Dear Mr. President,

As you know, we are currently giving Israel up to $500 per year for every man, woman and baby living in that country. Israel is using these funds to purchase high-tech military equipment and it is now using that equipment to mass-slaughter the good people of Lebanon. This is repugnant and unacceptable. We, as a country and as a nation should not be associated with this slaughter.

As we all know, the American-made weapons are given to Israel so that Israel can defend itself, not to blow up Red Cross ambulances, UN posts, high-rise apartment buildings, power plants and to indiscriminately massacre people. They can blame Hizballah for this until they get themselves blue in the face but the fact is that killing hundreds or thousands of people and destroying a country following an unfortunate border incident is a crime several orders of magnitude greater than what allegedly triggered this response. And, there is no way to establish that Israel’s version of events is the complete truth – let’s remember that Hitler too managed to organize an incident where Poland appeared to have attacked Germany, thus giving him a pretext to rape Poland.

Let's not support more murder and let us separate ourselves from this decades-old conflict. Rushing bombs to Israel and Band-Aids to Lebanon already lost us millions of friends in Lebanon and the rest of the world. Let's not lose more. We are the United States and we should advance our interests not Israel’s.

Please stop the aid to Israel today. And, think about it for a moment: there would not have been a 9/11, no Iraq invasion, no thousands of dead Americans in Iraq, no hundreds of billions wasted there if we were not involved in the Middle East on the side of one party.

Thank you for your attention and please continue to work for the people of this country, not for the dual-loyalty AIPAC. Israel is NOT a US state, nor is it our ally. Israel never fought with us and all Israel does is take our aid, occasionally sell our technologies to interested third parties and helping us make more enemies in the world.

Thank you for your attention.

With Blair puddling next to him, Bush predicts that 'we' will prevail because our ideology 'freedom' offers more hope than their ideology "hatred". [God help us]

Bush on Hizbullah: show me another country where a political party in government has an armed militia. Bush can't seem to remember his or his predecessor's own creations: Kosovo, Macedonia. And he forgot that, probably not long before he began 'working' to solve the most recent Lebanon crisis he wrote another check payable to the Somali 'warlords', hoping that their US-paid militias would overthrow the other side that Bush does not like. But... how about his dear baby - purple-stained IRAQ? We got the Kurds there, in the goverment, with their militia, we got the 'Shia', in the government with militiaS (Sadr, Badr and so on) and we got the Sunni militias, killing Americans by the thousands. But, I suppose, Bush doesn't sees these places as 'countries'. They are only his dear babies.

What does Bush's insanity have to do with the stated topic of this site? Clearly, the citizens of a party-free repulic would not trust their affairs to some incompetent, insane, moronic megalomaniac.

- Yo Olmert, good move man. Mmmmm, my big, your country not so big.
- Eeeeeeee eeeeee.
- couple strikes and POP goes Beirut
- eeeeee eeeeee tehrohr... eeeee TEHROHR!!!!
- how'd ya like Codi?
- eeeeeeeeeeeeee
- Blair's country not so big. They say it was bigger.
- TEHROHR!!!! eeeeeeeeeeeeee. $5 billion
- Laura is out to the damn man strip joint again. Can you do me a favor and blow the damn thing up with Laura inside it? i'll get ya plausible undeniability AND a couple billion or two
- eeeeeeee TEHHROHHR, HUZ BALLAAAH!!!, KATIUSHA, GGHAMAZZZ!!! TEHHHHROHHHHR!!!!
- yeah... heh, heh. BULL!!! duh dozers! Good move on the UN thingy. The French must be real pissed.
- EEEEEEE $5 billion? tehrohr! best ally!!!! tehrorhr!
- okee donkeee. big country the chinese huh? we let them steal our nukes, they sell us mango - yummy! i can roast pig all by myself
- eeeeeeeee the account number eeeeeee
- and go easy on the indians okay? french and candian okay. i love canadian bacon and laura loves kevin. yeah, i gotcha: TEHROHR!!! TEHRORHR!!!! cha-ching... heh heh heh
- eeeeeeeeee eeeee
- yo, little country but you fat and sweaty. me, biiiiiiig country, not so fat. eeeeeeeee

Both the Dems and the GOPs begin their freakish electoral campaign agitprops by enumerating whatever popular bad things happen to be in the news: foreclosures, homeless, crime, bad schools, unemployment, racism, anti-gayism... whatever.

Then, both shout that the solution to everything would be... a bigger, more powerful, more intrusive government. The Dems would propose to tax 'the rich' to pay for part of the growth while borrowing the rest while the GOPs would borrow a lot and, of course, tax mostly 'the rich'.

Both would be busy degrading and stealing whatever rights we may still have left, probably for our own safety. After all, if the terrorists are hating us for 'our freedoms', they would surely stop hating us and begin loving us as soon as our freedoms are taken away by the Hillary-W axis of evil statists.

We do have choices. Don't we?

Let’s talk about the various “antis”.

Is being “antiparty” also anti-Semitic? It could be. In fact, it COULD be a code word for anti-Semitism.

But let’s not digress. Those who opposed the communist Russian empire were known as anti-Soviets. Not anti-Russian or racist or neo-Nazis but anti-Soviets. While anti-Sovietism would send one to the GULAG if in Russia, the free-world’s anti-Soviets were quite free to state their opposition to the Soviet regime. Anti-Sovietism meant opposition to one totalitarian form of state and it had anti-statism and anti-totalitarianism aspects.

Then we have the anti-Americans. These are really anti-US individuals who oppose the United States for whatever reason. They are not, by default neo-Nazis, racists or ‘enablers of terror’. Many of today’s anti-Americans are probably dedicated anti-statists or libertarians and, of course, anti-imperialists, global-warmists, peaceniks and so on.

Somehow, though, those who oppose Israel, and the range of opposition could be anything from objecting to the current Israel government’s behavior to wishing that the state of Israel is eliminated MUST be anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, racists and, in most cases also anti-American but not necessarily anti-Soviets.

How could the opposing of a state or its policies become a racial issue? The most likely explanation is that the supporters of that state are mainly concerned with ‘race’ themselves – if we agree to call the Jewish ethnicity a ‘race’. They seem to support that state because they view the state as the well-armed instrument for advancing certain race-centric objectives. If that is true - and it probably is true, note that Israel is often affectionately called ‘the Jewish state’ (Germany is not called ‘the Aryan state’) - then it should be fair to view most supporters of the state of Israel as racists-Semitists, not worse but not better than any other variety of racist.

There’s plenty of anti-US, anti-Iran, anti-Iraq, anti-French, anti-Russian, anti-Yugoslavia, anti-Albanian, anti-Mexican (oh, strike that), anti-South African (strike that too), anti Zimbabwe and so on and almost none of the above stands is ever viewed as racist or neo-Nazi or anti-Semitic. The opposing of Israel is automatically labeled as ‘racist’ and anti-Semitic by the supporters of the State of Israel.

And, re-visiting the initial question: ‘is being Antiparty also anti-Semitic’? The answer is YES, if one of the parties the Antiparty person opposes is ‘a friend of Israel’. In the case of the United States, both ‘major’ or ‘mainstream’ parties are faithful (and somewhat fearful) friends of the state of Israel. Therefore, any American Antiparty person is by definition a racist, neo-Nazi anti-Semite.

2025 AD - Red, White and Blue Lipstick

Let’s say that the year is 2025 and the US was occupied by a Chinese-led coalition of the willing whose stated purpose was to free the US from banned chemical and bio weapons and to free the American people from Queen Hillary accepting a life-time presidency.

Would you support or oppose an insurgency fighting the occupiers.

Let's further clarify the situation on the ground. The coalition has encouraged the formation of race-based political parties. The last vote for a new constitution had voters identify themselves with red (American Indians and Latinos), white (Blacks and other ‘minorities’) and blue (Whites) lipstick on their… lips, of course. The red-white coalition now rules Washington and the Whites (the Blue party) are hunted down, tortured and murdered and White women are raped as a matter of principle. Web sites and the media all over the world and talking heads are pouring millions of articles and speeches showing factual evidence that Whites are obsessed with taking over and controlling the world and that they would happily kill all non-Whites if given the opportunity. Other articles and news pieces show coalition forces throwing cheap, corn-starch-sweetened and trans-fat-rich candies at American kids and fixing school roofs.

Would you support the anti-coalition insurgency?

So, one day, you witness a group of coalition soldiers entering your neighbor’s house by means of blowing up the front door. A few hours later they come out, big smiles on their faces and, as they leave, the house seems to catch fire. You enter the house to help put out the fire and you find everyone inside shot dead, some women and children partially burned, one teenage girl showing signs of being shot, burned and gang-raped. The next day, you read in the local paper that the evil White insurgency killed a bunch of civilians. No mater how loud your town mayor screams, there is no investigation from either the red-white government or from the coalition of the willing.

Would you lean toward taking revenge and pay back the coalition under the circumstances or would you agree to do nothing for the sake of Amerika's newly-found freedoms and work with the coalition?

A Dialogue With The Deaf?

A: What we need is a true one-party system so that our Leader doesn't waste vital energies on petty disputes and can focus entirely on serving the interests of Israel and the New Worldly Order.

B: Please tell me you are being sarcastic.

A: I believe that I am realistic, not sarcastic.

What I wrote was the best possible translation of what today's uninspired and false 'conservatives' are agitating for. The Goldberg boy has an interesting barf piece on the desired DemoGOP merger or libby- conservative union, I believe he calls it, at the Nat'l Review Online. He is basically doing the diary of a cheap scribe whore who keeps dreaming and hoping against all hope that she would be shown 'some' respect in the morning.

It's nothing new but it appears that the vermin are getting restless and emboldened and that they feel like it's time to tear off at least half of the mask.

B: I doubt the Republicans and Democrats will ever merge into one political party. You need to remember that the heads of the DNC are probably clinically insane and hate the RNC and Bush to the point that it is pathological hatred.

A: It is good for the DemoGOPs to stay separated because it perpetuates the illusion of 'choice' that the voters-consumers must be given so that they are properly controlled. However, the entire world is back in an advanced clinical phase right now so irrational events - such as an American one-party political system becomes not only possible but likely.

What do you think 'bi-partisanship' translates into? Hmmmm?

B: Oh there is not a choice, only the insane would vote for lunatics.

A: You mean, like the guy who had hundred-thousand people killed and trillion- dollars spent to satisfy his illusions of mushroom clouds, half a world away?

Let's face it. We're no longer in the dreamy age of Aquarius. This is the comeback of Mordor. A new king took charge and the king is mad.

B: Clinton would fit that description after he invaded Serbia and aiding the North Korea in building nukes?

A: There is an amazing continuity, regardless of who is in power. Bush picked up the baton from Clinton and Clinton may take over again in 2008. Regardless of what Bush may believe, he is not 'a leader'. He may call himself so for as long as he stays on the path to deeper madness but, God forbid he would ever try to do something that's unapproved.

What's great about America?

The US used to have a great comparative advantage in areas such as the overall standard of living, the size of government, political freedom and individual rights.

We are no longer the wealthiest people. Governments at every level, from federal to village are increasingly imposing and enforcing their power on individuals. Our political system is more and more corrupt as the '2-party system' offers zero-choice on most issues that count. We still have some advantage in some individual rights area such as the ability to bear very small arms (body armor is expressly verboten) and the ability to speak on more issues than most people in the rest of the world can.

So... what's still great about America? Very little at this time.