OT - Gas to hit 4.00
nick at leippe.com
Wed Jun 18 10:59:54 MDT 2008
On Friday 13 June 2008, Justin Findlay wrote:
> On AD 2008 June 13 Friday 10:22:58 AM -0600, Kyle Waters wrote:
> > If you look at the bottom graph and if you define conservative as the
> > upper right quadrant on that graph(which would be a neo-conservative)
> > Then Bush is the most extreme of any current leader. I consider both
> > parties neo-conservative. Nader is Liberal. The green party is Liberal.
> > The libertarian party and constitutional parties are libertarian(on a
> > federal level anyways). None of them are "moderate" but that's all
> > relative.
> If you think historically in addition to currently, where would Hitler
> or Stalin be? How far in would they scale the rest of the graph. Bush
> may be extreme, and has enacted an ignominious government, but he's not
> as bad as either of them. I'm no Bush patriot (do those sort of people
> even exist anymore?) but not only is it relative, it's also arbitrary.
I disagree. I think Bush and the whole Bohemian Grove lot are at least as bad
as Hitler and Stalin. There is very much more than meets the eye with these
people. NWO is not just theory, it's happening, and he's been a big part of
it. I highly recommend reading
"George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography"
by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin
which can be found freely online. While this details George Bush Sr., it
covers the history of their family and friends since before WWI. Very
If you really want to learn something interesting, google "bush eugenics".
Here's a great outline (hit #2 on that google search):
Read that, and you might revise your comparison of Bush vs Hitler...
More information about the PLUG