City of Berkeley, Calif., Votes to Boot Marines *updates*

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
What a mess. The city of Berkeley voted to tell the Marines to leave their Berkely recruiting station.

I agree with the congressman's move.

BTW you have to love the list of earmarks, just shows you how messed up the whole earmark thing has become. A million dollars for a center in honor of a local congressman, what the hell.

U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., says the City of Berkeley, Calif., no longer deserves federal money.

DeMint was angered after learning that the Berkeley City Council voted this week to tell the U.S. Marine Corps to remove its recruiting station from the city's downtown.

"This is a slap in the face to all brave service men and women and their families," DeMint said in a prepared statement. "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic, but from now on they should do it with their own money."

"If the city can?t show respect for the Marines that have fought, bled and died for their freedom, Berkeley should not be receiving special taxpayer-funded handouts," he added.

Sen. DeMint will appear Saturday on FOX News Channel ? on FOX Online With Jamie Colby ? between noon and 2 p.m. ET.

Click here to read Jamie Colby's blog, The Colby Files, and for more information about the show.

In the meantime, a senior Marine official tells FOX News that the Marine office in Berkeley isn't going anywhere.

"We understand things are different there, but some people just don't get it. This is a part of the military machine that gives them the right to do what they do, but what they are doing is extreme," the official said.

DeMint said he will draft legislation to rescind any earmarks dedicated for the City of Berkeley in the recently passed appropriations bill ? which his office tallied to value about $2.1 million. He said that any money taken back would be transferred to the Marines.

DeMint's office provided a preliminary list of items that would be subject to his proposal:

? $975,000 for the University of California at Berkeley, for the Matsui Center for Politics and Public Service, which may include establishing an endowment, and for cataloguing the papers of Congressman Robert Matsui.

? $750,000 for the Berkeley/Albana ferry service.

? $243,000 for the Chez Panisse Foundation, for a school lunch initiative to integrate lessons about wellness, sustainability and nutrition into the academic curriculum.

? $94,000 for a Berkeley public safety interoperability program.

? $87,000 for the Berkeley Unified School District, nutrition education program.

The Marine official, speaking with FOX News on Friday, said Marine Commandant Gen. James Conway scoffed at the news, but there are no plans for to protest the City Council's decisions. There are definitely no plans to move the recruiting station either.

"To actually put something into law that encourages the disruption of a federal office is ridiculous. They are not going to kick a federal office out of its rightful place there, and this is not going to discourage those young patriots who want to be Marines," the official said.

The Berkeley City Council this week voted to tell the Marines their downtown recruiting station is not welcome and "if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome guests," according to The Associated Press.

The council also voted to explore whether a city anti-discrimination law applies to the Marines, with a focus on the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents open homosexuality in the military.

The council also voted to give the antiwar group Code Pink a parking space in front of the recruiting office once a week for six months, as well as a protest permit.

The Marine recruiting office in Berkeley has been open for about one year, but has been the subject of recent protests by Code Pink members.

Where is the link to the article? Or is this one of those spin emails?


And, as has been pointed out the city did not ask the marines to leave. It was only a resolution disliking the recruiting office. They did NOT kick the marines out. The knee jerk reaction by the senator from SC is just a cheap publicity stunt.

If the city dislikes a certain kind of business within it's limits it should have the right to close it down (which Berkeley didn't). Why can't the marines keep their recruiting offices on their own premises?

 

[piasabird]

They had a little war in Utah over a similar action like this. It is called an insurrection when you go in open defiance against the Federal Government. As a state, if you go against Federal Law, then you should expect federal funds in part to be cut off. As an example to this look at the EPA laws and the Seat Belt Laws. There is precedent for this.

There is also the possibility that we could move lots of federal troops in and the federal government could declare martial law and appoint a new governor or mayor in Lieu of adherence to Federal Law. I say move the federal troops in and take over the city and see if they like a city full of MP's and armed military units.

 

[piasabird]

Maybe the Military needs to do anti terrorism maneuvers in Berkely 4 times a year to shake them up a bit.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but I repeat, shouldn't conservatives have to "fund their own shit" when they do something Democrats don't like? I mean, if we're going to act like high school kids, shouldn't we ALL be able to act like high school kids? :roll:

Seriously, you want to know why people on my side think people on your side are a bunch of fucking morons? It's nonsense like this.

I see your point, but I'm not sure it is a valid comparison. It seems to me that allowing the Armed Forces to recruit, for example, is a legitimate thing. It isn't like some seedy debate over intelligent design and some words in a textbook...or the latest doomsday prophecy from a global warming nut.

If allowing them to recruit is a legitimate position to have, then so is NOT allowing them to recruit.

The council and/or city .gov was elected to ensure that they would look after the inhabitants of their districts. If the constituents believe that not having their family members be tempted by false promises and/or bribery to enlist and put their lives on the line when the politicians that made that a real possibility shield their own family members from that possibility...they are doing exactly what they were elected to do.

Unlike the democrats at the national level, these politicians are doing something to actively end the war.....stopping the supply of bodies to it.

So your position is adults are not smart enough to make their own decisions in life, thus should have the .gov make the decisions for them?

So you position is that a decision made by adults is not a smart one thus requiring the .gov to "correct" their mistake by withholding funding until they come around and see the err of their ways?

My position is quite simple. If you give your mom the finger, expect the tit to be taken away.

It seems many cant comprehend that simple concept. You want someone elses money, you best play nice with them. Your not required to take their money however, so if you dont want the money dont play nice.

Personally, while I loath Berkeley, I dont care one way or another what they choose to do.
I DO care however when they want to forge their own road and expect the tax payers to pay for it.

But dont tell someone to fuck off then wait for your handouts.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: piasabird
They had a little war in Utah over a similar action like this. It is called an insurrection when you go in open defiance against the Federal Government. As a state, if you go against Federal Law, then you should expect federal funds in part to be cut off. As an example to this look at the EPA laws and the Seat Belt Laws. There is precedent for this.

There is also the possibility that we could move lots of federal troops in and the federal government could declare martial law and appoint a new governor or mayor in Lieu of adherence to Federal Law. I say move the federal troops in and take over the city and see if they like a city full of MP's and armed military units.

Yes, I think the military should occupy every town that passes a resolution saying they don't like it. This is a well thought out, non-crazy idea that deserves a serious response.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Come on. You know perfectly well the government allows millions of illegal workers in to the US to drive America's young folk into the military. The military sells itself as a means of personal advancement while closing all other avenues except for the elites, right?

That sounds like a bit of a stretch......

 

[OutHouse]

yip pull the funding.

now the city can pay for those programs by raising taxes. yippeeeee.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but I repeat, shouldn't conservatives have to "fund their own shit" when they do something Democrats don't like? I mean, if we're going to act like high school kids, shouldn't we ALL be able to act like high school kids? :roll:

Seriously, you want to know why people on my side think people on your side are a bunch of fucking morons? It's nonsense like this.

I see your point, but I'm not sure it is a valid comparison. It seems to me that allowing the Armed Forces to recruit, for example, is a legitimate thing. It isn't like some seedy debate over intelligent design and some words in a textbook...or the latest doomsday prophecy from a global warming nut.

If allowing them to recruit is a legitimate position to have, then so is NOT allowing them to recruit.

The council and/or city .gov was elected to ensure that they would look after the inhabitants of their districts. If the constituents believe that not having their family members be tempted by false promises and/or bribery to enlist and put their lives on the line when the politicians that made that a real possibility shield their own family members from that possibility...they are doing exactly what they were elected to do.

Unlike the democrats at the national level, these politicians are doing something to actively end the war.....stopping the supply of bodies to it.

wow, just wow. your post is so beyond retarded i cant even respond to it. i think you hit all the branches when you fell out of the stupid tree.

:roll:

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Fair enough, but I repeat, shouldn't conservatives have to "fund their own shit" when they do something Democrats don't like? I mean, if we're going to act like high school kids, shouldn't we ALL be able to act like high school kids? :roll:

Seriously, you want to know why people on my side think people on your side are a bunch of fucking morons? It's nonsense like this.

I see your point, but I'm not sure it is a valid comparison. It seems to me that allowing the Armed Forces to recruit, for example, is a legitimate thing. It isn't like some seedy debate over intelligent design and some words in a textbook...or the latest doomsday prophecy from a global warming nut.

If allowing them to recruit is a legitimate position to have, then so is NOT allowing them to recruit.

The council and/or city .gov was elected to ensure that they would look after the inhabitants of their districts. If the constituents believe that not having their family members be tempted by false promises and/or bribery to enlist and put their lives on the line when the politicians that made that a real possibility shield their own family members from that possibility...they are doing exactly what they were elected to do.

Unlike the democrats at the national level, these politicians are doing something to actively end the war.....stopping the supply of bodies to it.

So your position is adults are not smart enough to make their own decisions in life, thus should have the .gov make the decisions for them?

So you position is that a decision made by adults is not a smart one thus requiring the .gov to "correct" their mistake by withholding funding until they come around and see the err of their ways?

My position is quite simple. If you give your mom the finger, expect the tit to be taken away.

It seems many cant comprehend that simple concept. You want someone elses money, you best play nice with them. Your not required to take their money however, so if you dont want the money dont play nice.

Personally, while I loath Berkeley, I dont care one way or another what they choose to do.
I DO care however when they want to forge their own road and expect the tax payers to pay for it.

But dont tell someone to fuck off then wait for your handouts.

Your position is utterly ridiculous given your analogy.

What it doesn't take into account is that the funding that they are threatening to take away.....WAS GIVEN TO THEM BY BERKELEY/CALIFORNIA IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!

Let's give a more realistic example:

You are providing financial support for your mother who in turn buys things for you with said financial support. You give your mother the finger and she threatens to stop buying things for you.

Should you:

A. Accept her irrational threat as valid
B. Threaten her financial capabilities to buy you something by withdrawing the funds that she was using to attempt to blackmail you with

If this asshat truly attempts this and gets enough idiots in the GOP to back him....I would fully support Cali passing a referendum to secede from the union to watch his and every other backwood hick politician try to explain to their constituents that they no longer are getting the subsidies that they require to keep their state .govs working.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
^ I don't agree with giving the money to the DoD, but I agree with taking it from Berkeley.

The Berkeley City Council took a public stand that the Marine recruiting center "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

From what I could find about the story, the Marines have only been in Berkeley for a little more than a year, having moved from Alameda in December of 2006, and the City Coucil did NOT vote to rescind any existing permits or terminate any existing leases or other contractual commitments.

It's Berkely, Ca. What else would you expect from known liberal stronghold? Their stand wasn't illegal, nor did it advocate any illegal or violent acts. The Council's vote is nothing more than a public position statement. Even DeMint said, "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic..."

Yet, in your typically twisted, mindless, reason free world, you'd support DeMint's idea to bludgeon all of the citizens of Berkeley, most significantly, the poor, by cutting funding designated mostly for public services, including transportation, health and safety.

Brilliant! You'd probably support any and all Federal action that would use all available resources to trample the Constitutional rights of all American citizens to protest the illegal, lethal actions of their government, including murder, treason, torture and an illegal war of lies.

Oh wait... Your Traitor In Chief and his cabal of liars, murderers, torturers and traitors have already done that continuously for the last seven years, and brown nosed Bushwhacko sycophants like you have supported them all the way. :thumbsdown: :|

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
^ I don't agree with giving the money to the DoD, but I agree with taking it from Berkeley.

The Berkeley City Council took a public stand that the Marine recruiting center "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

From what I could find about the story, the Marines have only been in Berkeley for a little more than a year, having moved from Alameda in December of 2006, and the City Coucil did NOT vote to rescind any existing permits or terminate any existing leases or other contractual commitments.

It's Berkely, Ca. What else would you expect from known liberal stronghold? Their stand wasn't illegal, nor did it advocate any illegal or violent acts. The Council's vote is nothing more than a public position statement. Even DeMint said, "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic..."

Yet, in your typically twisted, mindless, reason free world, you'd support DeMint's idea to bludgeon all of the citizens of Berkeley, most significantly, the poor, by cutting funding designated mostly for public services, including transportation, health and safety.

Brilliant! You'd probably support any and all Federal action that would use all available resources to trample the Constitutional rights of all American citizens to protest the illegal, lethal actions of their government, including murder, treason, torture and an illegal war of lies.

Oh wait... Your Traitor In Chief and his cabal of liars, murderers, torturers and traitors have already done that continuously for the last seven years, and brown nosed Bushwhacko sycophants like you have supported them all the way. :thumbsdown: :|

The City Council also took a stand that the Marines are known for death, destruction, and maiming and they give America horrible karma. Suppose you agree with that, too?

See here:

Video of the council meeting

Senator DeMint isn't proposing stripping all federal funding from Berkley, just the two million in earmarks they received.

From his site:

That is why I will propose legislation rescinding Berkeley?s earmarks and transferring the funds to the Marine Corps.

Over $2 million was secretly tucked away for Berkeley earmarks in the 2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill. These were projects that were never even voted on or debated. Two of the earmarks provide gourmet school lunches in the Berkeley School District, while our hard working Marines eat basic MRE?s.

Let me be clear, my bill does not make the rescission of these earmarks contingent upon the Council changing its decision, or any future action. It does not cut off all Federal funds to the City of Berkeley.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: XMan

The City Council also took a stand that the Marines are known for death, destruction, and maiming and they give America horrible karma. Suppose you agree with that, too?

Actually, when and if they're involved in legitimate military actions, that's their job. When they're not, as in your Traitor In Chief's war of lies in Iraq, you bet they give America a bad name, or, if you're into more mystical designations, karma.

So what? They're exercising their Constitutionally protected right to free speech. Should we suppose you agree with the ass licking Bushwhacko sycophants that it's appropriate to use the Federal funding process as a bludgeon to shred that right and the rest of the Constitution, too? :roll:

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: XMan

The City Council also took a stand that the Marines are known for death, destruction, and maiming and they give America horrible karma. Suppose you agree with that, too?

Actually, when and if they're involved in legitimate military actions, that's their job. When they're not, as in your Traitor In Chief's war of lies in Iraq, you bet they give America a bad name, or, if you're into more mystical designations, karma.

So what? They're exercising their Constitutionally protected right to free speech. Should we suppose you agree with the ass licking Bushwhacko sycophants that it's appropriate to use the Federal funding process as a bludgeon to shred that right and the rest of the Constitution, too? :roll:

If it's war of lies, surely the legislative oversight of the Congress should be able to put a stop to it then, right? Maybe instead of getting PO'ed at Bush you should save some scorn for the likes of Pelosi who hasn't done jack to stop this supposedly illegal war. Last time I checked, your party ran both sides of the legislative branch, buckwheat, and they haven't done spit to stop it except whine about it. And golly gee, now that the war's basically won it's a non-issue, and the economy sucks! Oh, noes, it's the Great Depression all over again!

Harvey, they're not taking away all of Berkeley's federal funding. I'm sorry that you're so blinded by your rage that you can't see that simple fact, but it's just not the case. Two million bucks of BS earmarks. It's a drop in a flood compared to the money that the federal government collects in taxes, and a drop in the flood that they deign to send back to the people. And yeah, they're exercising their right to free speech. That doesn't mean they aren't immune to the consequences of that free speech.

Get a grip, man. I'm looking forward to the January 09 if only for the simple fact that maybe you and the rest of your fellow libs will notch down the nuthouse "Bush is the AntiChrist" crap and return to the normally scheduled "Republicans are trying to starve granny and the little children" garbage.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: XMan

If it's war of lies, surely the legislative oversight of the Congress should be able to put a stop to it then, right? Maybe instead of getting PO'ed at Bush you should save some scorn for the likes of Pelosi who hasn't done jack to stop this supposedly illegal war. Last time I checked, your party ran both sides of the legislative branch, buckwheat, and they haven't done spit to stop it except whine about it. And golly gee, now that the war's basically won it's a non-issue, and the economy sucks! Oh, noes, it's the Great Depression all over again!

Harvey, they're not taking away all of Berkeley's federal funding. I'm sorry that you're so blinded by your rage that you can't see that simple fact, but it's just not the case. Two million bucks of BS earmarks. It's a drop in a flood compared to the money that the federal government collects in taxes, and a drop in the flood that they deign to send back to the people. And yeah, they're exercising their right to free speech. That doesn't mean they aren't immune to the consequences of that free speech.

Get a grip, man. I'm looking forward to the January 09 if only for the simple fact that maybe you and the rest of your fellow libs will notch down the nuthouse "Bush is the AntiChrist" crap and return to the normally scheduled "Republicans are trying to starve granny and the little children" garbage.

Thank god the war's basically won. At my count this will be at least the third time the war has been pretty much won. We're lucky, most wars you only get to win once... this one it looks like we're going win at least half a dozen times!

On another note, Xman I would like to hear your responsible ideas for what the Democrats should do with a 1 vote majority in the Senate in order to stop the war. And no, refusing to ever pass another spending bill for the war is not a responsible idea.

 

[ProfJohn]

link
Video of Code Pink and others blocking access to the station why the cops do nothing. Really sad.

You know it is against the law to block access to an abortion clinic, but I guess blocking access to a military recruiting station is okay in the mind of libs.
Federal Access to Clinic Law

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: XMan

If it's war of lies...

You can stop right there. Including the word, IF in your opening phrase automatically discredits anything you have to say that follows. :thumbsdown:

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
link

You know it is against the law to block access to an abortion clinic, but I guess blocking access to a military recruiting station is okay in the mind of libs.
Federal Access to Clinic Law

So the best a loudmouthed ass sniffing Bushwhcacko sycophant like you can come up with as an appropriate response to displays by local civil activists, even to those participating in civil disobedience, is to bludgeon all of the citizens of Berkeley, most significantly, the poor, by cutting funding designated mostly for public services, including transportation, health and safety.

Did your brain transplant fail... again? :roll:

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
^ I don't agree with giving the money to the DoD, but I agree with taking it from Berkeley.

The Berkeley City Council took a public stand that the Marine recruiting center "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

From what I could find about the story, the Marines have only been in Berkeley for a little more than a year, having moved from Alameda in December of 2006, and the City Coucil did NOT vote to rescind any existing permits or terminate any existing leases or other contractual commitments.

It's Berkely, Ca. What else would you expect from known liberal stronghold? Their stand wasn't illegal, nor did it advocate any illegal or violent acts. The Council's vote is nothing more than a public position statement. Even DeMint said, "The First Amendment gives the City of Berkeley the right to be idiotic..."

Yet, in your typically twisted, mindless, reason free world, you'd support DeMint's idea to bludgeon all of the citizens of Berkeley, most significantly, the poor, by cutting funding designated mostly for public services, including transportation, health and safety.

Brilliant! You'd probably support any and all Federal action that would use all available resources to trample the Constitutional rights of all American citizens to protest the illegal, lethal actions of their government, including murder, treason, torture and an illegal war of lies.

Oh wait... Your Traitor In Chief and his cabal of liars, murderers, torturers and traitors have already done that continuously for the last seven years, and brown nosed Bushwhacko sycophants like you have supported them all the way. :thumbsdown: :|

no :thumbsup: maybe once the citizens of Berkeley feel the pinch of all that money gone will start electing reasonable people into office and not a bunch of ass clowns.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
video of code pink blocking the stations door.

:thumbsup:

POS recruiter needs to get a clue.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
link
Video of Code Pink and others blocking access to the station why the cops do nothing. Really sad.

You know it is against the law to block access to an abortion clinic, but I guess blocking access to a military recruiting station is okay in the mind of libs.
Federal Access to Clinic Law

Yes, I'm sure that's what all liberals think. If blocking the enterances to military recruiting offices became as large a problem as the crazies made it for abortion clinics then of course there would be a law passed to prohibit it.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Citrix

no :thumbsup: maybe once the citizens of Berkeley feel the pinch of all that money gone will start electing reasonable people into office and not a bunch of ass clowns.

No! If you think cutting Federal funding for basic necessary public services is an appropriate response to American citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free speech then, ass clown doesn't begin to describe you. Traitor would be a more accurate word. Facist and totalitarian also come to mind.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
link
Video of Code Pink and others blocking access to the station why the cops do nothing. Really sad.

You know it is against the law to block access to an abortion clinic, but I guess blocking access to a military recruiting station is okay in the mind of libs.
Federal Access to Clinic Law

Yes, I'm sure that's what all liberals think. If blocking the enterances to military recruiting offices became as large a problem as the crazies made it for abortion clinics then of course there would be a law passed to prohibit it.

Why is it ok to block access to a recruiting office, but against the law to block access to an abortion clinic?

Please answer that simple question.

And what is next? PETA doesn't like KFC; can they blockade a KFC in order to save chickens?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
link
Video of Code Pink and others blocking access to the station why the cops do nothing. Really sad.

You know it is against the law to block access to an abortion clinic, but I guess blocking access to a military recruiting station is okay in the mind of libs.
Federal Access to Clinic Law

Yes, I'm sure that's what all liberals think. If blocking the enterances to military recruiting offices became as large a problem as the crazies made it for abortion clinics then of course there would be a law passed to prohibit it.

Why is it ok to block access to a recruiting office, but against the law to block access to an abortion clinic?

Please answer that simple question.

And what is next? PETA doesn't like KFC; can they blockade a KFC in order to save chickens?

It's not okay? It just isn't against the law, hence why cops aren't doing anything. If such a problem were to be come chronic or widespread I'm sure it would become illegal very quickly.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Citrix

no :thumbsup: maybe once the citizens of Berkeley feel the pinch of all that money gone will start electing reasonable people into office and not a bunch of ass clowns.

No! If you think cutting Federal funding for basic necessary public services is an appropriate response to American citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free speech then, ass clown doesn't begin to describe you. Traitor would be a more accurate word.

Harvey try reading the whole thread before you go making false statements.

Which of these are basic necessary public services:
? $975,000 for the University of California at Berkeley, for the Matsui Center for Politics and Public Service, which may include establishing an endowment, and for cataloguing the papers of Congressman Robert Matsui.

? $750,000 for the Berkeley/Albana ferry service.

? $94,000 for a Berkeley public safety interoperability program.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Harvey try reading the whole thread before you go making false statements.

:lips: my (_!_)

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Citrix

no :thumbsup: maybe once the citizens of Berkeley feel the pinch of all that money gone will start electing reasonable people into office and not a bunch of ass clowns.

No! If you think cutting Federal funding for basic necessary public services is an appropriate response to American citizens exercising their Constitutional right to free speech then, ass clown doesn't begin to describe you. Traitor would be a more accurate word. Facist and totalitarian also come to mind.

list the basic NECESSARY public services that would get cut?

I watched the tape of the city council meeting, i must say you sound just like those hippie loons that got up and spoke at the podium. you don't even know what a traitor, fascist or totalitarian is do you? you just throw out those big words to try to impress but in reality all you are doing is showing your low IQ.