The Sixties Radical on The Real Democcrat Socialist Party Agenda

You just gotta love this Bullshit that is coming out of the White House and the Democrat Socialist Party.

Harry Reid, Man Child President, the evil Little Lord Fauntleroy Obama, and the state run media are throwing a hizzy fit over House Majority leader Eric Cantor who after years of taking the shit that these clowns have been dishing out finally said I have a enough of your crap and told them to go pound sand.

This is about time.

Somebody has to do it so why not Eric Cantor.

Harry Reid etal can do this to the Republicans but how dare someone dare turn the tables on us especially a Jew.

Obama is an anti-Semitic prick.

So are Harry Reid and the rest of them.

You fight fire with fire.

Let me quote a line from The Untouchables- they put one of yours in the hospital you send three of theirs to the morgue.

It comes down to this.

If Speaker of the House John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and Mitch McConnell cave our country is screwed.

Will now become a Marxists society.

The lies are coming out.

The evil one has destroyed the housing industry, the auto industry, the banking industry, and the food industry just to name a few.

We have to stop this evil dead in its tracks.

Lyndon Baines Johnson destroyed the black family in 1965 with the war on poverty.

American’s Christian and Jewish roots upon which this country was founded have been destroyed by the Left, the Democrat Socialist Party, the state run media, the elitist Republicans etal have forced this country to turn its back on the God of The Bible, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

When this happens all hell breaks loose in a society.

It all starts with abandoning of  God.

Then social institutions of the family, education, and  political stones upon which a society is built fall apart the society is doomed.

The last to go is the economic.

This is basic Sociology 101.

Here are some definitions 

A social institution is a complex, integrated set of social norms organized around the preservation of a basic societal value. Obviously, the sociologist does not define institutions in the same way as does the person on the street. Lay persons are likely to use the term “institution” very loosely, for churches, hospitals, jails, and many other things as institutions.

Sociologists often reserve the term “institution” to describe normative systems that operate in five basic areas of life, which may be designated as the primary institutions. (1) In determining Kinship; (2) in providing for the legitimate use of power; (3) in regulating the distribution of goods and services; (4) in transmitting knowledge from one generation to the next; and (5) in regulating our relation to the supernatural. In shorthand form, or as concepts, these five basic institutions are called the family, government, economy, education and religion.

The five primary institutions are found among all human groups. They are not always as highly elaborated or as distinct from one another as into the United States, but, in rudimentary form at last, they exist everywhere. Their universality indicates that they are deeply rooted in human nature and that they are essential in the development and maintenance of orders. Sociologists operating in terms of the functionalist model society have provided the clearest explanation of the functions served by social institutions. Apparently there are certain minimum tasks that must be performed in all human groups. Unless these tasks are performed adequately, the group will cease to exist. An analogy may help to make the point. We might hypothesize that cost accounting department is essential to the operation of a large corporation. A company might procure a superior product and distribute it then at the price which is assigned to it, the company will soon go out of business. Perhaps the only way to avoid this is to have a careful accounting of the cost of each step in the production and distribution process.

A social system basically consists of two or more individuals interacting directly or indirectly in a bounded situation. There may be physical or territorial boundaries, but the fundamental sociological point of reference is that the individuals are oriented, in a whole sense, to a common focus or inter-related foci. Thus it is appropriate to regard such diverse sets of relationships as small groups, political parties and whole societies as social systems. Social systems are open systems, exchanging information with, frequently acting with reference to other systems. Modern conceptions of the term can be traced to the leading social analysts of the nineteenth century, notably Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, Herbert Spencer and Emile Durkheim; each of whom elaborated in some form or other conceptions of the major units of social systems (mainly societies) and the relationships between such units- even though the expression social system was not a key one. Thus, in Marx’s theory, the major units or components of the capitalist societies with which he was principally concerned were socio-economic classes, and the major relationships between classes involved economic and political power.

The most influential conceptualization of the term has been that of Talcott Parsons. Parsons’ devotion to this issue has two main aspects. First, what is called the problem of social order; i.e. the nature of the forces giving rise to relatively stable forms of social interaction and organization, and promoting orderly change. Parsons took Thomas Hobbes Leviathan, 1651, as his point of departure in this part of his analysis. Hobbes had maintained that man’s fundamental motivation was the craving for power and that men were always basically in conflict with each other. Thus order could only exist in strong government. To counter this Parsons invoked the work of Max Weber and, in particular, Durkheim, who had placed considerable emphasis on the functions of normative, factors in social life, such as ideals and values. Factors of this kind came to constitute the mainspring in Parsons Delineation of a social system. Thus in his major theoretical work, The Social system, 1951, he defines a social system as consisting in a plurality of individual actors interacting with each other in a situation which has at least a physical or environmental aspect, actors, who are motivated in terms of a tendency to the optimization of gratification and whose relations to their situations, including each other, is defined and mediated in terms of a system of culturally structured and shared symbols.

The major units of a social system are said to be collectivities and roles (i.e. not individuals as such); and the major patterns or relationships linking these units are values (ends or broad guides to action) and norms (rules governing role performance in the context of system values). Parsons second major interest has been to make sociology more scientific and systematic, by developing abstract conceptions of the social system; one of this points being that even though Weber placed much emphasis upon normative factors as guiding action, there was in Weber’s sociology no elaboration of a theoretically integrated total system of action. Hence the attempt to combine in one framework both a conception of actors in social situations and an overall, highly abstract, outside view of the major factors involved in a social system as a going concern. Various points in Parsons’ formulation have been criticized. Notably, objections have been made to the emphasis upon normative regulation, and it has been alleged that Parsons neglected social conflict under the pressure of his systematic perspective; i.e. pre-occupation with system ness and analytical elegance which blinds the sociologist to disconsensus in real life and spurs him to stress integrative phenomena in his analyses. However, it is widely agreed that sociologists should operate with some clearly defined conception of what constitutes a social system. Thus, for many sociologists the term social system is not by any means restricted to those situations where there is binding normative regulation; but in order to qualify as social system it must involve a common focus, or set of foci, or orientations and a shared mode of communication among a majority of actors. Thus, on this basis there can be a system of conflict.

In the end we as a nation have moved away from the grace of God.

Our Founding fathers knew this.

A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.

Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779

A good government implies two things; first, fidelity to the objects of the government; secondly, a knowledge of the means, by which those objects can be best attained.

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833

All good men wish the entire abolition of slavery, as soon as it can take place with safety to the public, and for the lasting good of the present wretched race of slaves. The only possible step that could be taken towards it by the convention was to fix a period after which they should not be imported.

Oliver Ellsworth, The Landholder, December 10, 1787

Another not unimportant consideration is, that the powers of the general government will be, and indeed must be, principally employed upon external objects, such as war, peace, negotiations with foreign powers, and foreign commerce. In its internal operations it can touch but few objects, except to introduce regulations beneficial to the commerce, intercourse, and other relations, between the states, and to lay taxes for the common good. The powers of the states, on the other hand, extend to all objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, and liberties, and property of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state.

Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833

The truth is we are borrowing 42 cents out of every dollar. This can’t go on.

WE ARE BROKE.

Eric Cantor, John Boehner, and the rest of you Republicans hold firm. Do not take the deal. Push your budget through the House. Cut taxes and spending.

Do away with The EPA, The Department of Education, The Department of Energy, and all the other departments.

Stop the spending.

Just say no.

The lies are being exposed.

The truth shall set you free.

Here’s a nother diddy. The Democrat Socialist Party are pushing for more spending and if the Republicans want to stop government waste and fraud they must give into new taxes and spending.

Part two- The Democrat Socialist party plan B is Mitch McConnell idiotic plan.

Give me a break.

McConnell you are a joke.

How does one compromise with evil?

If good compromises with evil, evil wins.

Can you say Bye-bye USA.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s