting nails in your coffin.

Your economic theory was DOOMED from the start because it was impaled upon a set of false premises. I know you may think that everything comes down to silly marxist economics, but it doesn't. The fact that (assuming your figures are correct,which is a big assumption given your history of posting made up quotes) the Soviet Union collapsed when it was "growing" only PROVES how at odds it is with how humans really want to live. How unhappy even the leadership was with it. When it was "working" HAHA!

Chuck, I want you to buy Christopher Hitchens book "god is not great." In the book Hitchens describes his own religious marxism. He also recounts how he had to let go of it, because he saw, time and again, how it was based on false premises. This was painful for him, but once he let go of his delusions, a whole world opened up to him. He now sees things clearly. He thinks rationally. Now that may be asking too much for you Chuck, but maybe there is hope for you yet.
26th August 2007 02:21 PM
gimmekeef Fuck all this crap...lets rock n roll....
26th August 2007 02:44 PM
Bloozehound Didn't Cash own a beach front mansion in Jamaica
26th August 2007 02:55 PM
Chuck
quote:
the good wrote:


The issue of Soviet collapse has been dealt with and documented. Its been proven. You just don't want to believe it. Delusion once again.

Can I assume you would admit that capitalism works if the United Staes collapsed during a period of economic expansion? I suspect I can't.

Its not a retreat to say your economic theory was discredited because of tried and true principles of human behavior. Its an explanation. Its throwing dirt on the coffin. Thank you for quoting Greenspan. He's putting nails in your coffin.

Your economic theory was DOOMED from the start because it was impaled upon a set of false premises. I know you may think that everything comes down to silly marxist economics, but it doesn't. The fact that (assuming your figures are correct,which is a big assumption given your history of posting made up quotes) the Soviet Union collapsed when it was "growing" only PROVES how at odds it is with how humans really want to live. How unhappy even the leadership was with it. When it was "working" HAHA!

Chuck, I want you to buy Christopher Hitchens book "god is not great." In the book Hitchens describes his own religious marxism. He also recounts how he had to let go of it, because he saw, time and again, how it was based on false premises. This was painful for him, but once he let go of his delusions, a whole world opened up to him. He now sees things clearly. He thinks rationally. Now that may be asking too much for you Chuck, but maybe there is hope for you yet.



LOL---you aren't even honest enough to admit that both competition AND cooperation are components of human nature. Your strict adherence to the ideology of capitalism will not permit you.

You refuse to admit that the definition of human-nature is contingent upon historical, cultural, and class forces. It's a religion for you---fixed, static, absolute.

You say the alcoholic Hitchens thinks rationally because NOW he pledges allegiance to imperialism---i.e., because he has atoned for his past sins against the holy writ of capital.

Your (mis)characterization of anti-capitalist politics as irrational, delusional, etc. is as weak as it is transparent. What you're really saying is that if something goes against your way of thinking, (which just so happens to be the way the ruling capitalist class and it's labor aristocracy thinks) it HAS to be irrational.

It's plain as day---you are a religious devotee screaming HERESY; and now you are trying to hand me a bible.

Pathetic, really.




[Edited by Chuck]
[Edited by Chuck]
26th August 2007 02:58 PM
Chuck
quote:
Riffhard wrote:



I love Cash. That much is fairly obvious. He was a man who loved his country and understood it's importance, place, and value, in the world. He was also a very rich man, and a capitalist. [But], yeah I dig the tune. Why?



Riffy



Because it's garden variety, faggy liberalism.

Aren't you supposed to be a free-market tough guy? Or is that just a pose?
26th August 2007 05:16 PM
the good
quote:
Chuck wrote:


LOL---you aren't even honest enough to admit that both competition AND cooperation are components of human nature. Your strict adherence to the ideology of capitalism will not permit you.

You refuse to admit that the definition of human-nature is contingent upon historical, cultural, and class forces. It's a religion for you---fixed, static, absolute.

You say the alcoholic Hitchens thinks rationally because NOW he pledges allegiance to imperialism---i.e., because he has atoned for his past sins against the holy writ of capital.

Your (mis)characterization of anti-capitalist politics as irrational, delusional, etc. is as weak as it is transparent. What you're really saying is that if something goes against your way of thinking, (which just so happens to be the way the ruling capitalist class and it's labor aristocracy thinks) it HAS to be irrational.

It's plain as day---you are a religious devotee screaming HERESY; and now you are trying to hand me a bible.

Pathetic, really.

[Edited by Chuck]
[Edited by Chuck]



I didn't address the "points" you made about human nature because they were so banal. They were silly and relativistic so that they could be used to justify your failed ideology. The part about slavery was a laugh. Nobody wants to be a slave Chuck. Not the slaves. Not the owners. NOBODY. That's human nature. Doesn't change with the times, the culture, blah blah blah. But it was a requirement of the collapsed soviet system that everybody became a slave, so there could be "economic justice." Only it didn't work, did it? Because the politcal class became the, what is the word you are so fond of, BOURGEOIS? Now I'm, sure in your mind capitalism is slavery, but nobody will agree with that view. I can quit my job. I can't quit a slave master.

And what about the competition/cooperation nonsense? Did it ever occur to you that if there is competition WITHIN families (where we would expect the most cooperation because they are genetically related) that it may be hard to found an economic philosophy on the idea of from each according to his ability, to each accoding to his needs?

Its all over Chuck. But I'm not here to gloat. I'm here to help. I want you to get better. And I think you can. You just have to let go.


[Edited by the good]
26th August 2007 05:49 PM
glencar
quote:
Chuck wrote:


Ha ha---just the type of transparent response I expected from one of the nerdy, right-wing, fan-boys on this site.

See folks---if you don't like the same records, or shows, or (fill in the blank) you're an idiot according to this nasty little bourgeois baboon.

Of course, what he's really saying is that I'm guilty of HERESY. LOL.

No, I'm just saying yer a maroon!
26th August 2007 06:26 PM
MrPleasant
quote:
Bloozehound wrote:
Didn't Cash own a beach front mansion in Jamaica



Curiously, I was just thinking about going there, for vacations. Fuck Disneyland: they're a bunch of queers!
26th August 2007 06:27 PM
BONOISLOVE

I asked Eno to tipe Bourgeois ON THE NET, and this shit is what came up.
26th August 2007 06:28 PM
BONOISLOVE
quote:
MrPleasant wrote:
they're a bunch of queers!



WHERE???
26th August 2007 06:31 PM
glencar
quote:
BONOISLOVE wrote:


I asked Eno to tipe Bourgeois ON THE NET, and this shit is what came up.

I believe that guy is currently the head of the French Joint Chiefs of Staff!
26th August 2007 07:59 PM
Bloozehound
quote:
Chuck wrote:


Because it's garden variety, faggy liberalism.





Did you just try to right off JC as mere "garden variety faggy liberalism" ?


26th August 2007 09:21 PM
Ten Thousand Motels lib·er·al·ism /ˈlɪbərəˌlɪzəm, ˈlɪbrə-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lib-er-uh-liz-uhm, lib-ruh-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. the quality or state of being liberal, as in behavior or attitude.

2. a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.
26th August 2007 10:46 PM
Boss
quote:
Riffhard wrote:



I love Cash. That much is fairly obvious. He was a man who loved his country and understood it's importance, place, and value, in the world. He was also a very rich man, and a capitalist. [But], yeah I dig the tune. Why?



Riffy



Please support the fuckhead and the war you support so much. Enroll yourself amd you kids in the armed forces. The war does not sound so great now blow hard. Its is so funny how the media is called biased when it reports things that make you look stupid. The fuck you voted for fought this war to make a ton of cash for his croonies. You still cannot admit you are wrong.

Why way the name of the war changed from Operation Iraqi Liberation to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Because the acronym of the first says it all. How many citizens of Iraq were on the hijacked planes. How mamu citizens of Suadi Arabia were? Why did we not attack Suadi Arabia? Keep reading the American Spectator, keep listening to Rush Limbaugh, and keep watching Fox news. They all cater to the stupid with small peni.

Oh by the way, your taxes are going to go up. Please do not blame the Democrats for this.

I would advise getting your head out of your ass soon. Please you are the one who comes over here all the time looking for a fight. Grow up. Stop being a "sheeple". You are what Karl Rove wanted America to be.
27th August 2007 02:27 AM
MrPleasant Why is Bush still alive?, I wonder.

Because he's a jerk!!!

He sucks.

Worst human being ever. Masturbatation! ("That's the sort of horrible shit that I have to listen from college students that arrive to my place every now and then; and they're sort of nice, the chicks; but they seem to detest Bush. Is he really THAT DUMB?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
27th August 2007 02:33 AM
BONOISLOVE
quote:
Boss wrote:
You are what Karl Rove wanted America to be.



This makes me sort of sad.

Some people have the right to be what they are. Like George W. Bush. Isn't he, like, a symbol of """""hope"""""?

I know that he's a horrible asshole, but let's keep that in secret. Shall we?

27th August 2007 02:42 AM
BONOISLOVE
quote:
Boss wrote:


Please support the fuckhead




27th August 2007 02:45 AM
MrPleasant
quote:
BONOISLOVE wrote:








Are Lee Harvey Oswald and his twin brother alive, I guess?
27th August 2007 11:12 AM
Joey " Are Lee Harvey Oswald and his twin brother alive, I guess? "


30th August 2007 01:40 AM
Altamont Joey's hybrid?

30th August 2007 08:48 AM
glencar Well, here's an interesting lil story...

Norman Hsu is one of the leading political fund-raisers in the country this year. In fact, many fund-raisers say he is one of a small handful of people capable of raising more than $1 million -- a major feat considering the maximum donation allowed by an individual for 2008 races is $4,600 per candidate.


Norman Hsu, left, with Hillary Clinton at a fund-raiser for the senator in New York in 2005.
But longtime political donors are curious: "Who is Norman Hsu?" asks Robin Chandler Duke, a former ambassador and longtime supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Until three years ago, Mr. Hsu never made a campaign contribution to a presidential candidate, according to federal election records. Now, though, several people involved in raising money for White House candidates say Mr. Hsu is a major player.

Many "HillRaisers" -- people who rustle up at least $100,000 for Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign -- are dwarfed beside Mr. Hsu (pronounced "Shu"). Several people involved in Democratic presidential fund-raising say Mr. Hsu, an apparel executive, has raised well over $1 million for the New York senator's presidential campaign, making him one of the top 20 Democratic fund-raisers in the country. The Clinton campaign doesn't disclose such details and declined to comment for this story.

"Forget the politics -- Norman is widely regarded as decent, and enormously generous," says Orin Kramer, a hedge-fund manager who is a chief fund-raiser for Barack Obama, the Illinois senator who is Mrs. Clinton's strongest rival for the party's presidential nomination.

"I have been blessed by what this country has given me and have tried to give back in many ways," Mr. Hsu said in an email to a Wall Street Journal reporter earlier this week. "One way has been through political contributions to candidates and causes I believe in. I have never asked for anything in return. I've asked friends and colleagues of mine to give money out of their own pockets and sometimes they have agreed," he added.

People who have met him at events describe Mr. Hsu as warm, giving, charming and well-dressed. But unlike most big fund-raisers this cycle -- such as hedge-fund magnate Paul Tudor Jones for Mr. Obama and buyout pioneer Henry Kravis for Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain -- Mr. Hsu remains remarkably low-profile. Even some other Clinton fund-raisers say they don't know him at all and have been surprised to see him emerge as a top fund-raiser.

DONATION DATA


See details on political donations from the Paw family, Norman Hsu and a handful of Mr. Hsu's business associates in New YorkYesterday, The Wall Street Journal reported that a modest home in a middle-class San Francisco suburb, where the family of mail carrier William Paw resides, is listed as the address for many contributions to the Clinton campaign. Mr. Hsu once listed the home as his address, according to public records, and the Paws' donations closely tracked his.

Mr. Hsu's lawyer, Lawrence Barcella, took issue with a connection between his client and the Paws.

"Like every fund-raiser, he asks friends, colleagues and others to support the causes and candidates he supports. That is what every fund-raiser in America for any cause -- political or nonprofit -- does," Mr. Barcella said in a written statement. "And, in none of these instances, to address the WSJ innuendo, has Mr. Hsu reimbursed them for their contributions."

Campaign-finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission list Mr. Hsu as a consultant with a company called Components Ltd.; a director of another called Next Components; a designer for Because Men's Clothes; and an independent apparel consultant.

Mr. Hsu has been connected with the Paws for at least a decade, according to a person familiar with the matter. Mr. Hsu recently hired William Paw's 35-year-old son, Winkle Paw, to work for several of his New York apparel companies.

According to campaign-finance records, Mr. Hsu made his first campaign contribution, in the amount of $2,000, to the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry on July 21, 2004. Mr. Hsu has since donated $225,000 to Democratic candidates.

During that same time, Mr. Hsu has "bundled" contributions from other donors for candidates. It is legal for individuals to ask friends, colleagues and family members to make donations to political candidates, though not to reimburse people for such donations.

Most presidential candidates disclose the names of their bundlers, and a new law requires registered lobbyists to disclose how much money they raise for lawmakers beginning next year.

Mr. Hsu supports other Democrats besides Mrs. Clinton. On June 23, he helped throw a "6th Anniversary of his 60th Birthday fund-raiser" for California Rep. Mike Honda. A few days later, he joined Blackstone Group Chairman Stephen Schwarzman and lawyer David Boies to host a $1,000-a-plate 40th-birthday bash for Rep. Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island.

In the email to the Journal, Mr. Hsu listed several Democratic politicians to whom he has given money, and said he has never asked any for favors. They include Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell; New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine; Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy; California Sen. Dianne Feinstein; and Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown.

Representatives for each of the Democrats declined to comment for this story.
30th August 2007 10:37 AM
Ten Thousand Motels Rocker Ted Nugent on His Recent Obama, Hillary Rant
Thursday, August 30, 2007
FOX News - O'Reilly Transcript

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,295157,00.html

[Edited by Ten Thousand Motels]
30th August 2007 01:00 PM
Riffhard It is funny, ain't it Blue? That this story gets almost no coverage in the media's rabid attack mode style that they always seem to attach to Republican scandals.


Hell this Hsu guy has been bankrolling major Dem players for long time now! He is supposed to be in federal prison right now serving a three year grand theft sentence! Yet, there he is, still donating to Cankles Clinton, Edwards, Obama, and going to Dem fundraisers! Hell, this guy has major ties with every single one of them!!



I hope the Republicans have the sense to totally exploit this story for all it's worth. If they don't then they have no right to win in November. God knows that the Dems, and The Daily Kos, MoveOn.org, The Dem Underground, any Soros funded group, and like minded media(read-NYT,Washington Post,CBS,ABC,CNN,NBC,MSNBC,...) would be all over this like a rabid pit bull if the shoe were on the other foot.





Riffy
30th August 2007 01:03 PM
Saint Sway
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
God knows that the Dems, and The Daily Kos, MoveOn.org, The Dem Underground, any Soros funded group, and like minded media(read-NYT,Washington Post,CBS,ABC,CNN,NBC,MSNBC,...) would be all over this like a rabid pit bull if the shoe were on the other foot.




just keep your shoe in your own stall please
30th August 2007 01:06 PM
Riffhard
quote:
Saint Sway wrote:


just keep your shoe in your own stall please




LOL! I need not worry. I have a very narrow stance.



Riffy
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
The Rolling Stones World Tour 2005 Rolling Stones Bigger Bang Tour 2005 2006 Rolling Stones Forum - Rolling Stones Message Board - Mick Jagger - Keith Richards - Brian Jones - Charlie Watts - Ian Stewart - Stu - Bill Wyman - Mick Taylor - Ronnie Wood - Ron Wood - Rolling Stones 2005 Tour - Farewell Tour - Rolling Stones: Onstage World Tour A Bigger Bang US Tour

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED)