I might be wrong but I think I remember Marx and Engels saying that if they were wrong and Socialism did not prevail then the human race would devolve into barbarism.

My question is are we already there?

Really, I supposed it does if you work for Goldman Sachs but as for the other 99% of the Worlds human population, entire animal population and mother earth herself not so much.

Remember boys and girls, the Internationale unites the human race!

Karl Marx is definitely back!

I am astonished by the ability of so many people to lie without shame. Of course they are lying principally to themselves. So we get people posting here about the savagery and violence of Islam. About how much superior we are. It takes my breath away because there is simply no comparison between and violence by Islamic fanatics and the violence by Western Imperialists. We win by a factor of thousands. But you see our violence is justified and theirs is not. Apparently it has to do with the number of people you kill. If you kill a dozen you are a terrorist. If you kill a million you get to retire to Texas. Jesus weeps.

I too have "a problem with illegals"

Let send them all back. Including the decendents of the "Without Papers" Italians and various other groups who never legally immigrated to the US. For that matter lets send back all the decendents of the Pilgrims as I don't believe their immigration was approved by the native Americans at the time. Gonna be a lot of people that will have to leave.

Its time to pull this insuferable ass aside and tell him - vote with us or we yank your chairmanship.

I have a little prediction. The same number of Red States will opt out of the public option as opted not to take the stimulus money. Yeah that’s right not a single frickin one.

Republicans fear the public option because they know it will be a huge success and widely popular just like Social Security and Medicare.

In fact I recently discussed this with an aide to a top Republican Congressman. He predicted that if the public option came into existance it would eventually replace private insurers because they could not offer the same levels of service or pricing. I thought that a good thing - he did not.

However I found it interesting that he conceded that the public option would be more efficient.

I can see all the Republican Governors lining up to take credit.

A while back I asked one of our Republican friends to provide one example where Congress had previously singled out an individual or organization (not convicted of a crime) to be specifically excluded from funding. The silence is deafening which I think resolves the debate.

If specifing a single entity in this way is not a bill of attainer can you please provide me with one instance in which Congress has cut of funding to a specific person or entity that had not been convicted of a crime. If you are right there must be hundreds so please provide one. If not please exit the discussion.

"Instead--one by one--they make their ill-informed "point," get smacked down and silently leave with their tale between their legs. Only to come back at a later date as though nothing ever happened"

Really when did that happen - it must have been in the alternate universe you live in.

Congress can cancel funding for a program or change the qualifications for funding under that program. But Congress can't say everybody can apply for funding if they qualify except for Xanthro. That would be a bill of attainer and is most certainly punishment. By the same yardstick specifically denying funding to Acorn is a bill of attainer. It seems pretty cut and dry to me why can't you grasp that.

I believe that almighty God sent Alan Grayson to inflict his rightous anger on the Republican Party.

I had a close friend who was a Conservative Catholic. He voted for Bush twice solely on the abortion issue. One night during a heating telephone conversation I pointed out to him that when Republicans controlled all four branches of government they did not act to outlaw abortion. Then he realized that Republicans don't care about the issue but just use it to get naive fundamentalist Christians to vote for them. He realized that they would never actually outlaw it because if they did people like him would have no further reason to vote Republican.

On that day he began to change. He still feels the same way about abortion but since he realizes neither party will outlaw it he is now free to push the other issues he cares deeply about. He is a strong advocate for single payer health care and immigrant rights. I don't think he is alone in his epiphany. Hence the strong welcome Obama got at Notre Dame.

Didn't he kick the money changers out of the temple and warn that a richman wouldn't have a snowballs change in hell of getting into heaven (I think the Aramaic version is a camel through the eye of a needle but you get my point)

Didn't he say the poor would inherit the earth?

But as hard as I try I can't find him condemning abortion or homosexuality. I guess Jesus wasn't a "practicing Catholic" either.

@Nathan Coker - why don't you just become a Southern Baptist. Then you can completely ignore the bible to suit your own prejudices.