Free Market Capitalism Replaced By??????

[Photoguy]

No matter if your a Liberal or a Conservative a fully socialized economy is whats coming. When the unemployment figures get high enough everything else will collapse. Social medicine and state controlled industries or complete anarchy and fall, those are really the only choice left now. Not everyone has quite realized it yet though.

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td valign="top">US Jobs Data Shifts Blogs' Focus To Depression From Recession

</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="5">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="TexteGrisGras">Friday December 5th, 2008 / 21h26</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td height="10">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td background="../../Images/imagesSite/Separateur_PointilleGrisH.gif" height="1">https://www.easybourse.com/Images/imagesSite/espaceur.gif</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="15">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td colspan="2" class="TexteGris" valign="top"> By Steven Russolillo Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Bloggers labeled this economic slowdown a recession months ago. Now some have shifted their sights to the dreaded "D" word.
November's U.S. employment data have prompted many strategists and market observers in the blogosphere to wonder whether this recession will ultimately turn into a depression. Even though the recession is officially a year old, more than half a million jobs lost in November signals the downturn may get worse before it gets better as the labor market faces headwinds from virtually every sector of the U.S. economy.
"Today's employment report begs the question of whether the meltdown we're experiencing should be called a Depression," Robert Reich, former secretary of labor and professor at the University of California at Berkeley, wrote on his blog Friday. "When FDR took office in 1933, one out of four American workers was jobless. We're not there yet, but we're trending in that direction."
The Bureau of Labor Statistics said U.S. nonfarm payrolls fell 533,000 in November, the largest decline since December 1974 and the 11th-consecutive monthly decline. The unemployment rate rose to 6.7%, the highest since October 1993. Economists were expecting the report to show a decline of 350,000 jobs with an unemployment rate of 6.8%.
The average workweek dropped to 33.5 hours, which Reich noted is the shortest number of hours since the Labor Department began keeping records on hours worked in 1964.
"A significant number of people are working part-time who'd rather be working full time," Reich said. "Coupled with those who are too discouraged even to look for work, I'd estimate that the percentage of Americans who need work right now is approaching 11% of the workforce."
The jobs data also prompted University of Maryland professor Peter Morici to wonder whether the U.S is headed for a depression.
"The threat of a widespread depression is now real and present," Morici said, according to The Wall Street Journal's Real Time Economics blog.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell as much as 257 points earlier in Friday's trading session, but the index recovered and was recently up 150 points as investors believe a bad jobs report may have already been priced into the market.
Portfolio.com's Felix Salmon labeled the current downturn as "a fully-fledged Great Recession," and said it is fairly obvious that the economy will continue to get worse before it gets better. The 533,000 job losses last month doesn't even include the millions of job cuts General Motors Corp. (GM) is warning about should it be forced into Chapter 7 liquidation, Salmon said.
"The employment bloodbath is only beginning," Salmon wrote on his Market Movers blog. "Anybody still hoping for a swift bounce back is looking increasingly delusional. As we saw this morning, the probability of downside surprises is much greater than the chance that we'll get any good news any time soon."
More than 1.2 million jobs have been lost in the last three months alone. The speed at which the labor market is contracting should certainly raise a red flag, according to Paul Kedrosky, a strategist with Ten Asset Management.
"There is no question this unwinding is happening faster and more savagely than any in memory," Kedrosky wrote Friday on his Infectious Greed blog. "The speed with which carnage slices through this tightly-linked economic system of ours, both globally and locally, is remarkable and unprecedented."
-By Steven Russolillo, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-2205; [email protected]
Click here to go to Dow Jones NewsPlus, a web front page of today's most important business and market news, analysis and commentary: https://www.djnewsplus.com/al?rnd=B8Ivi3kcr48MG8t2c5SWHw%3D%3D. You can use this link on the day this article is published and the following day.
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="10">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="TexteGrisPetit">Friday December 5th, 2008 / 21h26</td> <td class="TexteGrisPetit" align="right">Source : Dowjones Business News</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" height="5">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td height="10">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td background="../../Images/imagesSite/Separateur_PointilleGrisH.gif" height="1">https://www.easybourse.com/Images/imagesSite/espaceur.gif</td> </tr> <tr> <td height="15">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> https://www.easybourse.com/Images/imagesSite/espaceur.gif

[Speak2Truth]

This is the inevitable result of electing folks who put the Che Guevara banner on the campaign office wall. Let's not forget that Cuba's Socialists swept into power on the premise that the USA is the enemy that must be destroyed. It seems about half the folks who voted last election forgot that critical point.

Karl Marx spelled out the agenda - wreck the Capitalist economy, establish a Dictatorship of the Proletariat (in which various extreme measures can be made acceptable in the 'crisis' by inflaming public anger against various targets), then establish true Socialism in which Government dictates terms to private entities (such as GM, AIG, etc.), then finally establish Communism in which there is no more protection of private property against Government.

This particular crisis was developed over time in a calculated manner. It's the crisis the Socialist/Democrat Party will not let 'go to waste' - since they created it. They followed a standard Progressive Socialist procedure: create a crisis, blame someone else, insist on taking extraordinary powers and measures to solve the crisis they created in the first place.

Here's a little bedtime reading to help understand the history of what just happened.

American Thinker: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis
Cloward-Piven Strategy
American Thinker: Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis (https://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html)

"Affirmative Action" forced on the home lenders by Clinton Administration, leading to eventual disaster
Video of Clinton's HUD Secretary boasting of victory in forcing lenders to comply
YouTube - EVIDENCE FOUND!!! Clinton administration's "BANK AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" They forced banks to make BAD LOANS and ACORN and Obama's tie to all of it!!! (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivmL-lXNy64)

New York Times: Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending
Under pressure from Clinton Administration
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html?sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1)

How banks were bullied into making bad loans
'Community activists' used pressure tactics to secure high-risk mortgages
How banks were bullied into making bad loans (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94031)

Shocking Video Unearthed: Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
YouTube - Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

Snopes: New York Times reported in 1999 that Fannie Mae was 'broken' and would lead to disaster in economic downturn
Bush tried to fix it with oversight committee, Democrats thwarted effort
snopes.com: Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending (https://www.snopes.com/politics/business/easescredit.asp)

Snopes: Bush Admin tried to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congressional Democrats, with Barney Frank as spokesman, thwarted the effort.
snopes.com: Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending (https://www.snopes.com/politics/business/easescredit.asp)

Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers
Barak Obama and John Kerry are number two and three
OpenSecrets | Update: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Lawmakers - Capital Eye (https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.html)

Barack Obama Taps Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson to Help Choose Running Mate
Barack Obama Taps Former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson to Help Choose Running Mate - Associated Content (https://www.associatedcontent.com/article/781141/barack_obama_taps_former_fannie_mae.html)

Enjoy the links. I hope this raises consciousness to free us from the crooks who now take whatever liberties they like with our nation.

[theindependenteye]

Thanks for the links. I'll follow them up, seriously. But am I understanding you to say that the current economic crisis isn't real? Or that it's real but it's been created by Socialists? Is it your thesis, then, that the Bush Administration and the Gingrich Congress that preceded it were closet Socialists, or that in fact they didn't hold the reins of power, or that the Obama Administration was so incredibly astute that in three months they brought this all about? Please clarify.

Cheers--
Conrad

[ICPP]

What free market capitalism?

ALL our industries have been massively subsidized and 'protected' by our tax dollars for decades.

For instance, one third of American farmland lies fallow because we pay corporations like Monsanto billions NOT to farm in order to keep food prices artificially inflated.

What we have is socialism for US corporations, it's comical to see RWers now frothing at the mouth about socialism, terrified we might care for our elderly and sick.

[Esra]

The current economic crisis is in fact very real. It is a manufacture crisis, though. All safeguards and regulations have been removed or ignored many years ago and the system is collapsing because of it.

Have you ever heard the 1960's university protester mantra, "Bring it all down, man!"? Well, what do you think they were talking about. They were talking about bringing it all down, man! Those communist student protesters empowered by their communist professors are now powerful leaders in govt. They have turned the US into a Socialist nation which will eventually turn into a pure Communist nation.

Bush, Gingrich, Rumsfeld, Hillary, Obama, Bill, Kerry, they all are One World Govt. clogs. Surprise! It's a One World economic system based on Marxism, not free (or fair) market capitolism.

We are entering the global prison of globalization. Dems and Repubs are both serving the same master but it's not us.

The only solution is to return to Constiutional obedience. Our founding fathers were the wisest men. They set up the safe guards outlined in the US Constitution for this very scenario. But as Al Gore boasted in 2000, there is no more controlling authority to remain Constitutionally obedient.

Make no doubt about it, this economic collapse is a joint effort by the Clinton/Bush/Obama team. Bush isn't a failure at all. He performed for his masters brilliantly and has passed the ball to his teammate, Obama to run the ball into the goal line of world wide fascism and global imprisonment.

Thanks Bush, thanks Obama! Your names are on it. You names will live in infamy as destroyers of our America.




Thanks for the links. I'll follow them up, seriously. But am I understanding you to say that the current economic crisis isn't real? Or that it's real but it's been created by Socialists? Is it your thesis, then, that the Bush Administration and the Gingrich Congress that preceded it were closet Socialists, or that in fact they didn't hold the reins of power, or that the Obama Administration was so incredibly astute that in three months they brought this all about? Please clarify.

Cheers--
Conrad

[theindependenteye]

I ploughed my way through all the links offered by Speak2Truth because I'm truly interested in how people think who don't think as I do. My overall impression is that the conspiracy theories of the Far Right are as bizarre as those of the Far Left. That campaigns against bank redlining -- which I've seen and suffered from firsthand -- are responsible for forcing the banks to make bad loans?-- No, I'm not convinced. That Saul Alinsky influenced Obama?-- Well, I should hope so: he was a brilliant community organizer and made good things happen in Chicago in a horrifically corrupt climate.

But that's my personal take. All that's debatable, and I think if went at each other for hours we wouldn't be any closer to agreement -- though I agree that well-meaning laws can have bad consequences -- starting with the 3/5ths clause in the Constitution. And certainly there was never a more destructive "activist" Supreme Court than the one that gave corporations the same rights as individuals. But here's what I'm really interested in:

I get the impression from this (as well as from Far Left believers in vast Matrix-like theories) that it's pretty much hopeless. That elections are meaningless. That all sides of the political spectrum are on part of the conspiracy, and that would presumably include the major corporations that help fund them and control the mass media. If Rupert Murdoch is a closet Marxist, what's to be done? Esra wrote:

>>The only solution is to return to Constiutional obedience.

But what would be the mechanism for that? Violent revolution? As I said, I don't see eye to eye with your worldview, but I truly am interested in its implications and hope you'll take this as an honest question. What would you want to see happen, and how do you think it would ever happen?

Sincerely--
Conrad

[Dynamique]

This "socialist shock doctrine" scheisse was discussed briefly on HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, episode 152 (released 14 May 09) during the "Overtime" segment. It's available on iTunes.


This is the inevitable result of electing folks who put the Che Guevara banner on the campaign office wall. Let's not forget that Cuba's Socialists swept into power on the premise that the USA is the enemy that must be destroyed. It seems about half the folks who voted last election forgot that critical point.

[MsTerry]

This is great news!
Thanks for uncovering that the Bush/Cheney Regime is a de facto communist cover-up!


This particular crisis was developed over time in a calculated manner. It's the crisis the Socialist/Democrat Party will not let 'go to waste' - since they created it. They followed a standard Progressive Socialist procedure: create a crisis, blame someone else, insist on taking extraordinary powers and measures to solve the crisis they created in the first place.

[phooph]

Anyone who attempts to place the blame for the current financial chaos on one party or another is a sucker for Hegelian manipulation. Both parties colluded to bring about this mess. The Democrats were in charge of expanding the pool of borrowers and the Republicans were in charge of removing oversight and regulation. Between the two they brewed up the perfect financial storm. Some people got very very rich and have put their ill gotten gains in safe places.

We operate on a debt backed currency for which the interest is never issued into circulation. That requires borrowing to constantly expand to keep currency issuance ahead of the demands of interest. That requires an ever expanding pool of borrowers which eventually requires a loosening of lending rules to include less credit-worthy people when the credit-worthy ones are tapped out. It is, in essence, a ponzie scheme and eventually such programs reach the limits of borrowing.

Neither party will support ending this scam because the bankers who profit by it have been running the government since the passage of the Federal Reserve Act which created the the system in 1913 (and the 16th Amendment to pay for it). To do so would mean the loss of the support of the deep pockets of Wall Street, a major source of campaign contributions. We have no hope of escaping the clutches of this mob without public financing of campaigns, and Wall Street would oppose that vigorously.

[Esra]

That Saul Alinsky influenced Obama?-- Well, I should hope so: he was a brilliant community organizer and made good things happen in Chicago in a horrifically corrupt climate.Alinsky was a Marxist if I'm correct. He built his legacy on Gramskys idea of infiltrating and controlling the civil institutions of any society and letting govt. simple fall into their hands. In the Left's case, that means Marxism. Alinsky's social justice model was simply a vehicle to establish credibility. Much like Hama does by offering social services or Hitler did by offering Socialism. Alinsky was brilliant alright. But is America served well if Alinskys work ultimately lead us to totalitarianism?


If Rupert Murdoch is a closet Marxist, what's to be done? Well, Murdoch has made his start in Australia as a socialist media mogul. When you get that rich and powerful socialism/capitalism doesn't mean what it means to us common folk. With either system, he's assured his control and his continued fortune.


Esra wrote:

>>The only solution is to return to Constiutional obedience.

But what would be the mechanism for that? Violent revolution? As I said, I don't see eye to eye with your worldview, but I truly am interested in its implications and hope you'll take this as an honest question. What would you want to see happen, and how do you think it would ever happen?

Sincerely--
Conrad I hope it would never come to violence in American politics again.

Right now I see America is in an engineered economic collapse generated by crypomarxists on both the left and the right. They plan on swooping in and remaking America into Marx' totalitarian dream. Mathmatically speaking it's impossible to stop the collapse. Those who are best organized and fight the dirtiest will be the architecs of the post-collapse America. This brief moment in the near future, when the collapse is complete, is our only chance to foil their plot. It's a long shot because the Left, by nature, are the organized ones. However, never discount the devoted patriatism of the far Right, I suspect they will put up a mighty fight so they have a very good chance, too.

I'm in these forums to try to develop the mechanism for returning to Constitutional obedience and you can help me pound out a solution. I've been in the far Right forums listening to their political needs and now I'm in the Progressive forums listening to their needs.

Here is one idea I'll bounce your way:

All politics are local. Start with local citizens who fund their own local campaign. Politicians are owned by whoever funds their campain. A self funded official eliminates payback and the official can make decisions based on public needs not contributors demands. Support the gal who finances her own campain, whether she's on the left or right, that doesn't matter in local politics. She's probably a smart and succesful business woman who's earned a modest fortune. What matters is the official has a servants heart and will favor positions that improve the community over individuals with moneyed interests.

What would impel you to vote for a local politician running for, say......S.R. city council? This is an open question for everyone.

["Mad" Miles]

Alinsky was a Marxist if I'm correct.

Esra,

You are incorrect.

In fact, one of Alinsky's "innovations" was to ban all discussion of philosophy, politics, history, ideology and any other such questions from the community organizing process. This was designed to exclude Marxists, or any other ideologues from participating (at that time).

The goal was to avoid being red-baited by those on the right. It was the McArthy era, black lists, Commie bashing, etc. Any link to any of that was a political and social death sentence at that time. Redbaiting is a practice which has unfortunately, not died off.

He was an inspiration to many: Cesar Chavez, Tom Hayden and many others.

I personally am not a fan. For the reason I just stated as well as the way his method is top-down and manipulative. The organizers set the agenda. Meetings are just recruiting sessions to get volunteer labor from members of the community. Any semblance of democracy is just that, a show, a fiction, a false front. And his methods have been used by organizers from all across the political spectrum. Not just on the Left.

From your comments about Marxism and Socialism here, it is clear to me that you have no idea as to the history or nature of Marxism and Socialism.

But that is par for the course when conservative/libertarian/naively populist ranters hold forth on such matters. It is more common than the exception, when people rale against the Left and actually know something about what they're criticizing.

I suggest you go to the Library, check out, and read some books. You might even be surprised by what you learn.

Don't just read the critics of Marx. Read him and those who sympathetically comment on his work. He was a brilliant man who, while not a very good soothsayer, and someone who unfortunately influenced some of his famous followers (Lenin, Mao, Castro, Guevarra) to oversimplify and misread his work, came up with truly unique (one might say revolutionary) ways to think about and understand the workings of modern Capitalism.

Concepts which are useful even today. I am referring to the Labor Theory of Value, Commodity Fetishism, The relationship between our economic system and the ways ideology is used to justify and mystify that very same system, The Alienation of Labor from both the Means and Relations of Production, etc..

It's not easy stuff, it takes time, effort and concentration to begin to understand what he was getting at and how aspects still apply to this day. Yes, he was wrong about the inevitable drive of the working class to recognize its (our) exploited status and turn the tables to create a more just and egalitarian society (at least he has been wrong so far).

Yet when it comes to thinking about the intersection of culture, ideology, psychology, economics, group dynamics and other things having to do with political and social metatheory, he was a pioneer and innovator. And his influence in the fields of Sociology, Philosophy, History, Cultural Studies, Anthropology, Art History and Fiction (to name just a few) has been deep and profound.

Along with Hegel, Weber, Nietzsche, Freud, Heidegger. To name some more of the true heavies at the tip of the, "Understanding How Human Society Works, Or At Least Asking Interesting Questions In An Attempt To Think And Speak In An Informed Manner About Such Highly Controversial And Complex Topics", iceberg.

If you think everything is simple, maybe it is, or maybe you haven't been paying enough attention. And before I turn you or anyone else off to these thinkers, this stuff is actually quite fun once you get into it and begin to understand what they're really getting at!

I have read Marx, some of those who influenced him, many of those he influenced, some of his contemporaries, their critics and commentary from and about all that from variants on the Left, Right, Center and Fringes both Left and Right.

I'm also at least broadly familiar with the history of the times in which they were operating. That helps to understand their motivations, and the limits of perceptual possibility under which they operated.

It's a complicated world full of wonders, too bad uninformed ranters can't do it justice.


Before you accuse me of being a Marxist, I'm not. A past student of him, and many others too numerous to list, yes. Someone who has benefited from learning a few things from him and many others too numerous to list, yes.

But as the man said himself, "I am not a Marxist." Never was, never will be. I learned the perils of being a follower when I was a Jesus Freak in High School. Having cured myself of that, I was pretty well innoculated against any and all forms of "True Believer"ship.

I have been meaning to read more Hobbes, Burke and Strauss. Just haven't gotten around to it. And there are many others on my reading list, from all aspects of the political spectrum.

I quit reading Social and Political Philosophy/Theory back around 1987, when, things got repetitive after seventeen years of fairly regular study, and, I realized that I didn't have it in me to sit for six to eight hours a day reading, discussing and writing (what it takes to become a successful academic) so it wasn't going to be my profession.

And unless I was going to get paid for it, I needed to find something else I was able and willing to do for money. After many years struggling with that question, I now teach. Basic Adult Life Skills in prison.

I'm credentialed to teach English and Social Science/History in Secondary School. But after a couple of years slogging in those trenches a new public school job didn't pan out. The SQSP gig did and now I make more than I ever could in public school.

Unless I get laid off in the next round of state budget cuts, yet that could easily have happened if I still worked for a local school district.

(By the by, I taught off and on since the mid-eighties up until my preliminary credential in the Spring of '04. ESL, long term subbing in History/Social Science, Adult Literacy, across the board substituting. I was a 9th and 10th grades History/Social Science teacher at the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools in Hyde Park in the fall of 1986 for five weeks as a long term substitute. That's the Obama girl's school until recently. Founded by John Dewey. I thought I was replaced because I didn't have a credential. But the following summer I found out from one of my ex-student's father that I'd been replaced for political reasons. It's an interesting story...)

Adults, even convicted criminals, are an easier crowd than five classes of twenty to forty adolescents every day, five days a week.

Not all adolescents, just those few who are convinced they rule the world and everyone else should acknowledge that fact. And of course a few of their parents who agree with them.

I hardly ever get a chance to refer to Marx, Alinsky, or any other Political Philosophers or Theorists. Funny that. But I do get to talk about what it takes to try and understand and engage with the real world in an effective and interesting manner.

If you're going to talk out of your posterior orifice, you should check out the good shit.

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:


P.S. Sonoma Mark, if you've read the above, I know you have previously expressed deep-seated mistrust, even hatred, for Philosophy and Philosophers. Obviously I don't agree with you about that. But before you come at me for my past studies, I just want you to know, that's your problem, not mine!

[Esra]

That Saul Alinsky influenced Obama?-- Well, I should hope so: he was a brilliant community organizer and made good things happen in Chicago in a horrifically corrupt climate.

I'm unaware of any good things Alinsky made happen in Chicago. What do you know about the man?

["Mad" Miles]

Awwww Jeeez...!

(Archie Bunker to his wife Edith, and in response to just about anybody or anything else that chapped his grits.)

You can google can't you?

If you can't, what the hell are you doing on the internets? (Sic.)

It's easy, ya just type google.com in that little box up at the top of the screen and hit enter. Then you type in whatever you're looking for in the little box in the middle of the screen and hit enter again.

Watch the magic happen!

Here, I did this one for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Alinsky)


Saul Alinsky wasn't a Marxist, he was a Satanist!!!!

Just read far enough along for the proof.

"Mad" Miles


:burngrnbounce:

[Esra]

Esra,

You are incorrect.
In fact, one of Alinsky's "innovations" was to ban all discussion of philosophy, politics, history, ideology and any other such questions from the community organizing process. This was designed to exclude Marxists, or any other ideologues from participating (at that time).The goal was to avoid being red-baited by those on the right. It was the McArthy era, black lists, Commie bashing, etc. Any link to any of that was a political and social death sentence at that time. Redbaiting is a practice which has unfortunately, not died off.
He was an inspiration to many: Cesar Chavez, Tom Hayden and many others. I personally am not a fan. For the reason I just stated as well as the way his method is top-down and manipulative. The organizers set the agenda. Meetings are just recruiting sessions to get volunteer labor from members of the community. Any semblance of democracy is just that, a show, a fiction, a false front. And his methods have been used by organizers from all across the political spectrum. Not just on the Left.Thanks for you time. You are correct that being redbated was a political and social death sentence. Alinsky had to keep his marxist ideology on the down low only to stay viable. The ACLU, which was founded, funded and operated soley by openly self- identified communists also had to make a public rebuke of communism just to survive.





From your comments about Marxism and Socialism here, it is clear to me that you have no idea as to the history or nature of Marxism and Socialism. But that is par for the course when conservative/libertarian/naively populist ranters hold forth on such matters.

Don't you really mean people who aren't as learned as you?

I've made one post here in this forum so nothing is as clear as you think. I'll ignore your negativity and hope you appreciate what I bring to the table.






It is more common than the exception, when people rale against the Left and actually know something about what they're criticizing. I suggest you go to the Library, check out, and read some books. You might even be surprised by what you learn. Don't just read the critics of Marx. How often are you told you are condescending? Do you understand that when you come off like this most people respond by listing off their scholastic pedigree but in reality they open themselves up to be judged worthy by you and the debate is reduced to qualifying personal value instead of........discussing the actual subject? In this case its, Free Market Capitalism Replaced By?????? Keep it up, you are making the new guy look good!

I'd prefer we meet as anonymic equals on the level playing field of this honorable forum.





Concepts which are useful even today. I am referring to the Labor Theory of Value, Commodity Fetishism, The relationship between our economic system and the ways ideology is used to justify and mystify that very same system, The Alienation of Labor from both the Means and Relations of Production, etc.. It's not easy stuff, it takes time, effort and concentration to begin to understand what he was getting at and how aspects still apply to this day. Yes, he was wrong about the inevitable drive of the working class to recognize its (our) exploited status and turn the tables to create a more just and egalitarian society (at least he has been wrong so far). Yet when it comes to thinking about the intersection of culture, ideology, psychology, economics, group dynamics and other things having to do with political and social metatheory, he was a pioneer and innovator. And his influence in the fields of Sociology, Philosophy, History, Cultural Studies, Anthropology, Art History and Fiction (to name just a few) has been deep and profound. Along with Hegel, Weber, Nietzsche, Freud, Heidegger. To name some more of the true heavies at the tip of the, "Understanding How Human Society Works, Or At Least Asking Interesting Questions In An Attempt To Think And Speak In An Informed Manner About Such Highly Controversial And Complex Topics", iceberg. I see you have a lot to say on the subject of Marx and I'll gladly use you as my go to guy for any questions I have about him in the future.






If you think everything is simple, maybe it is, or maybe you haven't been paying enough attention. And before I turn you or anyone else off to these thinkers, this stuff is actually quite fun once you get into it and begin to understand what they're really getting at!Well there, we have something in common. I study topic after topic as they come at me. I study them as deep as I can. I've noted Hegel, Weber, Nietzsche, Heidegger and will process them in time, thanks for the leads. Outside of the Communist Manifesto, I have not read a thing about the man. I have the short publication in front of me with redlines, footnotes and post-its with my questions and comments. It is my well studied document. I've outlined it, reduced it and reorganized it all in my study of it. I turn to it regularly. It's required reading for anyone interested in modern politics. One specific item I'll mention is my complaint that he addresses the Bourgeois which is a strickly European concept. The concept of Bourgeois is so far removed from American realities, especially in 1846, that I'm surprised anyone in America takes Marx seriously today. Oh, I'm sure one can draw parallels or simularities to the European Bourgeois and America's upper class but the two are actually different species all together.




I have read Marx, some of those who influenced him, many of those he influenced, some of his contemporaries, their critics and commentary from and about all that from variants on the Left, Right, Center and Fringes both Left and Right. I'm also at least broadly familiar with the history of the times in which they were operating. That helps to understand their motivations, and the limits of perceptual possibility under which they operated. To me socialism and marxism is a foreign system of governance. How does the history of the times of Marx involve American politics and its economy? It's my opinion America has always been the exception to the rest of the world. The closer we have been led to par with the rest of the world the farther America has fallen in greatness.






I learned the perils of being a follower when I was a Jesus Freak in High School. Having cured myself of that, I was pretty well innoculated against any and all forms of "True Believer"ship.Your perils of being a follower is your personal failure, not the failure of the faith. I'm sorry for you that you blended "true believership" with a personal relationship with Christ and cursed the latter because of the former. Your mistake may have been looking for Jesus in group action instead of straight from the source.



I quit reading Social and Political Philosophy/Theory back around 1987, when, things got repetitive after seventeen years of fairly regular study, and, I realized that I didn't have it in me to sit for six to eight hours a day reading, discussing and writing (what it takes to become a successful academic) so it wasn't going to be my profession. I'm wondering if you studied American politics like the Federalist Papers, Webster, or any of the early 19th century historians?


And unless I was going to get paid for it, I needed to find something else I was able and willing to do for money. After many years struggling with that question, I now teach. Basic Adult Life Skills in prison. Good for you! I have a friend who is a director of a major homeless person's charity in Sonoma. His specialty is teaching life skills to broken people.



Unless I get laid off in the next round of state budget cutsshhhhh! that's not gonna happen.




I hardly ever get a chance to refer to Marx, Alinsky, or any other Political Philosophers or Theorists. Funny that.That is actually a good thing. Marx and Alinsky are bad politics for America. Marx develped a system which is foreign and hostile to traditional Americanism. Americanism is built on individual Rights and responsibilities and Marxism is built on State control and individual submission to the collective. The two theories are an antithesis.



If you're going to talk out of your posterior orifice, you should check out the good shit.I'll try but I want you to start first and show me how.
:burngrnbounce:


P.S. Sonoma Mark, if you've read the above, I know you have previously expressed deep-seated mistrust, even hatred, for Philosophy and Philosophers. Obviously I don't agree with you about that. But before you come at me for my past studies, I just want you to know, that's your problem, not mine! [/quote]

[Esra]

From your comments about Marxism and Socialism here, it is clear to me that you have no idea as to the history or nature of Marxism and Socialism.

After thinking about this statement and exactly what I wrote, it has become clear to me you are probably speaking of yourself.

What I mentioned is right on mark. Let me hear what you want me to know about marxism and socialism and I'll tell you why you are wrong.

["Mad" Miles]

Esra,

You replied privately that you don't trust Wikipedia. In my snarky post that you were responding to I gave you the first hit in a google search for Saul A. You obviously know how to google and aren't really interested in doing your own research.

You just want to ask provocative questions so you can shoot down the replies to score rhetorical points.

But Wikipedia gives other links, and there are other hits from a basic google search.

Given that your only well-studied Marx is the Commie Manifesto, a pamphlet written by Marx and Engels to energize working class revolt in the 1850's (or so, I'd have to look it up to give the exact date) it's clear you're not really interested in looking into his extant work.

If I'm wrong, I suggest starting with Theses On Fuerbach and The 1848 Manuscripts both also known at "The Young Marx". Once you've checked those pieces out, move on to Das Capital.

And no, I'm not interested in being your teacher, you can do that for yourself.

As for your claims of American Exceptionalism?

Wow, What a surprise! (Sic.)

Enjoy your intellectual ghetto. Let us know upon your escape. I have better things to do with my time than crossing textual swords with you, at least from now on.

I give up.

You win.

Enjoy.

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:

[Esra]

Esra,

You obviously know how to google and aren't really interested in doing your own research. I do a alot of research in my own time just as everyone else does. My request for information about Alisnky is to offer up dialog, not intellectual laziness. Listening to a distillation of a subject from people who are in the know is just one of many angles to approach a subject. The paragraphs you wrote about Marx' other works is a perfect example and more enriching than a wikipedia entry.


You just want to ask provocative questions so you can shoot down the replies to score rhetorical points. I ask honest questions because it's less boring than declaring A is good B is bad. I don't want to score points, that's boring too. I offer myself up on an intellectual basis willing to have my mind changed on any subject by exposure to facts and perspectives I can't find in any other forum.




As for your claims of American Exceptionalism?
Wow, What a surprise! (Sic.)Sure America has some blemishes. It's not because of the system, it's because of the occasional, poor individual leadership. For whatever stain you think America has, she is still not as sullied as her international counterparts. In particularly as sullied as the forms of liberal, foreign govts (socialism, communism) which the Left advocates we adopt.

The thing I've noticed from the far left is their actual contempt, through the amplification of actual and percieved injustices, of America. There is a name for this bizarre phenomina, it's called: Cloward-Piven Strategy (https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6967) , Cloward and Piven were inspired by Saul Alinsky:

"Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules," Alinsky wrote in his 1989 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system's failure to "live up" to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist "rule book" with a socialist one.





Enjoy your intellectual ghetto. Let us know upon your escape. I have better things to do with my time than crossing textual swords with you, at least from now on. You open with a personal attack and now close prematurely with a personal attack. That's called a liberal meltdown. When I found this site at the P/J center in SR I was so excited to read that respect was a premium here. I thought I'd stumbled upon something above what I find at the boring conservative and mainstream forums. I hope Miles isn't typical of the lockstep consensus one finds on both sides of the chamber.

Is there a lick of intellectual curiosity anywhere to be found?



I give up. You win. Enjoy. "Mad" Miles
aaaaaaaaand the meltdown.

[Speak2Truth]

This is great news!
Thanks for uncovering that the Bush/Cheney Regime is a de facto communist cover-up!

I think you missed a salient fact. It was GW Bush and several key Republicans who warned Congress to put a stop to the upcoming crisis, back in 2005. Once Democrats got control of Congress, there was no way to stop it.

Your comment reveals a standard leftist dodge - misdirecting attention away from the persons actually responsible for the manufactured crisis. It is also unsupported by the facts as you would learn from the links I posted.

While Bush was no saint, it was he who instructed the Justice Department to pursue crooked corporate CEOs to restore some integrity to our economy. The Bush Administration went after Ken Lay of Enron, Tyco Corporation, Global Crossing and so many other white-collar crooks who had prospered under the Clinton Administration. At some level, he was interested in actually restoring integrity to our economic system.

The housing market scam was specifically crafted by Democrats and was defended vigorously by them when Republicans tried to put a stop to it. Please review the material I posted at the beginning of this thread.

And here is one reminder:

Shocking Video Unearthed: Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

[ICPP]

We have the greatest propaganda machine on earth, and only an elaborate illusion of democracy. Corporate America runs the show, our military is their muscle, our media is their mouthpiece, our empty treasury is their pride and joy.

It makes little difference which party is in power, we might as well have Homer Simpson for president (oh, wait, we just did). We don't have opposition parties, we have very effective propaganda pitting the victims of the greatest theft in human history against one another.

I grieve for the death of America and I fear what will happen in the next few years.



I think you missed a salient fact. It was GW Bush and several key Republicans who warned Congress to put a stop to the upcoming crisis, back in 2005. Once Democrats got control of Congress, there was no way to stop it.

Your comment reveals a standard leftist dodge - misdirecting attention away from the persons actually responsible for the manufactured crisis. It is also unsupported by the facts as you would learn from the links I posted.

While Bush was no saint, it was he who instructed the Justice Department to pursue crooked corporate CEOs to restore some integrity to our economy. The Bush Administration went after Ken Lay of Enron, Tyco Corporation, Global Crossing and so many other white-collar crooks who had prospered under the Clinton Administration. At some level, he was interested in actually restoring integrity to our economic system.

The housing market scam was specifically crafted by Democrats and was defended vigorously by them when Republicans tried to put a stop to it. Please review the material I posted at the beginning of this thread.

And here is one reminder:

Shocking Video Unearthed: Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
YouTube - Shocking Video Unearthed Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)

[Speak2Truth]

ICPP, I cannot argue against that post. I think you have summed up very effectively what has happened. It may also explain why 'patriotic' Americans and military veterans are now on the terrorist watch list - they are most likely to fight back.

[Braggi]

... But is America served well if Alinskys work ultimately lead us to totalitarianism? ...

Let your worst case scenario run wild and tell us what this totalitarian US will look like if "we" don't stop it. I'm curious what you're afraid of. Seriously.

-Jeff

[Speak2Truth]

Let your worst case scenario run wild and tell us what this totalitarian US will look like if "we" don't stop it. I'm curious what you're afraid of. Seriously.

-Jeff

Jeff, I'd like to paint a picture. Imagine a nation in which you labor to earn money and accumulate property to ensure the future of yourself and your family - but Government can, at any time and for any reason, take as much as it wishes from you to hand to someone else.

And what if your money is being seized to ensure that wealthy corporate heads who ran their businesses into the ground receive their bonuses?

Let's take if further. Alinsky as well as Cloward/Piven pushed an agenda to get as many people as possible on the welfare rolls, thus requiring Government to seize as much wealth as possible from those who produce and earn it honestly.

In effect, you live in a nation where you are a slave. The fruits of your labor are seized, at gunpoint (just say "no" and see what happens), to fill the pockets of political cash contributors, cronies and an ever-increasing Dependent Class. Dependency and failure are rewarded while you are punished for your honest efforts.

That is Socialism.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

Take it further - the Left are violently intolerant of expressed viewpoints that counter their propaganda. The leftists running our Congress have spoken openly of reinstating the "Fairness Doctrine" that will quell free political speech on the airwaves. They speak of government enforced "localization" of the broadcasting stations to thwart the widespread and popular programs that reveal their deceptions.

In addition, they progressively create new laws to silence Christians in the schools, in the halls of government and in as many public places as possible. Crushing free speech, thwarting our First Amendment...

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

As Socialists take power, they craft endlessly progressive disarmament laws to deprive The People of the power to defend themselves against Tyranny (the arbitrary exercise of government power). The Democrats talk of reinstating the blatantly unconstitutional "assault weapons ban" among other strategies to reduce the Sovereign Citizenry to a subservient, obedient serf class.

Disarmed people are no longer capable of compelling their own public servants to obey the law - so law no longer governs the nation. Tyrants habitually ensure the dominance of firepower will be in the hands of State Servants rather than The People. We see the democrats pushing that agenda.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

Barack Obama puts forth a candidate for the Supreme Court who has demonstrated racism in her rulings. Her notion of "justice" is not found in the law but, as she asserts, in her own personal perspectives formed by her experiences as a Latina woman. In the past, she demonstrated judicial bias against white males and has asserted her rulings would be superior to those of white males.

That is the very definition of Tyranny.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

If you want to imagine how bad it CAN get, you need only look at other nations that suffered successful Socialist revolutions. The USSR. Cuba. North Korea. China. Hitler's Germany.

The only limitation on how bad it CAN get is the whims of the lawless tyrants in power. Are you content to be at their mercy?

Today, you can see Democrats working tirelessly to restore the conditions that sparked the first American Revolution. That too is how bad it can get - a choice between enslavement or war.

[phooph]

Some form of this has been going on since the beginning of civilization and long before the terms socialism, capitalism, and left and right politics were invented. In monarchies and dictatorships it's pretty obvious where the wealth goes. :kneel:

Invent a system that purports to escape this and more subtle means are then invented to get around it.

The acquisitive will always find ways to benefit themselves at the expense of others. One way is to confuse the public by creating conflict and getting them to choose sides, just make sure the sides are are irrelevant. There is a scam as old as the hills. A stranger walks into a bar (pub, ale house, grog shop, sake shop, etc.) He orders a drink and begins to chat up the other patrons. He hints that he has certain skills. He's real friendly and may pay for a round of drinks. Everybody likes him. Later another stranger enters the establishment. He orders a drink and begins to chat up the patrons. He's a braggart and an egotist. Folks are suspicious of him. He says he can out fight (out drink, out shoot pool, out arm wrestle, etc) anyone. Eventually the first stranger hints that he's all talk. The second stranger challenges him to a duel. The competitors solicit bets, the excited patrons lay down their money. The winner will get a cut of the take. The second stranger beats the first stranger. He gets a pile of cash and proceeds to party a bit with the crowd while the first stranger leaves in disgrace. After a while the second stranger says he must be on his way and leaves. He meets up with the first stranger, they split the take and head on down the road looking for the next bunch of suckers.

When you get beyond the public face of politics and get down to reality we have, as Pat Buchanan says, two wings of the same bird of prey (https://buchanan.org/blog/gop-the-party-of-death-335).

https://lucente.org/blog/media/1/20080226-Two%20Wings%20Of%20The%20Same%20Bird.jpg

Or as Jesse Ventura says:
YouTube - Jesse Ventura: Politics Is Like Pro Wrestling (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7bCkfXlXcM)

Having heard the reports of people who worked at high levels in the Federal Gov., that's really how it works. Just like sports teams, each party has its fans and the other team is the bad guys. The fans put their money down and root for their team. One team wins and both get paid.

The scenario you describe below has been in place in this country for at least a century. During the Great Depression FDR added the financially disadvantaged to the public trough (the wealthy were already well fed). Having witnessed the overthrow of a monarchy and the installation of a socialist dictatorship in Russia, the growing unrest of the starving masses in America along with the growing popularity of the Communist Party made for handwriting on the wall too dangerous to ignore. Quick! Throw them some crumbs before they start hanging us in the public square. FDR was from the monied class. He protected his own by seeming to protect the little guy.

The power of wealth insures that the wealthy will always run a country in such a way as to increase and protect their wealth, and at the expense of everyone else if they can manage that. If they are subtle about it they can get away with it without setting off a revolution. Eventually hubris rises and they become less and less concerned about the great unwashed masses, less subtle, less careful, and more greedy. Then revolutions happen. For the process to begin, all it takes is a critical mass of those who have lost so much they feel they have nothing left to loose. Revolutions are not initiated by the poor, but by those who assumed they would be at least comfortable and are now facing poverty. The poor always make good foot soldiers, though, and both side recruit them, one side through anger at the left for bringing about socialism and the other by creating anger at the right for victimizing them, and then deep pockets are needed to fund the fight.

A couple of good books on the subject are by a man who's spent over 40 years investigating how the wealthy and powerful use the government to enrich themselves at the expense of the middle class. He studied the tax code in minute detail for his first book:
Amazon.com: Perfectly Legal: The Covert Campaign to Rig Our Tax System to Benefit the Super Rich--and Cheat Everybody Else: David Cay Johnston: Books (https://www.amazon.com/Perfectly-Legal-Campaign-Rich-Everybody/dp/B000CDG8N8/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b)

and investigated government handouts for the second:
Amazon.com: Free Lunch: How the Wealthiest Americans Enrich Themselves at Government Expense (and Stick You with the Bill): David Cay Johnston: Books (https://www.amazon.com/Free-Lunch-Wealthiest-Themselves-Government/dp/1591841917)

The beauty of the current financial crisis is that it reveals the depth of control that Wall Street has over Washington. It has pulled away the green curtain exposing the real "Welfare Queens" in the system. And as Rham Emanuel has said, it's a shame to waste a good crisis, so both sides are jockeying for position and looking to increase their popularity with their constituencies.

Here in the Sunshine State Arnold wants to cut state expenses and has his list. I noticed he wants to cut in home health care. That will force people into nursing homes. That's supposed to save money? I wonder how much he got in donations from the nursing home industry? Then there is canceling medical care for children. What happens then is the emergency room becomes the doctors office. Ever see an emergency room bill? I have. If the family can't pay, the state picks up the tab. People too poor to pay a doctors office visit are not going to be paying an emergency room bill many times the size.

Nationally the wealthy are being rewarded for bad behavior. There has not been much difference between how Bush and Obama are handling this with the exception of Obama throwing money at green tech. Both bailed out the deep pockets to keep them deep and threw a pittance at the working class. The Wall Street kids got their million dollar bonuses and the working stiffs got $600 stimulus checks. Notice how the guys who created the mess got the biggest handouts.

When asked why the guy at AIG who created the credit default swap concept that brought them down still received his 6 million dollar bonus, an AIG executive responded that they didn't want to loose his valuable expertise. Catherine Austin Fitts' blog quoted another Wall Street executive who defended the bailouts and bonuses by stating that Wharton grads should not be paid the same as a Sysco truck driver delivering restaurant supplies, to which Wharton grad and granddaughter of a Wharton board member, Catherine, replied that the Sysco truck driver was bringing positive value to the marketplace while the Wall Street guys were bringing negative value.

But you see the problem. These folks believe they own the country because they have for so long. Just as Enron and Bernie Madoff's hedge fund were the best investments you could make until they collapsed and exposed themselves a frauds, the covers have come off Wall Street. We need a revolution but as long as people fall for left vs right and Republican vs Democrat there will be band-aids where there should be major surgery because people can be convinced the other guy did it and waste their energy on the other guy and not the guy behind the green curtain, which is the Wall Street wich own both guys.

You keep using the term socialism, but socialism is when the government owns the means of production. When the means of production owns the government, which is what we really have here, it's called fascism. In Germany fascism was called National Socialism as camouflage. Since Wall Street is calling the shots this looks more like fascism than socialism.


Jeff, I'd like to paint a picture. Imagine a nation in which you labor to earn money and accumulate property to ensure the future of yourself and your family - but Government can, at any time and for any reason, take as much as it wishes from you to hand to someone else.

And what if your money is being seized to ensure that wealthy corporate heads who ran their businesses into the ground receive their bonuses?

Let's take if further. Alinsky as well as Cloward/Piven pushed an agenda to get as many people as possible on the welfare rolls, thus requiring Government to seize as much wealth as possible from those who produce and earn it honestly.

In effect, you live in a nation where you are a slave. The fruits of your labor are seized, at gunpoint (just say "no" and see what happens), to fill the pockets of political cash contributors, cronies and an ever-increasing Dependent Class. Dependency and failure are rewarded while you are punished for your honest efforts.

That is Socialism.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

Take it further - the Left are violently intolerant of expressed viewpoints that counter their propaganda. The leftists running our Congress have spoken openly of reinstating the "Fairness Doctrine" that will quell free political speech on the airwaves. They speak of government enforced "localization" of the broadcasting stations to thwart the widespread and popular programs that reveal their deceptions.

In addition, they progressively create new laws to silence Christians in the schools, in the halls of government and in as many public places as possible. Crushing free speech, thwarting our First Amendment...

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

As Socialists take power, they craft endlessly progressive disarmament laws to deprive The People of the power to defend themselves against Tyranny (the arbitrary exercise of government power). The Democrats talk of reinstating the blatantly unconstitutional "assault weapons ban" among other strategies to reduce the Sovereign Citizenry to a subservient, obedient serf class.

Disarmed people are no longer capable of compelling their own public servants to obey the law - so law no longer governs the nation. Tyrants habitually ensure the dominance of firepower will be in the hands of State Servants rather than The People. We see the democrats pushing that agenda.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

Barack Obama puts forth a candidate for the Supreme Court who has demonstrated racism in her rulings. Her notion of "justice" is not found in the law but, as she asserts, in her own personal perspectives formed by her experiences as a Latina woman. In the past, she demonstrated judicial bias against white males and has asserted her rulings would be superior to those of white males.

That is the very definition of Tyranny.

Isn't this bad enough for you to say, "This is no longer the America our ancestors fought to create!"

If you want to imagine how bad it CAN get, you need only look at other nations that suffered successful Socialist revolutions. The USSR. Cuba. North Korea. China. Hitler's Germany.

The only limitation on how bad it CAN get is the whims of the lawless tyrants in power. Are you content to be at their mercy?

Today, you can see Democrats working tirelessly to restore the conditions that sparked the first American Revolution. That too is how bad it can get - a choice between enslavement or war.

[Esra]

You keep using the term socialism, but socialism is when the government owns the means of production.

Bravo to you.

I would say socialism is when the govt owns the social services e.g. health care, welfare, etc.
[and]
Communism is when the govt owns the means of production and its distribution.

[Esra]

Let your worst case scenario run wild and tell us what this totalitarian US will look like if "we" don't stop it. I'm curious what you're afraid of. Seriously.

-Jeff"don't stop it"? Considering you are knee deep in one, I understand you are wholly apathetic and blind to living under totalitarianism. S2T already answered you.

[ICPP]

I would say socialism is when the govt owns the social services e.g. health care, welfare, etc.
[and]
Communism is when the govt owns the means of production and its distribution.

And, phooph's most salient point;

"When the means of production owns the government, which is what we really have here, it's called fascism. In Germany fascism was called National Socialism as camouflage. Since Wall Street is calling the shots this looks more like fascism than socialism."

[theindependenteye]

Ok, I'll bite. Both Pooph & Speak2Truth, bolstered by appropriate commentators, paint a ghastly picture of a power system so armored, so entrenched, so virulent that in neither scenario do I detect a glimmer of hope. This bolsters my sense that the Far Right and the Far Left share a unified vision of invulnerable world tyranny; the only difference seems to be that the Left thinks the Right's in power, and the Right thinks the Left is chuckling up its sleeve.

They may be quite correct. But since the secondary-source data they rely on has no more claim to truth than anything in the mainstream media or on Pacifica — or if it does, how do we know it does? — then we dunno. Even if a massive alarm clock goes off — say an H-bomb on Chicago — and the entire country wakes up simultaneously and sees the Truth... Well, the H-bomb might happen, but the Wake-up won't.

So from these insights — which I have no grounds for demeaning, any more than I could refute rumors of the Illuminati, the Elders of Zion, or the Templars — all I'm left with is this:

>>As Socialists take power, they craft endlessly progressive disarmament laws to deprive The People of the power to defend themselves against Tyranny ... Disarmed people are no longer capable of compelling their own public servants to obey the law - so law no longer governs the nation.

By "the law," I have to presume is *not* meant laws passed by Congress, signed by the President, or interpreted by the courts, since those are all part of the corrupt system. What then? God's law? The world-views of armed militias, which seem to be the only logical consequence of this suggestion that we should prepare for armed overthrow of the Government? Are you advocating that? (I'm not trying a reductio ad absurdum here, I'm trying to take you seriously.) If not, what's your alternative course of action?

To me, this kind of argument leads only to a rage-filled despair that either promotes impotent acquiescence to the status quo or leads to extreme civil violence: assaninations, militias, civil war — and I'll lay you ten to one the guy with the biggest pot of money wins. So the choice it offers is either to get very drunk, daily, or to apply for an entry-level job with the International Conspiracy, or to shoot a cop.

Can anybody, please, make me a better offer?

Peace & joy—
Conrad

[Esra]

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 5:44 PM, theindependenteye @ WaccoBB <[email protected]> wrote:

Ok, I'll bite. Both Pooph & Speak2Truth, bolstered by appropriate commentators, paint a ghastly picture of a power system so armored, so entrenched, so virulent that in neither scenario do I detect a glimmer of hope. This bolsters my sense that the Far Right and the Far Left share a unified vision of invulnerable world tyranny; the only difference seems to be that the Left thinks the Right's in power, and the Right thinks the Left is chuckling up its sleeve.



We are dealing with a power structure where Left and Right doesn't mean the same as it does to you and me. They are coming at us from both sides. Ultimately it looks like it'll be world wide Marxism, until the Muslims rise up at least.






If not, what's your alternative course of action?


All politics is local. Limit all local, state and national elected positions to one term.

Start a massive movement to vote-in local politicians from a qualified pool of hundreds of eager citizens. Start a politician mill, churn out the best local politicians to run for state and then national. Rotate them through fast to bring a whole new atmospere (with a spirited life of its own) in the halls of govt. power. Squeeze out the corporate interests with smart, principled, indepenant minded Americans. The good ones will stay in the system making progress up the piramid. The weak ones will go away come next election.





So the choice it offers is either to get very drunk, daily like the eastern block, or to apply for an entry-level job with the International Conspiracy.

The only choice for the patriot is live free or die.

[ICPP]

...As Socialists take power, they craft endlessly progressive disarmament laws to deprive The People of the power to defend themselves against Tyranny (the arbitrary exercise of government power)...

RW survivalist fantasies of standing up to the US military are almost cute in their naivity.

The United States spends more on it's military than ALL other nations in the world COMBINED, and we are as ruthless in killing any threat to the status quo as any global empire has ever been.

[phooph]

The single most effective step to take would be the public funding of elections coupled with instant runoff voting (you rate the candidates in order of preference). The system we have exists because those with the money buy the politicians. The right defends this system by calling it "free speech," but when the wealthy have more speech than the rest of us there is no such thing as democratic free speech. (This is akin to "the press is free to them that owns it.")

When getting re-elected is dependent upon taking money from the wealthy then the agenda of the wealthy will get priority. History shows us that the wealthy generally see the rest of us as sheep to be shorn, and their paid for politician are holding the shears.



We are dealing with a power structure where Left and Right doesn't mean the same as it does to you and me. They are coming at us from both sides. Ultimately it looks like it'll be world wide Marxism, until the Muslims rise up at least.

All politics is local. Limit all local, state and national elected positions to one term.

Start a massive movement to vote-in local politicians from a qualified pool of hundreds of eager citizens. Start a politician mill, churn out the best local politicians to run for state and then national. Rotate them through fast to bring a whole new atmospere (with a spirited life of its own) in the halls of govt. power. Squeeze out the corporate interests with smart, principled, indepenant minded Americans. The good ones will stay in the system making progress up the piramid. The weak ones will go away come next election.

The only choice for the patriot is live free or die.

[theindependenteye]

>>All politics is local. Limit all local, state and national elected positions to one term. ... Squeeze out the corporate interests with smart, principled, indepenant minded Americans.

The one-term idea has good things about it. An argument against it is that the enforced turn-over means you have a government filled with people who are just learning the job and in fact would enormously increase their dependence on corporate lobbyists. How you get this vast pool of highly-qualified, principled patriots to interrupt their careers for 2-4 years of selfless service is beyond me. I guess they're going to have to be rich to start with. It's a good thought, but it seems to me it outdoes the most doctrinaire Marxist in its fantasy.

>>The only choice for the patriot is live free or die.

I guess this is your response to my inquiry about whether you're proposing armed insurrection against the government. Maybe I'm misreading.

In any case, I would support that as a personal choice, but I'd not like someone else to do my choosing for me, whether it's a tyrannical government or a flaming patriot.

And BarnYard wrote:
>>The single most effective step to take would be the public funding of elections coupled with instant runoff voting.

I'm very much in favor of both those things, but you will never get money out of politics as long as Supreme Court rulings stand that equate political contributions with free speech. Instant-runoff might help secondary parties toward more prominence, or it might just lessen the incentive of the major parties to co-opt their ideas. I think it's a wise idea to try it, and it'll necessarily be initially on a local level -- maybe it'll catch hold.

Neither of these things, though, will necessarily affect the ideological direction of who's elected and what they do -- we might get more "socialism" or more "social Darwinism" with either.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[phooph]

A number of European countries have done this. There is an organized movement to promote public campaign funding for those who want more information:
https://www.publicampaign.org/




>>The single most effective step to take would be the public funding of elections coupled with instant runoff voting.

I'm very much in favor of both those things, but you will never get money out of politics as long as Supreme Court rulings stand that equate political contributions with free speech. Instant-runoff might help secondary parties toward more prominence, or it might just lessen the incentive of the major parties to co-opt their ideas. I think it's a wise idea to try it, and it'll necessarily be initially on a local level -- maybe it'll catch hold.

Neither of these things, though, will necessarily affect the ideological direction of who's elected and what they do -- we might get more "socialism" or more "social Darwinism" with either.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[Speak2Truth]

I think phooph wrote a powerful piece and find most of it agreeable. However, I must offer an insight that is more of a response to...


<hr>{ The post below is part of a thread, click here (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccoreader/46088-free-market-capitalism-replaced.html) to view. }
{ In WaccoBB.net, theindependenteye wrote: }

>> This bolsters my sense that the Far Right and the Far Left share a unified vision of invulnerable world tyranny; the only difference seems to be that the Left thinks the Right's in power, and the Right thinks the Left is chuckling up its sleeve.

>> They may be quite correct. But since the secondary-source data they rely on has no more claim to truth than anything in the mainstream media or on Pacifica

>>Me: As Socialists take power, they craft endlessly progressive disarmament laws to deprive The People of the power to defend themselves against Tyranny ... Disarmed people are no longer capable of compelling their own public servants to obey the law - so law no longer governs the nation.

>>By "the law," I have to presume is *not* meant laws passed by Congress, signed by the President, or interpreted by the courts, since those are all part of the corrupt system. What then? God's law? The world-views of armed militias, which seem to be the only logical consequence of this suggestion that we should prepare for armed overthrow of the Government?

Okay, here we go.

I speak from first-hand observation. I'm not an armchair critic. I've attended enough Democrat/Communist gatherings as well as Republican/American meetings that I can say, from first-hand exposure, the Democrat Party is absolutely and irrefutably an enemy of the United States.

The "Che Guevara" banner on Obama's campaign office wall should have been enough warning to all.

The Republican Party, however, is home to genuinely patriotic Americans loyal to the founding principles of Liberty in our nation. And, any damned Commie who would dare try to post a Communist banner on one of their walls would feel lucky if the only injury they receive is the door hitting them in the arse on the way out.

While some in the Republican Party may be traitorous to American principles, and I'll list John McCain among them, most of the ones I've met are not. They are, instead, practical and pragmatic when it comes to defending our national interests. If that means smacking down a foreign dictator who has sent his agents to attack our country repeatedly, good. If that means dunking Khalid Sheik Mohammed in water to get information t save American lives, well, that's their job. That does not mean they are trying to create a "world tyranny". Rather, they are fighting to prevent one.

In general, is fighting bad? Is violence bad? No. It is what took us off the dinner menu for lions. It is what created a Free Nation. It is the ONLY thing that can preserve a Free Nation. As PHOOPH observed, once a free nation is created, subtle methods are quickly used to re-subjugate it. Power-mongers rig the system to empower themselves while re-enslaving the populace. The ONLY remedy available to the populace is to, once again, take up arms and clean the tyrants out of office then appoint new public servants with a proven loyalty to the nation's founding principles.

Thomas Jefferson was correct. Only direct force will succeed in preserving liberty. And, that force should only be applied to enforce the Constitution and the Founding Principles of this nation in order to be justifiable. You would be correct to say that legislation and court decisions are not the core laws to be defended - for so often they are actually hostile to our liberty.

Our nation has many examples of the Militia upholding its duty. In the town of Athens, Tennessee, the corrupt local politicians stuffed the ballot box, invalidating the elections. The townsfolk appealed to State and Federal government to obtain remedy but none came. So, in the manner prescribed by the Constitution, they formed a Militia and attacked their politicians as well as any police officers who chose the wrong side in the matter. They used military firearms and used dynamite against the jail house where the tyrants holed up. Finally, the Militia prevailed and Lawful Government was restored! Not "overthrown" - RESTORED. That's an important distinction.

That is why Democrats work tirelessly to disarm Americans while Republicans fight to preserve our power to keep our own government lawful. There really, truly is a difference between the party objectives - or so it seems from my direct personal experience with them.

It is at least still possible working within the Republican Party to defend our Constitution and liberty.

Al Gore gloated a few years ago that there is no more "controlling authority" to compel government to obey the Constitution. What he meant is that Americans have been programmed to forget their duty as Citizens to use whatever force is necessary to compel public servants to obey the Constitution. So, as Gore pointed out, they are now free to do whatever they want with NO Constitutional restraint whatsoever.

Thomas Jefferson foresaw this and recommended that violence is the only solution. You seem to recognize this. So does PHOOPH.

How far must Americans be pushed before they do remember that they are supposed to be Free Men? Are the TEA rallies a first warning to public servants? If so, the Obama Administration is not hearing it.

The only remaining question is, will Americans restore Lawful Government or will they be forever enslaved?

That's the stark reality.

I dread what is coming if the Obama Administration continues working to disassemble the United States. I dread even more the idea that he's okay with it - because civil war is just as useful as Fascism for wrecking the US as a superpower, the true goal of the Marxists.

[Speak2Truth]

RW survivalist fantasies of standing up to the US military are almost cute in their naivity.

I think you miss an important point: Democrats consistently try to eliminate US military votes in close elections because most military are right-wing conservatives and take their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution seriously.

You should ask yourself, when the conflict does arise, whose side will members of the military take?

Will they obey the orders of Barack Obama when we already have military officers threatening to refuse orders until he shows he is eligible to serve as President?

Soldier doubts eligibility, defies president's orders
'As an officer, my sworn oath to support and defend our Constitution requires this'
Soldier questions eligibility, doubts president's authority (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89837)

2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility
Says issue could decide if 'we are a Constitutional Republic'
2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89941)

Major general says president's eligibility needs proof
'Most important, what I really want is the truth'
Major General says president's eligibility needs proof (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90125)

More military officers demand eligibility proof
Plaintiff: 'In the worst case … it's going to be revolution in the streets'
More military officers demand eligibility proof (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90574)

[ICPP]

What conflict? You are seriously stupid if you think there's some sort of revolution brewing in the US and that our military is going to take sides. We had numerous generals calling Bush a war criminal too, your links mean nothing.


I think you miss an important point: Democrats consistently try to eliminate US military votes in close elections because most military are right-wing conservatives and take their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution seriously.

You should ask yourself, when the conflict does arise, whose side will members of the military take?

Will they obey the orders of Barack Obama when we already have military officers threatening to refuse orders until he shows he is eligible to serve as President?

Soldier doubts eligibility, defies president's orders
'As an officer, my sworn oath to support and defend our Constitution requires this'
Soldier questions eligibility, doubts president's authority (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89837)

2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility
Says issue could decide if 'we are a Constitutional Republic'
2nd U.S. soldier in Iraq challenges eligibility (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89941)

Major general says president's eligibility needs proof
'Most important, what I really want is the truth'
Major General says president's eligibility needs proof (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90125)

More military officers demand eligibility proof
Plaintiff: 'In the worst case … it's going to be revolution in the streets'
More military officers demand eligibility proof (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90574)

[Speak2Truth]

What conflict? You are seriously stupid if you think there's some sort of revolution brewing in the US and that our military is going to take sides. We had numerous generals calling Bush a war criminal too, your links mean nothing.

Here is what my links mean. The US Constitution prohibits Obama from being President unless he is a Natural Born Citizen. Obama knows this. He has hired teams of lawyers to fight off anyone trying to examine the documentation that would prove it one way or another. So, those military officers, sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, are making it clear we are in a crisis already.

As for "what conflict" - give it time. You are the one who mocked the possibility that the Citizenry could stand up to the US military. I simply pointed out that they may not need to if they take up arms to restore legitimate government.

[Braggi]

... That is why Democrats work tirelessly to disarm Americans while Republicans fight to preserve our power to keep our own government lawful. ...

One poster called you seriously stupid. I think you're seriously misinformed.

The Democrats do no such thing. The US Citizenry now holds an order of magnitude more firepower than we did a few decades ago. We have more than twice as many guns as people. How many do we need to assure you we haven't been disarmed? Get over this one.

The Republicans fight to preserve power, all right. Executive power, police power, military power, judicial review power. Note I didn't say citizen power because they're certainly not into that. The Republicans have done everything possible to push us toward a police state and G. W. nearly succeeded. That's one reason it was absolutely imperative to vote in Che, I mean Obama. (Just joking, heh heh.) We needed to take back the Supreme Court and start to reduce the impact of the draconian laws that are crushing our liberties and the Bill of Rights, mostly under the guise of the Failed War on (Some) Drugs, but furthered immensely under the Failed War on (Some) Terrorism. Most of these laws have come down to us from Republicans; and then there was Clinton who only acted like a Republican in everything he did.

Speak2Truth, I have trouble taking you seriously, but I guess that's how it is. You do seem to be serious. I support your right to your opinions, I support your right to "bear arms" as long as you do it legally and I also believe it takes all kinds to keep an eye on our politicians whom I trust about as much as you do.

I think you're totally nuts about term limits, though. I think California's current problems are largely due to the fact that our state has been run by amateurs for the last couple decades. But that's the stuff of a less interesting thread.

Thanks for your input.

-Jeff

[Speak2Truth]

The Democrats do no such thing. The US Citizenry now holds an order of magnitude more firepower than we did a few decades ago. We have more than twice as many guns as people.

We have ever-encroaching laws prohibiting various classes of firearms, we have Democrats pushing to register all gun ownership as well as ammunition purchases, it is not even legal in California to purchase guns that are clearly protected by the Constitution.

To learn what's really going on in the realm of firearms, keep track of the links at Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters (https://www.keepandbeararms.com)

Democrats criminalize more and more every year. The gun is too small. The gun is too big. The gun can be converted to full-auto. The gun "looks evil".

You have, unquestionably, lost your Right to Keep and Bear Arms (combat firearms) that the Constitution says "shall not be infringed". And, the Obama Administration has been discussing reinstatement of the anti-Constitutional "assault weapon" ban at the Federal level but may instead use a different approach to accomplish the goal. Perhaps a treaty with Mexico, considering their deceptions regarding Mexican gun trafficking.

If all they get in the short term is a list of who has what guns, that's good enough for a start. As Ray Nagin demonstrated after Hurricane Katrina, they're happy to use those lists to go around and disarm the law abiding Citizens who want nothing more than to defend their own lives against predatory gangs.


The Republicans fight to preserve power, all right. Executive power, police power, military power, judicial review power. Note I didn't say citizen power because they're certainly not into that. The Republicans have done everything possible to push us toward a police state and G. W. nearly succeeded.

I have to ask - what are you talking about? Be specific.


I support your right to your opinions, I support your right to "bear arms" as long as you do it legally

Not good enough. If you actually uphold the Constitution, you must oppose any government "infringement" on my Right to Keep and Bear Arms (combat weaponry).

Get the Democrats out - all they can do is come up with one infringement after another on my actual Rights.

I would like to learn what you mean by suggesting Bush pushed us towards a police state.

[ICPP]

This RW radio lunacy about Obama not being a US citizen obviously sells commercials but it makes me embarrassed for people like you.

Have you ever heard of the Secret Service or the FBI? If you really think a former senator who was born in Hawaii isn't eligible to be president why don't you give them a call?

It's your patriotic duty, and the least you can do before taking up arms against the most powerful military the world has ever seen.




Here is what my links mean. The US Constitution prohibits Obama from being President unless he is a Natural Born Citizen. Obama knows this. He has hired teams of lawyers to fight off anyone trying to examine the documentation that would prove it one way or another. So, those military officers, sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, are making it clear we are in a crisis already.

As for "what conflict" - give it time. You are the one who mocked the possibility that the Citizenry could stand up to the US military. I simply pointed out that they may not need to if they take up arms to restore legitimate government.

[Speak2Truth]

This RW radio lunacy about Obama not being a US citizen obviously sells commercials but it makes me embarrassed for people like you.

Are you saying Constitutional obedience is a Right Wing thing?

Obama has not demonstrated he is eligible and continues to hire attorneys to block access to the relevant documentation.

He knows it is a Job Requirement, yet he fights to block verification that he meets that Job Requirement.

Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits?
FEC shows more than $1 million paid to top law firm since election
Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits? (https://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95772)

The Constitution makes this specific requirement yet does not define who is responsible for enforcing it. That's the catch. It's apparently one that Obama may have been studying up on before running for office.

So, the actual Responsible Parties for enforcing the Constitution, The People, are taking action to force Obama to let the truth be known.

Grand juries cite Obama for ineligibility, treason
Hundreds of 'presentments' being handed to prosecutors
Grand juries cite Obama for ineligibility, treason (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98697)

Citizen grand jury indicts Obama - Citizen Sovereignty as a last resort when public servants fail in their duty
Groups in 20 more states reviewing eligibility claims
Citizen grand jury indicts Obama (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93481)

Are you convinced that Obama has proven his legal eligibility in a legal venue? Where? If not, you take the wrong position to ridicule those who demand the Constitution be obeyed.

I notice that FCC rules also require broadcasters to compel candidates to prove their eligibility before getting air time. That was, as far as I know, not done.

Our Constitutional Republic, our Free Market Capitalist, prosperous and libertarian nation, has been replaced in a Marxist Coup by a Tyrannical Dictatorship - and Fascism. Look up those words. They all apply.

The Foxes are now watching the henhouse, seizing assets from honest hard-working Americans, handing trillions of our dollars to corrupt CEOs who helped them gain power as well as "The Party" supporters such as Unions...

So, the Citizenry is trying all avenues allowed by the legal system to resolve the question of whether Obama is even legally President. They are, after all, the Sovereigns in this nation and it is their duty to compel their public servants to obey the Constitution. Good on them!

[ICPP]

So, let's see if I understand your position.

For this fantasy to be true, the conservatives in the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, DIA AND the State Department have to be in on some sort of conspiracy to hide his ineligibility to be a senator AND then president, and only now are RW radio hosts uncovering the truth.

Again, why aren't you letting the Secret Service et al know? Or are they still conspiring to cover this up?




Are you saying Constitutional obedience is a Right Wing thing?

Obama has not demonstrated he is eligible and continues to hire attorneys to block access to the relevant documentation.

He knows it is a Job Requirement, yet he fights to block verification that he meets that Job Requirement.

Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits?
FEC shows more than $1 million paid to top law firm since election
Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits? (https://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95772)

The Constitution makes this specific requirement yet does not define who is responsible for enforcing it. That's the catch. It's apparently one that Obama may have been studying up on before running for office.

So, the actual Responsible Parties for enforcing the Constitution, The People, are taking action to force Obama to let the truth be known.

Grand juries cite Obama for ineligibility, treason
Hundreds of 'presentments' being handed to prosecutors
Grand juries cite Obama for ineligibility, treason (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98697)

Citizen grand jury indicts Obama - Citizen Sovereignty as a last resort when public servants fail in their duty
Groups in 20 more states reviewing eligibility claims
Citizen grand jury indicts Obama (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93481)

Are you convinced that Obama has proven his legal eligibility in a legal venue? Where? If not, you take the wrong position to ridicule those who demand the Constitution be obeyed.

I notice that FCC rules also require broadcasters to compel candidates to prove their eligibility before getting air time. That was, as far as I know, not done.

Our Constitutional Republic, our Free Market Capitalist, prosperous and libertarian nation, has been replaced in a Marxist Coup by a Tyrannical Dictatorship - and Fascism. Look up those words. They all apply.

The Foxes are now watching the henhouse, seizing assets from honest hard-working Americans, handing trillions of our dollars to corrupt CEOs who helped them gain power as well as "The Party" supporters such as Unions...

So, the Citizenry is trying all avenues allowed by the legal system to resolve the question of whether Obama is even legally President. They are, after all, the Sovereigns in this nation and it is their duty to compel their public servants to obey the Constitution. Good on them!

[Speak2Truth]

So, let's see if I understand your position.

For this fantasy to be true, the conservatives in the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, DIA AND the State Department have to be in on some sort of conspiracy to hide his ineligibility to be a senator AND then president, and only now are RW radio hosts uncovering the truth.

Again, why aren't you letting the Secret Service et al know? Or are they still conspiring to cover this up?

You still don't understand. It is a FACT, not a fantasy, that Obama fights to prevent examination of the documents that would show whether he is a Natural Born Citizen and therefore in compliance with the Constitution.

The Secret Service has no authority, as far as I could discover, to pursue this matter.

You also seem to misunderstand bureaucrats - one of their chief skills is avoiding responsibility and conflict. It hurts them not at all to pass the buck.

Would you want to be the Judge who has to obey the law and declare Obama is illegally in office? Think of the consequences. The Rodney King riots were nothing in comparison. There is a serious deterrent factor - and nobody can compel them to do their duty in this matter.


have to be in on some sort of conspiracy to hide his ineligibility to be a senator AND then president, and only now are RW radio hosts uncovering the truth.You got this wrong, too. To be a Senator, one not need be a Natural Born Citizen. One could even be naturalized.

And, this issue was widely discussed and fought over for about 8 months before the inauguration. Perhaps you just weren't paying attention to actual News outlets that were unafraid to discuss it.

The whole purpose of that clause in the Constitution is to prevent someone from being accidentally elected who has loyalties to a foreign political system, nation or ideology. Obama is the perfect test case, having spent his formative years as a Muslim in Indonesia, then a student of various Socialist mentors.

[ICPP]

Um... you don't get to 'hide the truth' from the CIA, DIA, FBI and the Secret Service when running for the highest office in the USA.


You still don't understand. It is a FACT, not a fantasy, that Obama fights to prevent examination of the documents that would show whether he is a Natural Born Citizen and therefore in compliance with the Constitution.

[theindependenteye]

Responding to Speak2Truth--

In your earlier posts, I got the impression that you felt the current electoral process was utterly bankrupt, that Republicans and Democrats were equally under the spell of Marx, etc. Now it seems you embrace Republicans (and presumably their past record?) so long as they stay pretty far Right. Is that a fair description?

And I think you answered my question: that yes, you support armed insurrection against the Federal Government if, in your judgment, it's acting in a manner counter to the Constitution. And that all citizens should be sufficiently armed -- either individually with automatic weapons or, presumably, in militias armed with whatever weaponry they can afford. Is that a fair description?

So, some questions: Since you've expressed your belief that our current government is radically illegitimate and plotting against us, are you part of a group actively pursuing insurrection? Do you support individual actions such as the man killing the abortion doctor? How do you determine what's Constitutional and what's not, if not by the Supreme Court?-- Leave it up to which side is better armed?

Obviously I'm diametrically opposed to you politically. I've read countless websites in synch with what you're talking about, I could quote the arguments, and I just don't buy it. I'm not challenging your beliefs -- we're never gonna come even close to agreement -- but I *am* really interested in how you're thinking about this citizen-revolt business. I've talked to people on the far Left who have near-identical viewpoints (vast conspiracies, armed insurrection, etc.), and I've generally felt they were sincere but rather pathetic. Right-wing violence seems much more likely to me, partly because of its long history (cf. KKK) and partly because it can probably tap into major funding sources.

So while you may be a very nice person I'd enjoy having coffee with, your words, to me, are horrifying. Are you just words, or also action?

Enough.

-Conrad

[Speak2Truth]

Um... you don't get to 'hide the truth' from the CIA, DIA, FBI and the Secret Service when running for the highest office in the USA.

That's your speculation. So, show where the truth has been proven by such agencies.

Can you even show where they are given authority to force Obama to reveal his personal documents to settle the matter? I'd like to know if that is the case.

If it was already settled by any of those agencies, Obama could easily present that fact in court and put an end to all the money he's spending on lawyers to conceal it.

Your speculations just don't fit within the framework of what is actually happening.

[Braggi]

... I would like to learn what you mean by suggesting Bush pushed us towards a police state.

Have you not read a newspaper in the last 8 years?

-Jeff

[ICPP]

You seriously need to take a course in critical thinking, because you are completely lacking in the facility.

The president has the highest security clearance in the military that you think is so conservative it's about to peacefully overthrow our government. You know nothing about the Pentagon and it's DIA. Obama has been more thouroughly checked than any human on earth.


That's your speculation. So, show where the truth has been proven by such agencies.

Can you even show where they are given authority to force Obama to reveal his personal documents to settle the matter? I'd like to know if that is the case.

If it was already settled by any of those agencies, Obama could easily present that fact in court and put an end to all the money he's spending on lawyers to conceal it.

Your speculations just don't fit within the framework of what is actually happening.

[Speak2Truth]

In your earlier posts, I got the impression that you felt the current electoral process was utterly bankrupt, that Republicans and Democrats were equally under the spell of Marx, etc. Now it seems you embrace Republicans (and presumably their past record?) so long as they stay pretty far Right. Is that a fair description?

It's possible you got some of my posts mixed up with others'. My position is this:

I am an American and it is therefore my sworn duty (I swore the oath) to uphold and defend the Constitution. I've attended enough Democrat meetings to have no more doubt that party has been taken over by Communists. This is not speculation. I've been handed the Communist literature and heard them discuss their plans to wreck our military and so on.

As for Republicans, it seems most of them want to uphold our Constitution and Liberty. Some do not. They are called RINOs because they betray the Party ideals.

If one wishes to work within the system to restore our Constitutional Republic, it is not possible to do so by supporting Democrats. It IS possible to do so with the Republican Party. And I would be just thrilled to see a hard-core Libertarian elected just once. Guaranteed, popcorn-worthy entertainment for four years!


And I think you answered my question: that yes, you support armed insurrection against the Federal Government if, in your judgment, it's acting in a manner counter to the Constitution. And that all citizens should be sufficiently armed -- either individually with automatic weapons or, presumably, in militias armed with whatever weaponry they can afford. Is that a fair description? Yes, that is, as a LAST resort, the appropriate action for Americans to restore their Constitutional Republic. I'm in agreement with the founders of this nation in that regard.


So, some questions: Since you've expressed your belief that our current government is radically illegitimate and plotting against us, are you part of a group actively pursuing insurrection?No. At worst, I'm an investigative journalist. My fight, right now, is to learn facts and show them to the public. My war is against the deceivers in the mass media.


Do you support individual actions such as the man killing the abortion doctor?I'm not sufficiently familiar with the case to comment. Besides, the man was not a public servant. Defense of a Free State generally means correcting tyrannical actions by public servants, as in the Battle of Athens, Tennessee.



How do you determine what's Constitutional and what's not, if not by the Supreme Court?Step one: Read the Constitution for yourself. It is in plain English, not lawyerese, to ensure that the common man can easily understand it.

Step two: Beware even of the Supreme Court. Activist Judges, ruling according to their sympathies rather than obedient to the Constitution, are one of the greatest dangers to this nation. Sotomayor is a classic example, insisting her rulings, as a "wise" Latina woman and based on her personal experiences, would be superior to those of a white man. Absolute DISQUALIFICATION right there!


Obviously I'm diametrically opposed to you politically. I've read countless websites in synch with what you're talking about, I could quote the arguments, and I just don't buy it.I can accept that. Worldview is crafted, often intentionally, and it is very difficult to change.

I'm trying to stick with facts and logical conclusions. I hope you are a Liberal Intellectual as I am, that your beliefs are founded solidly in a willingness to learn the facts and form rational conclusions from them.




Right-wing violence seems much more likely to me, partly because of its long history (cf. KKK) and partly because it can probably tap into major funding sources. I'm not so sure the KKK was right-wing.

Remember, the Democrats fought to defend slavery. That is why our own Press Democrat newspaper was created - to defeat Lincoln and defend slavery. Robert Byrd, the former KKK recruiter, has been re-elected as a Democrat Senator for a very long time. Democrats and the Left in general are extreme racists and they create 'coalitions of power' among various race-based groups to have more political 'armies' to herd around.

Notice how Democrats talk about racial identity all the time as some sort of 'superiority' thing? Like Sotomayor? Or the 'historical opportunity' of electing a black man?

The KKK may defy right or left definition but this is a point to consider.

The Right wants personal freedom from others meddling in their lives.

The Left wants those in power to control all important aspects of a person's life and to make judgments based on 'class' or 'race' or whatever.

The KKK fits nicely into the same political box as Hitler's Socialist Workers Party, etc. No wonder Byrd keeps getting re-elected as a Democrat (leftist).

I ask you to approach these matters rationally, to get over your horror and learn the facts, then make logical conclusions.

That's what I did. I was raised by my Democrat Hippie mother to be rather solidly in their court. Then I started learning.

If you cannot logically disprove the facts or conclusions I present, then please try overcoming your emotions to let your brain rationally consider them.

I find this all rather horrifying also. But, I have to be intellectually honest and seek Truth. That's the very definition of a Liberal Intellectual.

[Speak2Truth]

The president has the highest security clearance in the military that you think is so conservative it's about to peacefully overthrow our government. You know nothing about the Pentagon and it's DIA. Obama has been more thouroughly checked than any human on earth.

And?

Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance
Barack Obama cannot be Trusted with Classified Information
Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance | SecurePuter (https://www.secureputer.com/obamadeniedsecurityclearance/)

But none of what you have said proves that the eligibility issue is resolved.

You are dodging the obligation of an intellectually honest person to acknowledge facts by digressing.

[Speak2Truth]

Have you not read a newspaper in the last 8 years?

I've read many newspapers. But your question to me does not explain what exactly you wish to assert is creation of a Police State.

Please, go into some detail and show that your assertion has factual backing.

I really would like to know if there's something I missed. Perhaps some action that does not fall within the primary function of Government to provide for our common defense?

You know, like maybe seizing trillions of dollars of taxpayer cash to stuff in the pockets of political cronies?

Wait, that's not Police State.

Awaiting the explanation...

[ICPP]

You cite a blog? Are you really as stupid as you present yourself?

As I said, you know nothing about the Pentagon, security clearances OR the DIA.

Let me see if I can sum up your positions in this thread. You think that;

The DIA and CIA were so lax in protecting our national security that they didn't bother to check Obama's background prior to the election, overlooking that he's supposedly a muslim terrorist bent on overthrowing the US with communism and socialism.

Then, they handed over control of the world's largest military, nukes and all, still without a background check OR a security clearance.

Now, you claim that the same military and it's intel agencies are so conservative and so appalled at their boo boo that they're going to peacefully overthrow the US government.

Thanks for the laughs, this is my last post in this thread, you may have the last word.





And?

Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance
Barack Obama cannot be Trusted with Classified Information
Barack Obama Denied National Security Clearance | SecurePuter (https://www.secureputer.com/obamadeniedsecurityclearance/)

But none of what you have said proves that the eligibility issue is resolved.

You are dodging the obligation of an intellectually honest person to acknowledge facts by digressing.

[Speak2Truth]

You cite a blog? Are you really as stupid as you present yourself?

It was more an effort to determine whether you are actually reading the links I'm posting. Sure, the guy gives good reason that Obama should not get security clearance. Did he receive such clearance? Do you have the facts? Again, you go on about how you think things "should" be. Don't you have any hard info to back up your speculations?

On the eligibility issue:

So, you can provide NO substantiation for the assertion that Obama's Constitutional legality was actually verified. Neither can anyone else.

That is why Obama continues to hire lawyers to block legal verification of the documentation that could prove his eligibility one way or the other.

Think about that. If the matter were resolved, Obama could simply present that fact to a Judge and be done with it.

Instead, he hires lawyers to fight off anyone actually trying to verify that he is in compliance with that Job Requirement.


Thanks for the laughs, this is my last post in this thread, you may have the last word.And that's what we call the "run away" reaction.

You cannot provide facts to demonstrate your assertions are true or even reasonable. So, you run away.

I really do hate winning this particular argument. I was hoping somebody could show me that the verification WAS actually done and show the details.

American military officers are involved in demands for verification that Obama meets the eligibility requirement. But no government agency can provide it to them.

A horrifying situation indeed.

[Skook]

By definition, the Commander in Chief of the US military has the highest security rating of all, and, as has been pointed out, there's nothing in his life that hasn't been minutely examined by our intelligence agencies.

But, don't let that stop you from your ravings, it must really be scary to think a muslim terrorist from Kenya handily beat the dead GOP.



It was more an effort to determine whether you are actually reading the links I'm posting. Sure, the guy gives good reason that Obama should not get security clearance. Did he receive such clearance? Do you have the facts? Again, you go on about how you think things "should" be. Don't you have any hard info to back up your speculations?

On the eligibility issue:

So, you can provide NO substantiation for the assertion that Obama's Constitutional legality was actually verified. Neither can anyone else.

That is why Obama continues to hire lawyers to block legal verification of the documentation that could prove his eligibility one way or the other.

Think about that. If the matter were resolved, Obama could simply present that fact to a Judge and be done with it.

Instead, he hires lawyers to fight off anyone actually trying to verify that he is in compliance with that Job Requirement.

And that's what we call the "run away" reaction.

You cannot provide facts to demonstrate your assertions are true or even reasonable. So, you run away.

I really do hate winning this particular argument. I was hoping somebody could show me that the verification WAS actually done and show the details.

American military officers are involved in demands for verification that Obama meets the eligibility requirement. But no government agency can provide it to them.

A horrifying situation indeed.

["Mad" Miles]

Speak2Truth wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/orangebuttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccoreader/46088-free-market-capitalism-replaced-post91469.html#post91469)
So, you can provide NO substantiation for the assertion that Obama's Constitutional legality was actually verified. Neither can anyone else.

That is why Obama continues to hire lawyers to block legal verification of the documentation that could prove his eligibility one way or the other.

Think about that. If the matter were resolved, Obama could simply present that fact to a Judge and be done with it.

Instead, he hires lawyers to fight off anyone actually trying to verify that he is in compliance with that Job Requirement. [quote]


Speak 2 Truth what is your documentation to prove your claim that President Obama has legally blocked efforts to prove his qualifications are false?

What court? What case? What docket? Not that any of that proves anything. Anyone with time and money can file a claim. How it's disposed by the court is more telling.

If I've missed your evidence in the barrage of paranoid right wing libertarian quasi-racist wingnut fascism you've been spouting, please, correct me.

Evidence? So far I've seen none for your claims. Saying something is true is not the same as proving it.

"Speak To Truth." What exactly does that handle mean?

I mean, I understand speaking "the truth" (although it's complicated), speaking about "the truth." But how does one talk to Truth? Is Truth a person? An entity? A monolith? A polylith? Where ya comin' from? (As if you've not made that abundantly clear.)

And what do your claims have to do with Free Market Capitalism being replaced by ....?

As if free market capitalism has ever existed. Anywhere. Anytime. Ever heard of Royal Charters? Robber Barons? Corporate Personhood? Just google or bing, it's all out there on the internets.

And please, call me a dupe. Make the cliche'd stereotype alive once more. Nothing like a classic to bring back memories....

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --><!-- using waccobburl -->

[phooph]

Trying to catch up on all this. . .

Some thoughts:

This thread has strayed far from the original topic.

It doesn't matter where Obama was born and who his relatives and friends are. He is now president and has all the security clearance that goes with that office. The same was applied to Bush. On Sept. 10 of 2001 a bipartisan committee that had continued to count the votes in Florida after the official recount was stopped, announced to the press that it had determined that Al Gore had actually won Florida, making Gore the legally elected President, (the events of 9/11 wiped this off the radar) but Bush had been installed by an act of the Republican stacked Supreme Court that stopped the government recount under grounds it would " irreparably harm George W. Bush." Yes, that was the term they used, implying that to continue to count the votes would be a threat to Bush becoming President. This ruling has been declared a violation of the Constitution by Constitutional lawyers. So much for the Supreme Court honoring the Constitution with a Republican majority. BTW, the Constitution is written in legalese, not "plain English" as Speak2Truth states.

Interpreting the Constitution Contextually (https://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth--730-Interpreting_Constitution_Contextually.aspx)

If Americans were familiar with Bush family history they would seriously question W's qualifications for the office and a security clearance. His grandfather was convicted of trading with the enemy during WWII and was instrumental in bringing German spies into the country. His family has a history of being involved in the illegal drug trade, and W and one of his brothers were busted for drug smuggling in Florida but escaped both prosecution and publicity due to family clout, just as Grandpa escaped publicity and jail time due to family clout (had some assets seized, a slap on the wrist). I used to live in Maine where the Bush boys were known among the local fishermen for their middle of the night rendezvous with off shore, foreign freighters using the fast cigarette boats that Daddy gave them. This was long before the Bushes were in the national spotlight. A friend of mine who grew up next door to Grandpa Bush and is friends with one of W's uncles calls them the The East Coast Mafia. I have been told by a former Republican that the family has a history of pedophelia.

Then there is W's Grandmother's alleged affair with occult cult figure, Aleister Crowley (https://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2006/04/george-w-bush-barbara-bush-and.html) that supposedly produced W's mom.

And the suspicion that the Bush family was complicit in the assassination attempt (https://www.hereinreality.com/hinckley.html)on Reagan. But then again it may all be in the family (https://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=119466).

Conservative author and historian, Webster Tarpley, who is warning people about Obama
YouTube - The Men Behind Barack Obama 1 / 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7DHJEvWwx0)

also wrote extensively on the Bush family:
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (https://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm)

Speak2Truth is going through something I have observed in others, that becoming disillusioned with one party they assume the other is the answer. Those who are open minded and intelligent will eventually see that the other party is just as duplicitous and corrupt as the previous. Some, however, must be members of an official group to feel secure and will blind themselves to the flaws of their newly chosen "religion" to maintain group affinity.

I have two sisters. They both must be members of an officially recognized group to feel at home. One has tried every Protestant religion in her city looking for the one true faith. The other left the liberal religion we were raised in and after a brief fling with Mormonism became a Southern Baptist, where she remains despite the flaws and contradictions of this particular brand of faith. As for myself, I have learned that to be a member in good standing with any group I generally have to abandon objectivity and freedom of thought. Every group has it's "true beliefs" and when those clash with reality the choice for me is between objectivity and dogma. I prefer objectivity.

I have seen people leave the Republican party disgusted at the corruption, venality, and total disregard for honesty and rule of law only to discover that the Democrats were no different. The largest, and fastest growing political affiliation in America is None of The Above, and for good reason. Gerald Celente, the highly regarded trends analyst, says we are on the verge of the creation of a truly serious third party. How long before it succumbs to the same diseases?

As for the gun scare, this happens every time a Democrat gets elected. The gun business makes a killing as people load up on guns and ammo in preparation for the "new legislation" to take guns away from Americans. Fortunately ammo goes stale after a while and needs to be replaced. I wonder who starts these rumors?

Regarding the assault weapons ban, this is a pet bit of legislation backed by the police forces across the country. Wonder who Obama would be pandering to if he signed that bill?

[Speak2Truth]

Just bear in mind, we are trying to make a rational examination of current events and their meaning. Y'all please try not to let "horror" overwhelm you as we honestly discuss and analyze these things.


Speak 2 Truth what is your documentation to prove your claim that President Obama has legally blocked efforts to prove his qualifications are false?

The court cases have gotten a lot of press coverage:

Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits?
FEC shows more than $1 million paid to top law firm since election
Is Obama campaign cash quashing eligibility suits? (https://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95772)

Citizen grand jury indicts Obama - Citizen Sovereignty as a last resort when public servants fail in their duty
Groups in 20 more states reviewing eligibility claims
Citizen grand jury indicts Obama (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93481)

McCain "vetted" by Congress, but Not Obama per latest Law suit
McCain "vetted" by Congress, but Not Obama per latest Law suit - iReport.com (https://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-211459)

'Twittered' eligibility case lawyer faces threat of sanctions
Previous Judge introduced his own hearsay and opinion as 'evidence' - would not allow actual evidence to be reviewed
'Twittered' eligibility case lawyer faces threat of sanctions (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94409)

Federal criminal complaint contends Obama ineligible
Ex-officer alleges prez used 'contrivance, concealment, dissembling and deceit'
Federal <I>criminal</i> complaint contends Obama ineligible (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92835)

Obama Eligibility battle rages on 3 fronts
Court, Congress and college challenged on constitutionality
Keyes lawyers subpeona Obama Occidental College records (https://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1855&posts=1)

Supreme Court refuses 2nd challenge to eligibility
Case alleges dual citizenship disqualifies Obama for office
Supreme Court refuses 2nd challenge to eligibility (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=83693)

Judge dismisses Obama birth certificate lawsuit
Rules voters don't have standing to 'police' constitutional requirements for president
Judge dismisses Obama birth certificate lawsuit (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=79086)

There are many more. What I found interesting about that last one is the Judge's assertion that the Citizens don't have standing as plaintiffs in a Constitutional matter. How is that possible?

The information I've seen indicates that Obama continues to fight against anyone attempting to examine his actual birth records as well as other relevant documents that would show whether he identified himself as a foreign citizen to obtain college financial aid. These are, of course, private records and only on a Judge's order or Obama's permission can they be examined as evidence.

Obama continues to block verification of whether he meets that Job Requirement.


And what do your claims have to do with Free Market Capitalism being replaced by ....?

They're not my claims. I'm simply discussing what is raging in court challenges across the nation.

So, this particular matter adds to the conversation by pointing out, as indicated by Obama's own efforts to conceal the truth, that our Free Market Capitalist nation has been replaced by:

A Coup.

Specifically, a Marxist Coup.

Also, Tyranny, as this Administration shows no regard for the rule of law (Constitution).

And, if he can put one more activist Judge in the Supreme Court, he will destroy the balance of powers in our government and institute a Dictatorship.

To understand this, watch this video about political systems:

The American Form of Government (https://www.flixxy.com/political-systems.htm)


As if free market capitalism has ever existed. Anywhere.

When one guy takes a horse to market and exchanges it for goods he wants - that is free market capitalism.

When that guy hires hands to raise herds of horses, building a business that increases his wealth and that of the people he hires while providing goods that others want or need, that is free market capitalism.

When the Left steps in to say, "You must give me 30% of your horses or we'll send men with guns to force you to. We will give those horses to people who helped us get into power and to people who don't have horses and you won't be compensated for them. Furthermore, we will tell you how much land you are allowed to use for raising horses, what land must be set aside as habitat for some critter nobody noticed before, what kind of horses you may raise, we will tax you for the carbon your horses exhale and for the methane emitted by their anuses, we will tax you for the water you pump from the ground for your horses and for the grain you grow to feed them and the supplies you purchase to groom them, we will tax you for the value of your assets including the horses and fences and structures that house the horses and the money you make from selling the horses and if you make too much we'll take even more from you..."

Well, you get the picture.

Democrats, the Left, will do whatever it takes to suck the prosperity right out of our society. That was one of the causes for Revolution spelled out in our Declaration of Independence. "He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance."

Perhaps those TEA Parties are more significant than the mainstream news wants to admit. King George did not want to believe the seriousness of warnings he received in the List of Grievances of 1775 and he disregarded the assertion that his policies were more than The People could bear. Is Obama, in his arrogance or willful adherence to the Marxist Agenda, racing down that same path to conflict?

That is what I dread.

As we know, the Marxist agenda includes wrecking the US system and knocking the US out of superpower status to empower China and other Marxist-run nations. Perhaps the Obama team do not even mind if they push Americans over the brink to rebellion. That would achieve the ultimate goal as well.

[Speak2Truth]

It doesn't matter where Obama was born and who his relatives and friends are. He is now president and has all the security clearance that goes with that office.

I strongly disagree. Here's why.

That clause is in the Constitution as a partial safeguard against The People accidentally electing a guy who has foreign loyalties or believes in foreign ideologies. Only someone born and raised as an American should be entrusted with executive power and command of our military.

Obama is the perfect test case. His formative years were spent as an Indonesian Muslim. His friends in Pakistan, Indonesia, Kenya (Raila Odinga) and so many other places are surely foreign allegiances. His great love for Hugo Chavez and other foreign Marxists and Islamists leads one to wonder, why was he so comfortable in this church for 20 years?

The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology
The Marxist Roots of Black Liberation Theology - The Acton Institute (https://www.acton.org/commentary/443_marxist_roots_of_black_liberation_theology.php)

Obama’s Afro-Centric Church: A Non-Negotiable Commitment to Africa
Faultline USA: Obama’s Afro-Centric Church: A Non-Negotiable Commitment to Africa (https://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2008/02/obamas-afro-centric-church-non.html)

Obama church published Hamas terror manifesto
Compares charter calling for murder of Jews to Declaration of Independence
Obama church published Hamas terror manifesto (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59456)

Isn't Obama the perfect example of what the Constitution was meant to protect us against? And, if the Constitution cannot be enforced to uphold that protection, doesn't that prove our system of government is no longer legitimate? That the Republic is already finished?

As for the Bush election - the Florid Supreme Court called a halt after four recounts showed Bush had won. The grounds were that Gore was applying different rules in different counties to try to come up with a win and election law requires the rules be applied equally among ALL the counties. You might find this informative:

Judicial Watch Florida Recount with Results and Analysis - Bush would have won election with proper statewide recount
JW Florida Recount with Results and Analysis (https://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2001/printer_881.shtml)

Florida recount study: Bush still wins
https://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/ (https://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html)


As for the issue of "interpreting" the Constitution. I repeat - one must first read the plain language in order to grasp the intent. For example, the First Amendment protects, against Government interference, religious establishments, freedom of religious expression, freedom of speech, freedom to peaceably assemble and so on. What the Communist-founded ACLU has done is manufacture an "interpretation" that is at odds with the plain language of the Constitution and that in fact comes from a foreign Constitution:

Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
"In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church."
https://www.constitution.org/cons/ussr77.txt

How is this possible? Clever use of a weakness in our justice system - judicial precedent. All they need is one activist Judge to make a bad ruling and have it stick to begin the process of undermining the actual words and intent of our law.

So, to protect Americans from this scheme, it is crucial that our "interpretation" of the Constitution ALWAYS begin with the actual words of the Constitution.


If Americans were familiar with Bush family history they would seriously question W's qualifications for the office and a security clearance. His father was convicted of trading with the enemy during WWII and was instrumental in bringing German spies into the country.Huh? I've never heard of any such convictions. Please provide links. I'd like to read up on this.

More importantly - what foreign allegiances, whether to nations or ideologies, are demonstrated by GW Bush that would show he cannot be trusted with the highest office?

You write about GW's grandfather trading with the NAZis. Let's not forget - they were like Saddam Hussein who was an international good guy for standing up to Islamist Iran. Hitler was the guy working to restore Germany, rebuild its economy. He was well spoken of in the US press, well loved by many Americans. In America, there were even NAZI parades carrying the swastika flag alongside the American flag. Even after Hitler's war in Europe began, the US tried to remain neutral because Hitler was highly regarded by so many in America. Even Charled Lindbergh worked for Hitler and supported him. It took time, and the sinking of some American ships, to change Hitler's status.


Speak2Truth is going through something I have observed in others, that becoming disillusioned with one party they assume the other is the answer.You are dead wrong.

I've attended enough Democrat meetings, been handed the Communist literature that spells out the agenda of wrecking the American system, heard them speak of wrecking the US military, shot video of Cindy Sheehan proclaiming Hugo Chavez should be our next President...

NEVER have I heard Republicans speak of being our nation's enemies! As I attend their meetings, I find them devoted to restoring the Republic our nation's Founders created.

Granted, I'm not sitting down to dinner with the Governator at a Kennedy family gathering...

But I find that Democrats have a great love for our nation's enemies and will protect and assimilate them, whether Islamist or Marxist. The Che Guevara banner on Obama's campaign office wall was more than enough warning to anyone paying attention.

So, I speak of what I have SEEN of the Democrats and Republicans.

Frankly, if anyone had told me what the Democrat party really was, I'd have laughed my ass off at them. I had to see it for myself and get over the shock to actually believe it.


I have seen people leave the Republican party disgusted at the corruption, venality, and total disregard for honestyI'll support that. I too have seen some bad players in the Republican Party. But bear in mind - the Party does NOT cling to our nation's enemies. That is the key difference. Republicans have a habit of fighting against the corrupt within their own party and Sarah Palin got quite a good reputation for doing that.


As for the gun scare, this happens every time a Democrat gets elected. The gun business makes a killing as people load up on guns and ammo in preparation for the "new legislation" to take guns away from Americans. Fortunately ammo goes stale after a while and needs to be replaced.Ammo is good for fifty or more years if stored in a cool dry place. I gather you're not well versed in the "gun culture".

Who starts the rumors?

For starters, if you subscribe to any magazines like "The Firing Line" you'll see a list of new legislations that come up to progressively ban guns, gun sales, require new registrations, fees, taxes and so on. These new bills don't get CNN coverage. All Democrat-sponsored. Democrats believe gun ownership is a "privilege", not a Right and certainly ignore the Constitution saying that Right "shall not be infringed".

Obama supports DC handgun ban
YouTube - Obama Supports DC Handgun Ban (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wu9jE1MnAE)

Are you licensed to reload that ammo?
Alarm raised over treaty provision to ban activity. Foreign treaty to crack down on American Rights.
Are you licensed to reload that ammo? (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95733)

California bill would criminalize ownership of "standard capacity" magazines.
Progressive disarmament.
SB 776 Senate Bill - AMENDED (https://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_776_bill_20090415_amended_sen_v98.html)

DC Rejects Handgun Application - classes all bottom-loading guns, including semi-auto handguns, as machine guns
DC Rejects Handgun Application | WUSA9.com | Washington, DC | (https://www.wusa9.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=74036)

FactCheck.Org Misses the Target - Obama DID support ban on nearly all hunting ammunition
Confederate Yankee: FactCheck.Org Misses the Target (https://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/274040.php)


Regarding the assault weapons ban, this is a pet bit of legislation backed by the police forces across the country.1) It is a violation of the Constitution that Obama swore to uphold and defend against all enemies foreign or domestic. Must he commit seppuku after signing such a bill? Or do you think it's okay for him to disregard the law that he is required to obey?

2) Police officers strongly support an armed populace and are sometimes aided by armed Citizens when they get in trouble. Unfortunately, their spokespersons are bureaucrats beholden to political masters and will too often say what their political masters want them to say.

Before moving to this area, I trained with cops and I taught them how to shoot. I speak from first-hand experience.

3) Ted Nugent understands the 2nd Amendment perfectly. Learn from him.

Ted Nugent on Gun Control
Ted Nugent (https://biggeekdaddy.com/miscvideos/TedNugent.html)

Finally, how does all this relate to the replacement of our Free Market Capitalism? In a Free Market, one that respects the Constitution, we can buy "Arms", which are combat firearms, and we can use them for whatever just purpose we wish. Shooting paper targets, shooting back at armed rioters trying to kill us, shooting intruders in our home trying to do us harm, shooting deer, whatever.

This Free Market Capitalism is being replaced by the Marxist agenda of ensuring Guns serve the State so that it has absolute power over the Subjects. That is the opposite of "The Right of The People to keep and bear Arms".

Are you an American? Did YOU ever sign that oath to uphold and defend the Constitution? Does that define where you stand or were you lying if and when you signed that oath?

["Mad" Miles]

Hey Speak2Truth and his interlocutors,

Ya want something real to be afraid of?

Check this out: https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/ (https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/)

Admittedly most of the article contains facts well-known to any self-respecting conspiracy theorist, or any other observer of the alternative media. But there are some new twists of the story here. Who else saw the recent "60 Minutes" on the Predator Drone and its gleeful operators?

It's from an openly "Marxist" website.

By the way, when you rightie-right ideologues use the term marxist, you consistently display your naivete, or is it "will to ignorance"?

Which kind?

Who?

It's not Walmart ya know?

"Da Trut? Dat Trut"? Ya cain hanelle da Trut, Mon! Yeah hav noah ideah wut dat ees..."

Moving on,

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:


P.S. Don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't answer ANY of my questions about your internet handle. Other than regurgitating websites that somebody with the time to peruse them can and will easily identify as propaganda from your little camp on the fringes, of the fringes, of conservative right-wing paranoid wingnutville.

P.P.S. Believe it or not, we probably agree on, more than I want to go into specific detail about, the issue of gun control. I'm torn on the issue. Overall I propose that everyone has to train and get licensed in order to have the right to own a firearm.

Everyone would have to learn, and demonstrate, basic safety procedures; how not to shoot off one's own toe while loading or cleaning. Only point the barrel in the direction of someone you're intending to kill. etc. Only then would an adult have legal permit to own.

But No registration of what anyone is actually packing. The man doesn't get to know what you've got.

On the other hand, guns kill. Usually a neighbor or family member. Kids have to be kept away from them so they don't innocently blow themselves or a playmate away while "pretending" with daddy (or mommy)'s piece. Just check the easily available stats.

And if you think that by packing a big death machine that that will keep the forces of order from taking you out whenever they deem it expedient? Well, you're not just naive, you're clearly just not paying attention!!! Note article link above.

As for attending Demo Party meetings and having seen the "marxist" plan in action?

Talk about self-marginalization.... I'm no fan of the Demo's. I've written extensively about exactly why, on this board.

But again, ya doan know sheeaat 'bout no Karl and his interlocutors. Hie ye to the library. Ya got some work to do!

(For a more extensive, and exponentially more dismissive and devastating, response to another of your ilk who recently trolled this board, just check my archive of posts.

Ignorance is in no way, even remotely definable as, bliss. It's also not a very effective defense, legally or intellectually.)

[phooph]

Here's a right wing Christian website on a similar issue:
spychips.com - how RFID will compromise privacy, security, freedom (https://www.spychips.com/)


Hey Speak2Truth and his interlocutors,

Ya want something real to be afraid of?

Check this out: https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/ (https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/)

Admittedly most of the article contains facts well-known to any self-respecting conspiracy theorist, or any other observer of the alternative media. But there are some new twists of the story here. Who else saw the recent "60 Minutes" on the Predator Drone and its gleeful operators?

It's from an openly "Marxist" website.

By the way, when you rightie-right ideologues use the term marxist, you consistently display your naivete, or is it "will to ignorance"?

Which kind?

Who?

It's not Walmart ya know?

"Da Trut? Dat Trut"? Ya cain hanelle da Trut, Mon! Yeah hav noah ideah wut dat ees..."

Moving on,

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:


P.S. Don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't answer ANY of my questions about your internet handle. Other than regurgitating websites that somebody with the time to peruse them can and will easily identify as propaganda from your little camp on the fringes, of the fringes, of conservative right-wing paranoid wingnutville.

P.P.S. Believe it or not, we probably agree on, more than I want to go into specific detail about, the issue of gun control. I'm torn on the issue. Overall I propose that everyone has to train and get licensed in order to have the right to own a firearm.

Everyone would have to learn, and demonstrate, basic safety procedures; how not to shoot off one's own toe while loading or cleaning. Only point the barrel in the direction of someone you're intending to kill. etc. Only then would an adult have legal permit to own.

But No registration of what anyone is actually packing. The man doesn't get to know what you've got.

On the other hand, guns kill. Usually a neighbor or family member. Kids have to be kept away from them so they don't innocently blow themselves or a playmate away while "pretending" with daddy (or mommy)'s piece. Just check the easily available stats.

And if you think that by packing a big death machine that that will keep the forces of order from taking you out whenever they deem it expedient? Well, you're not just naive, you're clearly just not paying attention!!! Note article link above.

As for attending Demo Party meetings and having seen the "marxist" plan in action?

Talk about self-marginalization.... I'm no fan of the Demo's. I've written extensively about exactly why, on this board.

But again, ya doan know sheeaat 'bout no Karl and his interlocutors. Hie ye to the library. Ya got some work to do!

(For a more extensive, and exponentially more dismissive and devastating, response to another of your ilk who recently trolled this board, just check my archive of posts.

Ignorance is in no way, even remotely definable as, bliss. It's also not a very effective defense, legally or intellectually.)

[Speak2Truth]

Check this out: https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/ (https://dissidentvoice.org/2009/06/cia-and-pentagon-deploy-rfid-death-chips-coming-soon-to-a-product-near-you/)

RFID has a maximum range of about 40 feet and is therefore not very good for targeting of predator drones. However, it may be a convenient way to track general movements as when you carry an RFID-driver's license and walk past readers in various locations. Anyhow, I find nothing frightening in the article (except the standard practices of Socialists such as are taking over our government now). Did you have something specific in mind?

The military purchases millions of RFID tags specifically for logistics purposes - tracking movement of pallets of goods. Shipping and receiving. That sort of thing.

Frankly, I find THIS far more alarming: YouTube - Tapping your cell phone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCyKcoDaofg)

Get a metal business card holder and keep your RFID-enabled driver's license in there. As far as I know, it will block the signal.


By the way, when you rightie-right ideologues use the term marxist, you consistently display your naivete, or is it "will to ignorance"? Explain why you say that? I'm fairly familiar with the Marxist agenda, beginning that lazy good-for-nothing Karl who was too damned lazy to work a day to feed his starving wife and daughters. He was the ultimate moocher, always begging money off other people, who spent a lot of time cooking up a scheme to get his hands on other people's stuff.


P.S. Don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't answer ANY of my questions about your internet handle.I consider the question completely irrelevant to our conversation. The current subject is what has replaced our free market capitalist system.


Overall I propose that everyone has to train and get licensed in order to have the right to own a firearm. Then it would not be a "right" that shall not be infringed. It would become a mere privilege and those hostile to the Right would be in charge of the difficulty of the tests, the costs, the categories of people who could not even take them, the number of months or years one must wait before retaking it if one fails a written part, the trickiness of the questions in the written part...

Remember the "Poll Tax"? Control over the cost of casting a vote was in the hands of those Southern Democrats who did not want blacks to vote. All they had to do was price it so the poor blacks could not afford to exercise their Right. Unfortunately, the Democrat strategy includes heaping artificial costs on gun ownership to price it out of range of as many people as possible.

https://www.nraila.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=244

Taxes: Another proposal to make gun ownership too expensive for most Americans, has been to drastically increase the federal excise tax on ammunition, from the current 11 percent to as much as 1,000 percent. In 1974, Kennedy said “if [banning handguns] is not feasible we may be obliged to place strict bans on the production and distribution of ammunition. No bullets, no shooting.” Since then, Kennedy and others in Congress have introduced bills to ban or impose prohibitive taxes on .25, .32, 9mm, 5.7x28mm, and .50 caliber ammunition; cartridge cases under 1.3 inches in length; hollow-point bullets; ammunition that “serves no substantial sporting purpose and serves primarily to kill human beings”; and (via the Consumer Products Safety Commission) “defective” ammunition. Sen. Obama supports prohibitive ammunition taxes.

Don't put control of "permission" to exercise a fundamental Right in the hands of those who wish to exterminate it. The Founding Fathers knew better - "shall not be infringed".

However, let's try for some common ground since we seem to be in agreement on the nature of the test. I've heard many folks complain that guns should be treated like cars. Okay, then, perhaps a very basic competency test should be required to carry in public places - and that license must be honored by all States and in all public places upon issuance. Once the very simple test is passed, one can carry, concealed or openly, any type of firearm in public.

Otherwise, even for those who do not pass the "public operation" test, it's perfectly legal to own and operate any gun or car on private property.

I'm just toying with that notion since I'm a firearm instructor.


On the other hand, guns kill. Usually a neighbor or family member.When a 12 year old boy shoots dead a family "friend" who is holding a knife to his grandmother's throat, it is unfortunately included in that misleading assertion.

Many cases of justified self defense are against a "family acquaintance" or even a family member. You must distinguish justifiable homicide from criminal aggression. And, the "neighbor" killings are primarily gang activity, especially drug dealers fighting over turf.

And, what is the common characteristic of every VICTIM of criminal aggression?

They were insufficiently prepared to defend themselves.


Kids have to be kept away from them so they don't innocently blow themselves or a playmate away while "pretending" with daddy (or mommy)'s piece. Just check the easily available stats.Yes, more kids die from drowning in a bucket or the bath tub or the swimming pool. We definitely need to keep kids away from those things. I'm being facetious yet factual.

A sensible approach, tried and proven, seems to be: NRA Eddie Eagle program in elementary school. Then, a firearm safety and marksmanship program in High School. Most high schools in this nation had rifle ranges and classes and the kids brought their own rifles to school on the bus - until the left gained undue influence in the 1960s. There were no school shootings back then.


And if you think that by packing a big death machine that that will keep the forces of order from taking you out whenever they deem it expedient?

Nothing guarantees one's safety from criminal aggressors in this world.

Nothing improves one's safety like a firearm and proper training.

[Speak2Truth]

Okay, Phooph, between your link and the Mad one's, I'm becoming more alarmed at the expansion of RFID tracking. Maybe I can add a bit to the concerns:

I have a close acquaintance who was a programmer for RFID tracking systems. His company got the contract to install RFID tracking of materials for the military. Shortly thereafter, his company was sold to China.

China then ran the company that set up RFID tracking of our military assets.

Hm...

[phooph]

I have a close acquaintance who was a programmer for RFID tracking systems. His company got the contract to install RFID tracking of materials for the military. Shortly thereafter, his company was sold to China.

China then ran the company that set up RFID tracking of our military assets.

Hm...

Hmmm. Why do I find this hilarious?:lol2:

RFID chips are a double edged sword. They can streamline the tracking of all sorts of products improving efficiency and cutting costs, but what they can do for products they can do for people, too. In some cases that would be helpful, but in others it could be very oppressive. The first country to apply automated tracking was Nazi Germany. It helped them with efficiency in production and distribution of all sorts of things and with the round up and processing of "undesirables."

Embedding an ID tag in every person would allow them to shop without having to carry a credit or debit card. There is a proposal to create a smart shopping cart that would read the ID tags on products added to the cart and debit the shopper's account as they exited the store. No standing in line to check out and great automatic inventory for the store. I'm sure a computer could place orders to replenish low stock without people involved. We could do away with a lot of jobs that way and reduce costs. No?

Anyone who became a problem to society could be tracked and controlled with a tag like this. Authorities could shut off access to all purchasing leaving the bank account frozen. The possibilities are endless.:wink:

But back to China handling the tracking of our military assets - technology transfers to China have been ongoing. A member of my family is a former Sec. of Defense (Democrat) who after he left the Pentagon was involved in the sale of restricted technology to China. When some members of congress attempted to investigate they found themselves tangling with Condi Rice, who got him off the hook.

[Sara S]

I suggest you read Mark Morford's column from today's sfgate.com: A Troubling Lack of Pure Evil.

Try to have an open mind.




We have ever-encroaching laws prohibiting various classes of firearms, we have Democrats pushing to register all gun ownership as well as ammunition purchases, it is not even legal in California to purchase guns that are clearly protected by the Constitution.

To learn what's really going on in the realm of firearms, keep track of the links at Keep and Bear Arms - Gun Owners Home Page - 2nd Amendment Supporters (https://www.keepandbeararms.com)

Democrats criminalize more and more every year. The gun is too small. The gun is too big. The gun can be converted to full-auto. The gun "looks evil".

You have, unquestionably, lost your Right to Keep and Bear Arms (combat firearms) that the Constitution says "shall not be infringed". And, the Obama Administration has been discussing reinstatement of the anti-Constitutional "assault weapon" ban at the Federal level but may instead use a different approach to accomplish the goal. Perhaps a treaty with Mexico, considering their deceptions regarding Mexican gun trafficking.

If all they get in the short term is a list of who has what guns, that's good enough for a start. As Ray Nagin demonstrated after Hurricane Katrina, they're happy to use those lists to go around and disarm the law abiding Citizens who want nothing more than to defend their own lives against predatory gangs.



I have to ask - what are you talking about? Be specific.



Not good enough. If you actually uphold the Constitution, you must oppose any government "infringement" on my Right to Keep and Bear Arms (combat weaponry).

Get the Democrats out - all they can do is come up with one infringement after another on my actual Rights.

I would like to learn what you mean by suggesting Bush pushed us towards a police state.

[Speak2Truth]

RFID chips are a double edged sword. They can streamline the tracking of all sorts of products improving efficiency and cutting costs, but what they can do for products they can do for people, too.

So, the trick is for us to ensure it is used to streamline commerce while fighting tooth and nail to block malicious use.

What is your opinion of the RealID act? The idea is to ensure every Citizen who is qualified to work in the US has an ID card. That makes it easy for employers to obey the law and avoid hiring criminal invaders. Democrats have fought against this but may now get around it by granting amnesty to their new voting bloc that is tens of millions strong.

For my part, I favor the Real ID for employment as well as voting. Some folks protesting it will fake a German accent saying, "papers, please!". However, we already carry a driver's license, credit cards... but Real ID would be key to restoring some integrity to our voting system and to ensuring our Constitution is obeyed regarding illegal invaders.

What's your take, phooph?


But back to China handling the tracking of our military assets - technology transfers to China have been ongoing. A member of my family is a former Sec. of Defense (Democrat) who after he left the Pentagon was involved in the sale of restricted technology to China. When some members of congress attempted to investigate they found themselves tangling with Condi Rice, who got him off the hook.

I find that disturbing. I was aware of the Clintons, Kerry's and Al Gore's connections with the Chinese military and financing but Condi Rice?

Yeah, the sell-out to China has been going on for a couple of decades now.

In 1990, I read a portion of what was purported to be a KGB outline for taking down America. It went something like this:

1) "Lose" the Cold War. Then, as Jimmy Carter said, Americans would lose their fear of Communism (meaning they would no longer be wary of Communists)

2) Take control of the systems of control in the US - Political offices, mass media, Hollywood, courts and the school system

3) Progressively turn the US into another Socialist nation

Check out this video, an interview with a KGB agent who defected and explained what they've been doing in the US. This is one key reason I became a Liberal Intellectual Investigative Reporter (most accurate label I could come up with). I find I am surrounded by people who willfully block knowledge from their own minds in order to defend preconceptions that were fed to them. Folks from all over the political spectrum do it.

The key to the KGB strategy is that they would create a new worldview within the US to get Americans to progressively ENSLAVE THEMSELVES. They are well practiced at this game, having honed it over the last century. As I see it, the election of the Obama Administration may just be the final straw in that process.

Yuri Bezmenov - KGB explains psychological warfare inside US, demoralization
Dailymotion - Yuri Bezmenov - a video (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov)

Beginning of Yuri Bezmenov video series.
https://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jVZ4Lkm6JQw

[Speak2Truth]

I suggest you read Mark Morford's column from today's sfgate.com: A Troubling Lack of Pure Evil.

It was funny, all right.

But let's take a step up on the ladder and look down at the fellow, analyzing his presentation from a bird's eye view. What is he really saying?

That the purveyors of Mass Manipulation have simply changed their tune. That, with a Democrat in office, they have stopped their crazy-making, stopped the endless stream of negativity they formerly pounded into the public consciousness every day.

Reporting on the Iraq War? Now, it has to be positive when Obama's name is connected to it, though such reporting will not reflect on Bush's success there.

Movies coming to the theater or TV? Now, they will portray America in a positive light instead of as a global bully.

The mass media are masters of manipulating the "feelings" of the public. When a Republican is in office, they generate as much negativity as possible. When a Democrat is in, they generate as much positive feeling as possible. It's a Pavlovian technique to sway voters.

I noticed that change immediately when Clinton was first elected, then when Bush was elected, then when Obama was elected. The whole tone of the mass media (and 90% of journalists are Democrats, making this possible), changed drastically. They tell YOU when to be upset or when it's okay to breathe a sigh of relief or whom to hate or whom to ridicule. They play on a well-known human psychological principle - that we look to others for appropriate emotion cues.

So, his post reflects the change in his "FEELINGS", a response to the new signals being sent by his herders. As one Socialist agitator explained to me, about 60% of the population are "cattle" and can be easily herded around with simple word-emotion cues.

The KGB agent to whom I linked above explains what they've been doing to Americans, to the "cattle" or, as Lenin labeled them, "useful idiots".

This is a key reason I, as a Liberal Intellectual seeking Truth, do so much fact-digging. I don't want to be led around by emotion manipulators. I don't want to be one of their "cattle".

[phooph]

So, the trick is for us to ensure it is used to streamline commerce while fighting tooth and nail to block malicious use.

Good luck on that. Every tool can be turned into a weapon.


What is your opinion of the RealID act? The idea is to ensure every Citizen who is qualified to work in the US has an ID card. That makes it easy for employers to obey the law and avoid hiring criminal invaders. Democrats have fought against this but may now get around it by granting amnesty to their new voting bloc that is tens of millions strong.

It also insures that a detailed file can be accessed with the swipe of a card at an airport, voting place, etc. Anti-war activists are already being detained at international airports. Who else will be added to the list of dangerous dissenters, Constitutionalists? They were listed as suspect under Bush's reign. Conservatives have also fought long and hard against the RealID act.


For my part, I favor the Real ID for employment as well as voting. Some folks protesting it will fake a German accent saying, "papers, please!". However, we already carry a driver's license, credit cards... but Real ID would be key to restoring some integrity to our voting system and to ensuring our Constitution is obeyed regarding illegal invaders.

What's your take, phooph?

"You know, comrades, that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this —- who will count the votes, and how." – Joseph Stalin




I find that disturbing. I was aware of the Clintons, Kerry's and Al Gore's connections with the Chinese military and financing but Condi Rice?

It's about the money, stupid. Both parties collude when it comes to getting rich. The Clintons and the Bushes have been working together since the Iran Contra operations were based out of Mena, Arkansas which became the central distribution point for the cocaine epidemic that began during the Reagan era. (When W was campaigning for Texas gov. he was using Barry Seal's drug smuggling plane (https://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ciadrugs/W_plane.html) that had moved guns to the Contras and cocaine to the streets of the America.)

BILL CLINTON and CIA DRUGS for GUNS, and IRAN/CONTRA, NCOIC (https://www.ncoic.com/clinton.htm)
The Mena Arkansas Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Drug Connection (https://www.dldewey.com/columns/menaf.htm)


Yeah, the sell-out to China has been going on for a couple of decades now.

In 1990, I read a portion of what was purported to be a KGB outline for taking down America. It went something like this:

1) "Lose" the Cold War. Then, as Jimmy Carter said, Americans would lose their fear of Communism (meaning they would no longer be wary of Communists)

2) Take control of the systems of control in the US - Political offices, mass media, Hollywood, courts and the school system

3) Progressively turn the US into another Socialist nation

Check out this video, an interview with a KGB agent who defected and explained what they've been doing in the US. This is one key reason I became a Liberal Intellectual Investigative Reporter (most accurate label I could come up with). I find I am surrounded by people who willfully block knowledge from their own minds in order to defend preconceptions that were fed to them. Folks from all over the political spectrum do it.

The key to the KGB strategy is that they would create a new worldview within the US to get Americans to progressively ENSLAVE THEMSELVES. They are well practiced at this game, having honed it over the last century. As I see it, the election of the Obama Administration may just be the final straw in that process.

Yuri Bezmenov - KGB explains psychological warfare inside US, demoralization
Dailymotion - Yuri Bezmenov - a video (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x32cxf_yuri-bezmenov)

Beginning of Yuri Bezmenov video series.
https://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jVZ4Lkm6JQw

The second link didn't seem to work.

The problem becomes, that the more you look into these things the more suspicious you can become. Who do you trust to tell you the truth? Is Yuri coming clean or is he also part of the propaganda war? What he says appears credible, and on the other hand it could be part of the same tactics he is describing.

After Stalin took power in Russia he understood that many idealistic Bolsheviks would be disillusioned by his reign of terror so he had his secret police create a dissident organization to pull in those who opposed him. He let it run till he felt the most influential people were ensnared and then had them all arrested and executed. In our own country the FBI and CIA have penetrated dissident movements on the right and left and manipulated them into activities that thwarted their original intent and often publicly discredited them. The purpose was to drive out the clear thinkers and leave only the extremists. In Europe the CIA worked with their counterparts in several European countries to discredit dissident movements by setting off bombs in public places and then calling in to the media posing as members of these organizations and making demands in concert with the sympathies of the groups.

When Saddam took power in Iraq, (with the help of the CIA) he had all potential opponents and his most powerful allies in the parliament taken from the room and shot. He had this filmed. Some footage was shown in a documentary on Iraq on Public Television.

These are all examples of the Machiavellian power politics played out around the world. Our country is no different. People can be manipulated because they tend to become allied with groups and factions.

Communism and now terrorism are red herrings used to manipulate the unsuspecting into falling into the traps of those who have throughout time been the real enemies of freedom, the oligarchs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy) and plutocrats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) who gave us the Soviet Union (https://cabotia.org/wall-st-bolshevik-rev.html) and Nazi Germany (https://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/).

[Speak2Truth]

It also insures that a detailed file can be accessed with the swipe of a card at an airport, voting place, etc. Anti-war activists are already being detained at international airports. Who else will be added to the list of dangerous dissenters, Constitutionalists?

You are pointing out that we already have to provide authentic identification at the airport. I don't see how the RealID act would complicate that.

Our Constitution requires that illegal invaders be removed from our country. Nothing else is allowed. Not jobs, not drivers licenses, stolen social security numbers, housing, bank accounts, enrollment in schools... nothing.

Currently, we don't have a system that verifies a person is a genuine American. Stolen IDs are being freely sold. I support RealID because it upholds a Constitutional mandate - and our nation is currently being bankrupted and endangered by failure to uphold that mandate.


It's about the money, stupid. Both parties collude when it comes to getting rich. The Clintons and the Bushes have been working together since the Iran Contra operations were based out of Mena... the more you look into these things the more suspicious you can become. Who do you trust to tell you the truth?

My own eyes.

I have attended a wide variety of gatherings and meetings and such. The Democrat Party are explicitly enemies of the USA, working to aid Communist takeover and to knock the US out of superpower status so China and Russia can become globally dominant. The ACLU, ACORN, ANSWER and other groups are part of that operation.

What I have seen with my own eyes gives credibility to Yuri Bezmenov. I cannot disbelieve him because I have personally witnessed and even shot video coverage of exactly what he's talking about.

I've never seen enemy activity among Republicans. Greed? Yes. Power-hungry? Yes. But among them I have found the genuine Americans, too, those who wish to defend what America was created to be. And, Republicans are willing to fight our nation's enemies, not coddle them. By enemies, I mean folks who work to knock the US down including Communists and Islamists.

I haven't spent enough time at Libertarian gatherings to provide a summary. They're a bit hard to find.


In our own country the FBI and CIA have penetrated dissident movements on the right and left and manipulated them into activities that thwarted their original intent and often publicly discredited them. The purpose was to drive out the clear thinkers and leave only the extremists.

Sure. That led to the Randy Weaver incident - the BATF trying to turn the guy into a mole and his refusal to participate. Timothy McVeigh was similarly a dupe, though it appears Terry Nichols and Ramzi Yousef corrupted him. It's not only government agencies screwing with these groups.

There's an important safety tip - if you participate with a political group, get the crazies out. Communists will try to turn your group into a hate group to then go bully others. It's possible government spooks will entrap your group by suggesting illegal activities. Who knows? The key is to be UNWILLING to be turned into criminals or bullies. It takes a strong person to be restrained and reasonable.


In Europe the CIA worked with their counterparts in several European countries to discredit dissident movements by setting off bombs in public places and then calling in to the media posing as members of these organizations and making demands in concert with the sympathies of the groups.

William Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis and other Obama Communist buddies were not framed by anybody.

I get the gist of what you're saying, though.


Communism and now terrorism are red herrings used to manipulate the unsuspecting into falling into the traps of those who have throughout time been the real enemies of freedom, the oligarchs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy) and plutocrats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy) who gave us the Soviet Union (https://cabotia.org/wall-st-bolshevik-rev.html) and Nazi Germany (https://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/).

Hooray! A new direction for our discussion!

"Greeners" are being utterly duped by Mikael Gorbachev and don't even realize it.

Democrats are utterly duped by a Communist figurehead, Barack Obama, and don't even realize it.

Republicans may have been duped too... but the key question for me is this:

Are the people seeking power ENEMIES of the United States or will they use their power, even abuse of power, to make the United States stronger on the world stage?

That's the first criteria by which I judge politicians.

I have no doubt where Obama, Gore/Gorbachev and other radical Leftists stand. They are our enemies because they seek ruin of this nation to aid Leftist nations' rise to dominance.

Can you point out how GW Bush was an enemy of our nation trying to destroy it? He had 8 years to prove it if he was.

Also, have you seen "The Obama Deception"?

[Speak2Truth]

Hey, Phooph, check out this video shot right here in Santa Rosa. This lady explains what is going on, especially why they're herding millions of foreign invaders into this country:

Illegal Immigration Socialist/Communist Agenda
YouTube - Illegal Immigration's Socialist/Communist Agenda (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwaQBOU_xI)

[phooph]

You are pointing out that we already have to provide authentic identification at the airport. I don't see how the RealID act would complicate that.

Go back to the SpyChips website and actually read their stuff.


Our Constitution requires that illegal invaders be removed from our country. Nothing else is allowed. Not jobs, not drivers licenses, stolen social security numbers, housing, bank accounts, enrollment in schools... nothing.

Currently, we don't have a system that verifies a person is a genuine American. Stolen IDs are being freely sold. I support RealID because it upholds a Constitutional mandate - and our nation is currently being bankrupted and endangered by failure to uphold that mandate.

RealID, is consider a move toward a totalitarian society, and an unconstitutional program by conservatives and libertarians. What flavor are you?



My own eyes.

I have attended a wide variety of gatherings and meetings and such. The Democrat Party are explicitly enemies of the USA, working to aid Communist takeover and to knock the US out of superpower status so China and Russia can become globally dominant. The ACLU, ACORN, ANSWER and other groups are part of that operation.

The ACLU operates to support the Bill of Rights. I find it amusing that so called Constitutionalists hate it so much. The reason is obvious. They believe the Bill of Rights is reserved only for those they agree with, until they need it themselves, and then they aren't shy about calling for help. (https://www.techimo.com/forum/imo-community/134413-aclu-defends-conservative-professor-charged-political-incorrectness.html)

ACORN registers poor people to vote. Very anti-Constitutional, don't you agree?

I can't answer for Answer. Don't pay much attention to them.


What I have seen with my own eyes gives credibility to Yuri Bezmenov. I cannot disbelieve him because I have personally witnessed and even shot video coverage of exactly what he's talking about.

What constitutes communism in your view? What I have seen is creeping corporatism.


I've never seen enemy activity among Republicans. Greed? Yes. Power-hungry? Yes. But among them I have found the genuine Americans, too, those who wish to defend what America was created to be. And, Republicans are willing to fight our nation's enemies, not coddle them. By enemies, I mean folks who work to knock the US down including Communists and Islamists.

What rock have you been living under? Greed and hunger for power are the roots of all evil and criminal activity. How many Republicans convicted of crimes (https://www.republicanoffenders.com/) does it take for you to notice they are just human beings after all?

Are you aware that all the Americans convicted of spying for foreign countries have been political conservatives and therefore likely voted Republican? Robert Hanssen, the most high profile, was an ultra right winger and brother-in-law to the American representative of Opus Dei, the ultra conservative Roman Catholic sect? Why did he spy? He wanted the money.


I haven't spent enough time at Libertarian gatherings to provide a summary. They're a bit hard to find.

Lots of stuff on line. Lewrockwell.com and vdare.com have a lot of articles. You won't like it much if you like Bush. Conservatives and libertarians consider him a traitor.


Sure. That led to the Randy Weaver incident - the BATF trying to turn the guy into a mole and his refusal to participate. Timothy McVeigh was similarly a dupe, though it appears Terry Nichols and Ramzi Yousef corrupted him. It's not only government agencies screwing with these groups.

There's an important safety tip - if you participate with a political group, get the crazies out. Communists will try to turn your group into a hate group to then go bully others. It's possible government spooks will entrap your group by suggesting illegal activities. Who knows? The key is to be UNWILLING to be turned into criminals or bullies. It takes a strong person to be restrained and reasonable.

Yes, keep that in mind.


William Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis and other Obama Communist buddies were not framed by anybody.

Hooray! A new direction for our discussion!

"Greeners" are being utterly duped by Mikael Gorbachev and don't even realize it.

Really? I thought it was Al Gore.


Democrats are utterly duped by a Communist figurehead, Barack Obama, and don't even realize it.

Republicans may have been duped too... but the key question for me is this:

Are the people seeking power ENEMIES of the United States or will they use their power, even abuse of power, to make the United States stronger on the world stage?

That's the first criteria by which I judge politicians.

I have no doubt where Obama, Gore/Gorbachev and other radical Leftists stand. They are our enemies because they seek ruin of this nation to aid Leftist nations' rise to dominance.

Can you point out how GW Bush was an enemy of our nation trying to destroy it? He had 8 years to prove it if he was.

Well, he made a lot of Presidential Decrees and signing statements that bypassed Congress and thus wrote into law increased powers to the presidency that have been handed to Obama on a silver platter.

Some commentary from one of Reagan's appointees:
Bush Has Crossed the Rubicon (https://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11578.htm)

Bush’s War on the Bill of Rights by Anthony Gregory (https://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory10.html)
From the author of Unfit for Command who helped get Bush re-elected and then became alarmed at his anti-Constitutional agenda. The articles are mild compared to what he said on the air:
How Bush betrayed conservatives (https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=38886)
Bush executive order threatens 5th Amendment? (https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=42717)
Bush order called 'stunning' power grab (https://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=42676)

And if you want a treasure trove of articles on how the Bush administration has violated the Constitution and betrayed the cause you can peruse the archives of The American Conservative magazine (https://www.amconmag.com/archive.html).


Also, have you seen "The Obama Deception"?

Yes, ages ago. I may even have posted to Wacco. Can't remember.

What you are yet to understand is that whoever sits in the White House works for the same group of people no matter what their political affiliation. They are only the front men. Some day we may have a front woman. :thumbsup:

[Speak2Truth]

I'll do a partial reply, will do more after reading some of your links:


RealID, is consider a move toward a totalitarian society, and an unconstitutional program by conservatives and libertarians. What flavor are you?

I'm a Liberal Intellectual. I think for myself.

The Constitution mandates that illegal invaders, those who enter our country without permission, must be "repelled". That means, removed by whatever means are necessary. NO other option is allowed.

RealID would give employers the ability to know whether they are violating our Constitution by hiring invaders using stolen IDs. It would also give the Federal Government teeth to enforce the Constitution against employers who, with that tool available, still choose to violate our Constitution by illegally hiring such persons.

I don't see where the Constitution prohibits employers from verifying that employees are legal to work in the US.


The ACLU operates to support the Bill of Rights. I find it amusing that so called Constitutionalists hate it so much. Because they work to destroy the Bill of Rights. Systematically. This is about to become a long discussion.

I'll start with our Constitutional protections in the First Amendment. Freedom of religious expression has always been protected in this nation. An Episcopalean church was even set up in the Capitol building and was the most attended church in D.C. until the 1850s. Thomas Jefferson personally signed approval of this church establishment. But, if the ACLU were correct, this would not have been possible.

So, where does the ACLU get its "separation of church and state" notion? Clearly, not from the letter Jefferson wrote assuring the Danbury Baptists that their freedom of religious expression was absolutely protected against Federal interference. No.

All the ACLU had to do was a bit of trickery in the courtroom to create a precedent to enforce... are you ready for this? The COMMUNIST Constitution!

Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
"In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church."
https://www.constitution.org/cons/ussr77.txt

Is it even possible that the "separation of church and state" that is NOT in our Constitution was the intent of the Bill of Rights? Clearly, the guys who approved the Bill of Rights, who attended church in the Capitol building and opened Congress and the Supreme court with prayer and created our first national Holiday as a day of prayer to God... well, they would have laughed their asses off at the ACLU's assertions.

Then they would have done whatever was necessary to rid this country of the ACLU and restore our Bill of Rights.

I have to go to a meeting right now but I'll read and respond to the rest of your post soon. Meanwhile, here are a couple of videos you might find informative on the First Amendment vs. the ACLU issue.

Spiritual Heritage Resolution
GovTrack: H. Res. 397: Text of Legislation, Introduced in House (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr111-397)

Video: Our Judeo-Christian Nation
YouTube - Our Judeo-Christian Nation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpQOCvthw-o)

The War on God in America
YouTube - War on God (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7wlX7mwsok&feature=related)

ACLU bullies small-town festival for including Christians
Issue is whether government should 'endorse' religious expression
ACLU bullies small-town festival for including Christians (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80649)

Prayer in public: Can you still say 'Jesus'?
ACLU sues to stop clergy from invoking 'religious messages' at meetings
Prayer in public: Can you still say 'Jesus'? (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73355)

ACLU attack dogs maul student prayer
Group snarls at admin for allowing invocation, Christmas concerts at churches
ACLU attack dogs maul student prayer (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73667)


And here's a bit more on the Communist foundations of the ACLU:

Roger Baldwin - Founder of the American Civil Liberties Union
Enthusiastic proponent of Communism
https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1579

More ACLU communist history and deceptive practices
The ACLU and its long history of trying to destroy America
https://www.geocities.com/graymada/aclu.html (https://www.nodnc.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=268)


The Bill of Rights must apply to all Americans. Just because Atheists are not religious does not give them the right to crush the Rights of others. But, the ACLU, in standard Communist practice, works to crush Christianity in this nation and uses Atheists as "useful idiots", as a basis of popular support to crush the 1st Amendment.

But why all this Leftist hostility towards Christianity? Because Leftists form "coalitions of power" that are hostile towards others, have no regard for the Rights of others, to bully society into submission.

Let the former Commissar of Education of the USSR (where the ACLU's founding principles originate) explain it:

"We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best among them must be considered our worst enemies. They preach love of one's neighbor and mercy, which is contrary to our principles. Christian love is an obstacle to the development of the Revolution. Down with love of our neighbor! What we want is hate... only then can we conquer!" - Anatole Lunarcharsky

[Speak2Truth]

Oh, hell's bells. I meant E-VERIFY, not RealID. Sorry, I totally used the wrong term and did not even notice until now. Duh.

[toddwquigley]

What you are yet to understand is that whoever sits in the White House works for the same group of people no matter what their political affiliation. They are only the front men. Some day we may have a front woman.


Yep, you got it, it's all the same people, and they will try to take us down one way or another. My problem with the current puppet is that it's all for his ego, he wants to economically crash us, so that he can bring in communism to "save us", and thus make his case for unofficial ruler of the World, as the man who brought the great evil America into the fold by defeating us from within.

His ego is amazing, but what's really amazing is that his insecurity is as big as his ego. He looks in the mirror and sees a pile of shit, but since he can't live with that, he convinces himself that he is the same degree positive and a little more, so that he winds up at a positive self image. Simple narcisstic psychosis: "I am perfect, and I am the only one who is intelligent and the only one who counts", (because if one brick falls, the whole wall falls).

What blows my mind is how over half of the Nation completely drank the Kool-Aid, even though there wasn't any evidence that he is what he says he is. Even now he lies to their face, and then does whatever he wants, and people still make excuses for him, because they have so much invested emotionally, that they can't let go of the fantasy. He told them what they wanted to hear, and of course that makes them feel better right now, which is much more important than how it effects the future (Even squirrels save for the future).

Yes, we have a nation of selfish, lazy, greedy, illresponsible, impatient morons who can justify anything against any logic if it makes them feel better about themselves right now.

Yep, the Democratic party is certainly showing who they really are right now, which in reality is everything that they hate.

Remember those words: Selfish, lazy and greedy, they are the mantra of todays Democrats (and a few Republicans). "Please, oh please, tell us what we want to hear so that we don't have to deal with the uncomfortable truth.

I'm a libertarian, and as such, I wish our current politicians would spontaneously combust at once, so we could rebuild our country into what it was approx. 70 years ago, when people were responsible, and took care of themselves, but also helped their family, friends and neighbors.

The Great Depression and WWII refined and defined us. They gave rise to the most productive and happy society in modern history: "The Greatest Generation".

In the last 60 years since then, (especially the last 17) everything that the "Greatest Generation" had built by being responsible, honest, humble, selfless, and hard working, has been squandered by their illogical, dishonest, dishonorable, selfish, lazy, and greedy children and grandchildren.

Their love of making the government responsible for everything so they don't have to be, has given rise to uncontrolled and unnecessary social programs, bigger government and extreme political correctness (ACLU etc.) have destroyed our once great country

By the time everyone realizes that communism doesn't work, we finally hit bottom again, and we rebuild from the foundation up again, another 20 or 25 years will pass.

Major bummer......

[Speak2Truth]

AMEN BRUTHA!!! And I would like very much to see a genuine Libertarian get elected. We'd have at least four years of solid entertainment. I would even subscribe to cable TV just to see that show!

I would like to pose a question for your consideration, however.

You assert that all those politicians are serving the same masters. We might name as Masters the Federal Reserve, the Bilderbergers, the Rothschilds, Michael Gorbachev...

The question is - can we accept that some politicians do not serve those masters but instead truly do have their duty to the nation in their hearts? That they are people who would push our nation back towards Constitutional Obedience and national self interest? How about Sarah Palin? Ron Paul? Tom Tancredo?

I know in my heart that I would serve this nation with conscience as Thomas Jefferson did. Perhaps John Adams. If, that is, I were ever to risk running for public office. I would take a principled stand against the corruption tearing down this nation.

So, I have to believe there are some folks already working in the political arena with the same sense of duty as I have.

[toddwquigley]

I know in my heart that I would serve this nation with conscience as Thomas Jefferson did. Perhaps John Adams. If, that is, I were ever to risk running for public office. I would take a principled stand against the corruption tearing down this nation.

So, I have to believe there are some folks already working in the political arena with the same sense of duty as I have.[/quote]

Yes, there's a few, just like there are always a few good cops that aren't corrupt:

Ron Paul, Dennis Kuchinich and Sara Palin are all against the Fed, and when you get down to it, those who run the Fed such as you have named, effectively run the show.

However, the vast majolrity are like Pelosi, Reid and Obama: Corrupt to the core, and like cops, they look out for each other, because even if they are not of the same party, they still have a common enemy; The people.

[phooph]

I'll do a partial reply, will do more after reading some of your links:

I'm a Liberal Intellectual. I think for myself.


The Constitution mandates that illegal invaders, those who enter our country without permission, must be "repelled". That means, removed by whatever means are necessary. NO other option is allowed.

Please quote the exact article from the Constitution (https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html) for me. I can't find it.



RealID would give employers the ability to know whether they are violating our Constitution by hiring invaders using stolen IDs. It would also give the Federal Government teeth to enforce the Constitution against employers who, with that tool available, still choose to violate our Constitution by illegally hiring such persons.

I do believe that would violate Amendments 4 and 5:
Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

I think the ACLU would be all over that.


I don't see where the Constitution prohibits employers from verifying that employees are legal to work in the US.

No, it doesn't.


Because they [ACLU] work to destroy the Bill of Rights. Systematically. This is about to become a long discussion.

I'll start with our Constitutional protections in the First Amendment. Freedom of religious expression has always been protected in this nation. An Episcopalean church was even set up in the Capitol building and was the most attended church in D.C. until the 1850s. Thomas Jefferson personally signed approval of this church establishment. But, if the ACLU were correct, this would not have been possible.

So, where does the ACLU get its "separation of church and state" notion? Clearly, not from the letter Jefferson wrote assuring the Danbury Baptists that their freedom of religious expression was absolutely protected against Federal interference. No.

Really? I would think Jefferson made it rather clear:

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.


All the ACLU had to do was a bit of trickery in the courtroom to create a precedent to enforce... are you ready for this? The COMMUNIST Constitution!

Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
"In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church."
https://www.constitution.org/cons/ussr77.txt

That seems to be a rather long and seldom used document. :wink:
I would think if the Constitution of the USSR were the referenced document in court cases, the judges would dismiss the cases. Instead they often rule in favor of the ACLU. Even the Supreme Court. To do so, arguments must past muster with the US Constitution.


Is it even possible that the "separation of church and state" that is NOT in our Constitution was the intent of the Bill of Rights? Clearly, the guys who approved the Bill of Rights, who attended church in the Capitol building and opened Congress and the Supreme court with prayer and created our first national Holiday as a day of prayer to God... well, they would have laughed their asses off at the ACLU's assertions.

Except maybe for Jefferson.


Then they would have done whatever was necessary to rid this country of the ACLU and restore our Bill of Rights.

I have to go to a meeting right now but I'll read and respond to the rest of your post soon. Meanwhile, here are a couple of videos you might find informative on the First Amendment vs. the ACLU issue.

Spiritual Heritage Resolution
GovTrack: H. Res. 397: Text of Legislation, Introduced in House (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr111-397)

Considering the long history of religious observances listed, I am wondering what the beef is about. I personally have no objection to religious displays in public buildings provided all religions, including atheism, are welcome, which would be in the spirit of the Constitution.


Video: Our Judeo-Christian Nation
YouTube - Our Judeo-Christian Nation (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpQOCvthw-o)


The War on God in America
YouTube - War on God (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7wlX7mwsok&feature=related)

This is great for suckers for sentimentality, but the 'poor persecuted me' tone of these folks always hits my funny bone. I like how they hold up FDR, the Father of the US Welfare State, as one of their heroes. I thought socialists were godless. :hmmm:

Removal of references to one particular god would be in compliance with the non-establishment clause. The reality is that the US is a nation of many religions and there were religions here before white invaders (illegal aliens) brought theirs over from Europe. Historical consensus is that the founders were deists. The Judeo part is a bit suspect as Jews were often persecuted. A good chunk of the west was built by Asians who had their own religions.

Imagine you were living in Saudi Arabia (there are quite a few Americans who do) and you were given an award by the Saudi government and they threw the phrase, 'All blessings be to Allah' into the text of the document, which they might, Saudi Arabia having an established religion and forbidding displays of competing religions. What the Religious Heritage folks would like is a Judeo Christian version of Saudi Arabia.


ACLU bullies small-town festival for including Christians
Issue is whether government should 'endorse' religious expression
ACLU bullies small-town festival for including Christians (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80649)

Prayer in public: Can you still say 'Jesus'?
ACLU sues to stop clergy from invoking 'religious messages' at meetings
Prayer in public: Can you still say 'Jesus'? (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73355)

ACLU attack dogs maul student prayer
Group snarls at admin for allowing invocation, Christmas concerts at churches
ACLU attack dogs maul student prayer (https://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73667)

Nitpicky to be sure, but the question is, do these things constitute establishment of religion? If so they are in violation of the Constitution. The test is if it would also be OK to take the school choir to a Buddhist temple, synagog, or mosque and sing appropriate music. If that were also OK I wouldn't see a problem.



And here's a bit more on the Communist foundations of the ACLU:

Roger Baldwin - Founder of the American Civil Liberties Union
Enthusiastic proponent of Communism
https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1579

Communism didn't become vilified in this country till after WWII and we no longer needed Stalin but needed some way to keep the military industrial complex fed with pork. Till then the Soviet Union was seen as another Great Experiment like the USA. It was a Democrat, Avril Harriman, who was instrumental in firing up the Cold War. He was ambassador to the USSR and fed disinformation to the US regarding Soviet intentions. The reason? He was a banker and made a lot of money on loans for the arms race that ensued. The Soviets, having been invaded with very tragic consequences in the past (including recently by Germany), was frightened into joining in and the race was on.

Another champion of the socialist worker's paradise theory was Francis Bellamy, author of the Pledge of Allegiance.

When looking at the early supporters of communism one must also consider Jesus, who's anti-capitalist pronouncements earned him a reservation on a cross. Early Christian communities were communistic and the practice did not fall out of favor (at least publicly) until the Cold War. Religious communities probably come the closest to true communism of any attempts. The Roman Catholic Church operates on a communistic basis with priests, monks, and nuns depending on the church, which owns everything to care for them. I am descended from Protestant quasi-communist Christians on my mother's side. They practiced a sort of hybrid communism with a mix of private and communal property.



More ACLU communist history and deceptive practices
The ACLU and its long history of trying to destroy America
https://www.geocities.com/graymada/aclu.html (https://www.nodnc.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=268)

I got a page full of "fatal error" messages on that one.



The Bill of Rights must apply to all Americans. Just because Atheists are not religious does not give them the right to crush the Rights of others. But, the ACLU, in standard Communist practice, works to crush Christianity in this nation and uses Atheists as "useful idiots", as a basis of popular support to crush the 1st Amendment.

I would argue that atheism is a religion and I find fundamentalists atheists just as obnoxious as fundamentalists of any other religion. I'm sure there is some sage sounding quote they could put up among those of the other religions. Here are a couple from a signer of the Declaration of Independence and the second president of the US, John Adams :

"The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."

"The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."


But why all this Leftist hostility towards Christianity? Because Leftists form "coalitions of power" that are hostile towards others, have no regard for the Rights of others, to bully society into submission.

Religions have been used as tools of oppression throughout history, and Christianity is a religion with a long history of persecuting and oppressing both outsiders and insiders. The disenfranchisement of women was couched in religious language and the Bible was used to justify slavery. The religion of Manifest Destiny sprang out of Christianity and was used to justify driving out and exterminating the native populations of the Western Hemisphere, Africa, and Australia. Between six and nine million Europeans, 85% of them women were tortured and burned at the stake by Christians for being witches. The victims were for the most part, Christians. Even babies were not immune from this horror. The Holocaust was perpetrated in a "Christian nation" by a man who promised to return Germany to God. Religion is used to justify all sorts of horrors. "God told me to," is not reserved just for crazed serial killers.


Let the former Commissar of Education of the USSR (where the ACLU's founding principles originate) explain it:

"We hate Christians and Christianity. Even the best among them must be considered our worst enemies. They preach love of one's neighbor and mercy, which is contrary to our principles. Christian love is an obstacle to the development of the Revolution. Down with love of our neighbor! What we want is hate... only then can we conquer!" - Anatole Lunarcharsky

There are Christians who adhere to the same policy. They have their own groups to hate.:fireright:

[phooph]

A mirror image of yourself. Another true believer who is sure their ideology will save the world and turn it into a paradise free from all the baddies.
:thumbsup:


Hey, Phooph, check out this video shot right here in Santa Rosa. This lady explains what is going on, especially why they're herding millions of foreign invaders into this country:

Illegal Immigration Socialist/Communist Agenda
YouTube - Illegal Immigration's Socialist/Communist Agenda (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwaQBOU_xI)

[phooph]

I think I will let a former president of the Moral Majority speak on this:

Gods Come Cheap These Days
By Chuck Baldwin
June 12, 2009


This column is archived at
https://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090612.html


When President George W. Bush was first elected back in 2000, I well
remember the way Christian conservatives went gaga over him. They would deny it, of course, but it was more than hero worship: they acted as if he were a god. Life-size posters filled Christian bookstores. Religious broadcasters and televangelists swooned over him like 16-year-old girls used to swoon over Elvis Presley. Pastors invoked his name almost as a prayer. The Religious Right acted like they had died and gone to Heaven. In the minds of Christian conservatives, G.W. Bush could do no wrong. The result of all this sophomoric silliness was that the Religious Right became blind, impotent lackeys to a Big-Government, big-spending, Orwellian, and inept administration--maybe one of the worst in U.S. history.

And all of this was not lost to the political left. They called Christian
conservatives "dupes," "buffoons," "gullible," and a whole lot more. But now
it is the liberals' turn to take a voyage in the vehicle of villainous
vulnerability.

First, there was the major media's "anointing" of President Barack Obama.
Yes, I use the word "anointing" on purpose. Make no mistake about it: in the
minds of the major media, Obama was not inaugurated; he was canonized. No pope, king, or potentate of history received the coronation that Barack
Obama received. To the liberals who dominate the news media and
entertainment industry in this country, Obama is not a President: he is a
god.

For example, did readers see the way NBC newsman, Brian Williams, bowed to his majesty, Barack Obama? (If you missed it, see it here:

YouTube - Brian Williams says goodnight to President Obama (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYtHHxTTmc) )

Where are Keith Olbermann's eloquent rebukes of the Military Commissions Act (MCA), the suspension of Habeas Corpus, and many other Big-Government intrusions into the private lives of the American people that were first instituted under George W. Bush and that now continue under Barack Obama?

When he wants to, Olbermann can be a very convincing, articulate defender of constitutional liberties. However, it seems that Olbermann is only
interested in constitutional government when it is a Republican trampling
it. Since Obama became President, Olbermann has not only muted his criticism against unconstitutional policies emanating from the White House, he has joined the chorus of mindless worship of the new President.

(Here are Olbermann's trenchant comments on President Bush's support for the Military Commissions Act and denying Habeas Corpus--something we will not see from Olbermann regarding the same policies emanating from the Obama White House:

YouTube - Countdown: Special Comment 10-18-06 MUST SEE (https://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=sAjVHtSO_As)

The list of ways that media and entertainment lemmings fawn over Barack
Obama is almost endless. And just when one thinks he has heard it all, out
comes the blathering balderdash from Newsweek editor-at-large Evan Thomas.

Appearing on last weekend's Inside Washington, Thomas lauded President Obama as a "brave," "great teacher" who "stands above everybody." But Thomas saved his most outrageous oratory for last Friday's Hardball program. On Hardball, Thomas gushed, "I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above--above the world, he's sort of God."

There you have it: according to Newsweek's Evan Thomas, Barack Obama is
"sort of God."

Well, now that God is in the White House, I suppose we don't need the
Constitution; we don't need the Bill of Rights; we don't need Congress; we
don't need the Supreme Court; we don't need individual sovereign states; we
don't need the media; and we certainly don't need Evan Thomas, do we?

There it is, my friends: because Barack Obama is the President, the major
media now worships toward 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Goodbye resistance;
goodbye objectivity (if they ever had it); goodbye fairness; goodbye
investigative reporting; goodbye accountability (at least for Obama);
goodbye professional journalism; and goodbye free and independent press.
Hello propaganda; hello favoritism; hello yellow journalism; hello
socialism; hello "monarchalism"; hello globalism; hello elitism; and hello
Pravda.

What in the world has happened to us? How is it that otherwise intelligent
and educated people can so quickly forget virtually everything their
principles and values taught them, and become little more than clumsy chumps for a Presidential administration--any Presidential administration? Are we that slavish? That childish? That foolish? Apparently so.

As bad as it was under Bush, it will be twice as bad under Obama. Only
because, at least with Bush, the major media's natural liberal bias tended
to want to keep Bush somewhat honest, which meant that Bush would often face criticism from the media for some of his unconstitutional policies (such as Olbermann's eloquent repudiation of Bush's policies regarding the MCA and Habeas Corpus referenced above).

Forget it with Obama. The liberal bias of the major media will tend to cause
them to support anything this guy says or does, and to always look the other
way whenever unconstitutional or illegal activity surfaces.

For eight years, Christian conservatives had "Lord Bush." Now, liberals have
"Lord Obama." Seems to me that gods come pretty cheap these days.


What you are yet to understand is that whoever sits in the White House works for the same group of people no matter what their political affiliation. They are only the front men. Some day we may have a front woman.


Yep, you got it, it's all the same people, and they will try to take us down one way or another. My problem with the current puppet is that it's all for his ego, he wants to economically crash us, so that he can bring in communism to "save us", and thus make his case for unofficial ruler of the World, as the man who brought the great evil America into the fold by defeating us from within.

His ego is amazing, but what's really amazing is that his insecurity is as big as his ego. He looks in the mirror and sees a pile of shit, but since he can't live with that, he convinces himself that he is the same degree positive and a little more, so that he winds up at a positive self image. Simple narcisstic psychosis: "I am perfect, and I am the only one who is intelligent and the only one who counts", (because if one brick falls, the whole wall falls).

What blows my mind is how over half of the Nation completely drank the Kool-Aid, even though there wasn't any evidence that he is what he says he is. Even now he lies to their face, and then does whatever he wants, and people still make excuses for him, because they have so much invested emotionally, that they can't let go of the fantasy. He told them what they wanted to hear, and of course that makes them feel better right now, which is much more important than how it effects the future (Even squirrels save for the future).

Yes, we have a nation of selfish, lazy, greedy, illresponsible, impatient morons who can justify anything against any logic if it makes them feel better about themselves right now.

Yep, the Democratic party is certainly showing who they really are right now, which in reality is everything that they hate.

Remember those words: Selfish, lazy and greedy, they are the mantra of todays Democrats (and a few Republicans). "Please, oh please, tell us what we want to hear so that we don't have to deal with the uncomfortable truth.

I'm a libertarian, and as such, I wish our current politicians would spontaneously combust at once, so we could rebuild our country into what it was approx. 70 years ago, when people were responsible, and took care of themselves, but also helped their family, friends and neighbors.

The Great Depression and WWII refined and defined us. They gave rise to the most productive and happy society in modern history: "The Greatest Generation".

In the last 60 years since then, (especially the last 17) everything that the "Greatest Generation" had built by being responsible, honest, humble, selfless, and hard working, has been squandered by their illogical, dishonest, dishonorable, selfish, lazy, and greedy children and grandchildren.

Their love of making the government responsible for everything so they don't have to be, has given rise to uncontrolled and unnecessary social programs, bigger government and extreme political correctness (ACLU etc.) have destroyed our once great country

By the time everyone realizes that communism doesn't work, we finally hit bottom again, and we rebuild from the foundation up again, another 20 or 25 years will pass.

Major bummer......

[phooph]

I would consider Ron Paul the best of the bunch. He understands that the root of the problem is based in the financial sector.

Sarah Palin enjoys spending other people's money way too much. She took Wasilla's balanced budget and ran them millions in debt building a sports complex when they really needed a sewer system. During the campaign a wealthy supporter loaned her a credit card and told her to get herself some nice clothes. She took the whole family shopping and bought them all several outfits including a half dozen suits for her husband. The total bill was around a quarter million. Imagine what she'd do if she had the US Treasury at her disposal.:woohoo:



AMEN BRUTHA!!! And I would like very much to see a genuine Libertarian get elected. We'd have at least four years of solid entertainment. I would even subscribe to cable TV just to see that show!

I would like to pose a question for your consideration, however.

You assert that all those politicians are serving the same masters. We might name as Masters the Federal Reserve, the Bilderbergers, the Rothschilds, Michael Gorbachev...

The question is - can we accept that some politicians do not serve those masters but instead truly do have their duty to the nation in their hearts? That they are people who would push our nation back towards Constitutional Obedience and national self interest? How about Sarah Palin? Ron Paul? Tom Tancredo?

I know in my heart that I would serve this nation with conscience as Thomas Jefferson did. Perhaps John Adams. If, that is, I were ever to risk running for public office. I would take a principled stand against the corruption tearing down this nation.

So, I have to believe there are some folks already working in the political arena with the same sense of duty as I have.

[toddwquigley]

A mirror image of yourself. Another true believer who is sure their ideology will save the world and turn it into a paradise free from all the baddies.
:thumbsup:


That would describe anyone from any political party, nothing unusual there.

However my points are valid: The greater majority enjoyed a much higher quality of lift back then.

We worked harder, gave more, expected less and were happier, we still had a pretense of control over the government, common sense generally prevailed over political correctness, and except for the idiocy of Social Security and Medicare, there was not the insane spending on social programs that turn decent people into worthless freeloaders for life.

But back to your statement, I personally think it's too late, and now we are going to have to ride it out. Bush and Obama's stimulus's and Obama's giant budget have put us over the top, we will never be able to catch up, so we may as well ride it out. Inflation makes your debts smaller, so when we go to pay China, we just print what we owe, how convenient... Until they demand payment in another form like Swiss Francs.



Now we have the opposite

[phooph]

I know in my heart that I would serve this nation with conscience as Thomas Jefferson did. Perhaps John Adams. If, that is, I were ever to risk running for public office. I would take a principled stand against the corruption tearing down this nation.

So, I have to believe there are some folks already working in the political arena with the same sense of duty as I have.

Yes, there's a few, just like there are always a few good cops that aren't corrupt:

Ron Paul, Dennis Kuchinich and Sara Palin are all against the Fed, and when you get down to it, those who run the Fed such as you have named, effectively run the show.

However, the vast majolrity are like Pelosi, Reid and Obama: Corrupt to the core, and like cops, they look out for each other, because even if they are not of the same party, they still have a common enemy; The people.[/QUOTE]

That goes for both parties. To quote one of my favorite researchers and writers on the topic: The state is a fiction sanctified by Hegel and his followers to CONTOL the individual. Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to dump the trap of right and left, this is a Hegelian trap to divide and control. The battle is not between right and left; it is between us and them. - Antony Sutton

[toddwquigley]

That goes for both parties. To quote one of my favorite researchers and writers on the topic: The state is a fiction sanctified by Hegel and his followers to CONTOL the individual. Sooner or later people will wake up. First we have to dump the trap of right and left, this is a Hegelian trap to divide and control. The battle is not between right and left; it is between us and them. - Antony Sutton[/quote]



I couldn't agree more, a polarized populace can't do anything, because they have to spend all their energy plotting and planning what and how to deal with the things the other side is plotting and planning.

United we stand, divided we fall, and insignificant things like prop 8, and abortion become emotionally charged struggles that firmly divide us.

There's an old sailor's quote, to paraphrase: On the sea there is not much time to fight each other, because the sea is the enemy of all.

This is how our politicians think: Them vs. us, and if we want to have any real change we must join together and fight them.

Good luck with that though, because people are selfish, and are not likely to give up their cause and join to fight a common enemy when they think they are close to winning.

[toddwquigley]

I would consider Ron Paul the best of the bunch. He understands that the root of the problem is based in the financial sector.

Sarah Palin enjoys spending other people's money way too much. She took Wasilla's balanced budget and ran them millions in debt building a sports complex when they really needed a sewer system. During the campaign a wealthy supporter loaned her a credit card and told her to get herself some nice clothes. She took the whole family shopping and bought them all several outfits including a half dozen suits for her husband. The total bill was around a quarter million. Imagine what she'd do if she had the US Treasury at her disposal.:woohoo:


I would definitely agree with Ron Paul, but the media has marginalized him by painting him as a crackpot (Like they did with Kuchinich).

In defense of Sarah: It was a classic case of "What we want now to make us feel better vs What we need, and a sports complex is a lot more fun than a sewer system. Also, it was my understanding she Was told to dress them all up and make them look presentable, so she did.

[phooph]

But back to your statement, I personally think it's too late, and now we are going to have to ride it out. Bush and Obama's stimulus's and Obama's giant budget have put us over the top, we will never be able to catch up, so we may as well ride it out. Inflation makes your debts smaller, so when we go to pay China, we just print what we owe, how convenient... Until they demand payment in another form like Swiss Francs.

Inflation favors those who owe and are financially liquid enough to pay those debts. It's a great debt shrinking machine.

Back in the 70s, the oil producing nations selling to us became disenchanted with payment in inflating US dollars and demanded gold. Nixon then ended any last vestiges of gold backing for the dollar and the oil producers organized and formed a coalition - the hated OPEC - to work jointly to demand fair compensation. They formed what was essentially a trust and agreed to fix prices. To let us know they meant business they cut their exports to the US and created the first oil crisis in the US. We could be facing something similar with our other creditors.

[phooph]

I would definitely agree with Ron Paul, but the media has marginalized him by painting him as a crackpot (Like they did with Kuchinich).

The media is the propaganda arm of the established powers. Anyone likely to actually threaten them is treated as a loony or a criminal. When one looks at who owns the media, and if you get a list of board members you get a picture of corporate incest. MediaChannel.org -- Media Ownership 2001 (https://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml)

The charge that the media is liberal also originates with the media. It redirects ire away from the true centers of control. Of course liberals are sure the media is conservative because they observe that many of their pet subjects are also given short shrift or ignored.


In defense of Sarah: It was a classic case of "What we want now to make us feel better vs What we need, and a sports complex is a lot more fun than a sewer system. Also, it was my understanding she Was told to dress them all up and make them look presentable, so she did.

If you were a politician would you rather your name were associated with a sports complex or a sewer? I doubt Miss Glamour Puss would want to be known as the Sewer Queen.

According to those in the room, the generous supporter was shocked when he saw the Palins had run rampant with his generosity. Gov. Palin and her husband, Todd (who works most of the year on the North Slope making big bucks and then takes off a month or two to fish), were not known for living a frugal life. The campaign had also given her a generous clothing budget.

[Speak2Truth]

Phooph: Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution reads:

Section 4 - Republican government

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Some argue that only if the "invasion" is by persons with guns should it be repelled - which is ridiculous. That notion provides a foreign country easy avenue to demographically conquer then, through our democratic processes, rule our nation. Mexico is testing those waters and so far America has failed to fight back.

"Invasion" quite literally means trespass without permission.

E-Verify - I see no invasion of one's home or papers and effects or unreasonable search and seizure in a system of positive identification for American workers. The Constitution (and common sense) requires that "invaders" be removed from our country, not given jobs. Therefore, a simple verification of eligibility to work is in direct support of the Constitutional mandate. The Federal government is required to do this, not prohibited from doing it.

The 4th Amendment has been over-broadly and very inconsistently "interpreted". If it is reasonable to require a driver's license containing your photo, birth date, height, weight, home address, hair and eye color... surely it is no great stretch to have an ID card showing you are legal to be and work in the US - when the Constitution mandates the Federal Government forcibly remove all persons who are not.

If the ACLU actually upheld the Constitution, it would be levying lawsuits against Mexico for knowingly and directly sending an invasion force into our country. The ACLU would be protecting Americans, not the unConstitutional foreign invaders.

But, when you realize the ACLU is a Communist organization, it all makes sense. Here's a Communist at the May 1 rally in Santa Rosa explaining what they're doing:

Illegal Immigration Socialist/Communist Agenda
YouTube - Illegal Immigration's Socialist/Communist Agenda (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcwaQBOU_xI)

PROTECTION OF RELIGION - THE 1ST AMENDMENT

Jefferson's quote: I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

Clearly, that "wall" he speaks of is protection of religious expression against interference by the Legislature. Laws suppressing free religious expression or religious establishments are prohibited. And he practiced what he asserted - Jefferson personally signed authorization to establish an Episcopalean church right inside the Capitol building. The Constitution prohibited the Legislature from interfering.

To understand the intent it helps to examine the actions of the folks who wrote and approved that Constitution.

The phrase the ACLU uses is a small fragment of a sentence from that letter - and is NOT from our Constitution. The interpretation they apply to it is directly from the Communist Constitution, not ours. That is why the ACLU works tirelessly to drive Christianity out of the halls of government and the schools. It is exactly what the USSR Constitution stated.

Like I said, they played a clever trick. They used a phrase that is not in our constitution to convince the "useful idiots" that is what our Constitution says (just ask anyone under the age of 25) then applied an interpretation of that phrase that is the opposite of its actual intended meaning...

And the useful idiots fell for it!!

Yuri Bezmenov would be proud!

Let's not assume Leftist supreme court judges are above participating in this game.


I would think if the Constitution of the USSR were the referenced document in court cases, the judges would dismiss the cases. Instead they often rule in favor of the ACLU. Even the Supreme Court. To do so, arguments must past muster with the US Constitution.

No! The problem is that the Supreme Court too often is influence not by the words of the Constitution but by outside opinions. That is why Obama is trying to get Sotomayor on the Supreme Court - a woman who insisted she will rule by her sympathies rather than the actual words of the Constitution. This has been done too often in the past.

That is why there is a supposed "Right" to kill an unborn child that is nowhere to be found in the Constitution.

They need not directly reference the constitution of the USSR - they have already planted the "separation of church and state" Big Lie in the minds of enough people to sway even some members of the Judiciary.


Removal of references to one particular god would be in compliance with the non-establishment clause. ... Historical consensus is that the founders were deists.

There is no such historical consensus. The founders came from a variety of religious backgrounds but came to some agreements. They established a specifically Episcopalean church in the Capitol building. Not Muslim, not Hindu, not Jewish and not vaguely "deist". They put the Ten Commandments on the Supreme Court building. I would caution you to be wary of that phrase "no establishment clause". It's not in the Constitution.

Say instead, "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof". Laws restrict something. Now, the meaning should be clear as well as the reason they approved a specific sect of Christianity to hold services in the highest government building in the nation.

President-Elect Thomas Jefferson personally approved and attended Church in the US Capitol
https://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=90

Congress was prohibited from interfering. Otherwise, you'd have seen a huge fight about it right then and there. Was there such a fight?

Jefferson was broad-minded, of course. When he created the University of Virginia, he made sure a pastor would come each week to minister to the students - but made sure that every two weeks it would become a different Christian church sending the pastor.

When you look at what the creators of the Constitution actually DID, you realize how laughably moronic the little snippet phrases like "separation of church and state" and "no establishment clause" actually are. They are a trick - a set of words NOT found in our Constitution, with implied meanings attached that cannot be found in our Constitution, designed to program the weak-minded through repetition into believing our Constitution means something other than what it says.


Imagine you were living in Saudi Arabia (there are quite a few Americans who do) and you were given an award by the Saudi government and they threw the phrase, 'All blessings be to Allah' into the text of the document, which they might, Saudi Arabia having an established religion and forbidding displays of competing religions.

I would be okay with that phrase even if I object to their establishment of an official State Religion (meaning others are suppressed). That phrase would be showing their respect to me, even if I do not hold to their particular belief system. We are supposed to be worldly and tolerant and "understand" the beliefs of others - so why would I be offended by such a thing?

As long as the award isn't for carrying a really heavy backpack to the train station.


Nitpicky to be sure, but the question is, do these things constitute establishment of religion? If so they are in violation of the Constitution.

Again, you misuse "establishment". When a nation establishes an official State Religion, as Saudi Arabia does or England did at the time the Constitution was written, the purpose is to suppress, forcibly, other religions. It was very dangerous to be Catholic in England, for example. Government punishment was the consequence. THAT is what our Constitution protects us against - exactly what the ACLU is doing. Suppression of free religious expression!

You quote abuses by Christianity in the past tense. That is telling. We can quote abuses by Islam and Socialism in the present tense. You mention some Christians still "hate".

We condemn Christians who stray from the teachings of their Prophet. We condemn Socialists who adhere to theirs.

Our nation was squarely founded in the Protestant religion, not even Catholicism. I can make the case for this and I'd love to debate John Adams on the matter.

[Speak2Truth]

The media is the propaganda arm of the established powers. Anyone likely to actually threaten them is treated as a loony or a criminal.

I see we have much to agree on.


The charge that the media is liberal also originates with the media.

Except this, perhaps, due to semantics.

The charge should be that the media is "leftist", supporting the Leftist agenda. I get really annoyed when folks say "liberal" when referring to leftism. For example, the fawning support and efforts to ensure Obama got elected were an effort to aid the leftist agenda.

Liberals, persons like myself, desire freedom from government meddling in our lives or telling us what to do. We want liberty!

Obama promised to take away our liberty, to establish Statism, to seize unheard of powers over this nation. No liberal in their right mind could vote for the guy. But the leftists tend to think of liberals as "useful idiots".

I have to wonder - when conservative speakers use that term "liberal", are they really trying to give cover to the leftists? Or did they get tricked into using that word by the leftists?

After all, people still say "separation of church and state" which was a successful trick by the leftists. They are masters of mental manipulation. They are the Morlocks and see us as the Eloi. No kidding.

[theindependenteye]

>>My own eyes.
>>I have attended a wide variety of gatherings and meetings and such. The Democrat Party are explicitly enemies of the USA, working to aid Communist takeover and to knock the US out of superpower status so China and Russia can become globally dominant.

Since you describe yourself as an investigative reporter, could you be more specific about what you've observed at Democrats' meetings that constitutes this treasonous activity? What was actually said and done?

This sounds too much like J. Edgar Hoover's equation of every group promoting civil rights, union organizing, anti-war activities, etc. etc. as "Communist" -- in other words, everything he happened to disagree with politically -- and infiltrated many of these groups with provocateurs to promote illegal activity.

But we're open to hearing your eye-witness evidence of treason.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[Speak2Truth]

Since you describe yourself as an investigative reporter, could you be more specific about what you've observed at Democrats' meetings that constitutes this treasonous activity? What was actually said and done?

I hope you are willing to be convinced.

I attended a gathering in Santa Barbara. Cindy Sheehan was invited by the "Veterans for Peace" group and local Democrat leaders, Hanna-beth Jackson and Mayor Marty Blum, to be a guest speaker. The meeting was held in the Veterans Hall.

I sat across the street with my cameraman and watched the front door for a bit. The hand-out was the Revolutionary Communist Party Newspaper. We later picked up a copy inside. On the back the stated agenda included destruction of the American system.

We watched a FOX news van pull up, a well-dressed reporter get out, speak briefly with the folks at the door, then return to the van which promptly departed.

I've met a few FOX street reporters - Democrats who have asserted their support for illegal immigrants and other leftist issues. This was an entertaining moment, all right.

Inside, a video was dispensed called "Arlington West". The speaker promoting it asserted it was crafted to frighten young people from joining the military. It was to be dispensed throughout High Schools to help break down willingness to enlist. I picked up a copy.

Cindy Sheehan said some fun things, such as Hugo Chavez should be the next President of the United States. Her loyalties are clear.

Another speaker explained how they were doing their part towards destruction of the US military so that the world would be "safe" again.

After I turned off my camera, and she was watching the little red light, she blurted out some really vicious statements against America and got loud applause.

I am paraphrasing here. I actually shot video of most of this. I might as well make it available somewhere.

At the end of it, one person asked me nervously if I'm a Homeland Security guy. I laughed it off. No. I'm an independent journalist with a Press Pass issued by the city police department. Oh, THAT was what they noticed. Made 'em nervous.

Another cracked a joke - "When the USSR fell, Michael Gorbachev lamented, 'There are no more Communists in Russia any more. They're all in America now!'"

Peals of laughter.

And that was a typical meeting.

I suppose I could tell you of meeting a former member of the Communist government of Afghanistan at another meeting, where which the password to get in was "Jimmy Carter". But I'll wait for this post to sink in first.

My question to YOU, theindependenteye, is this. Are you an American? Do you have in your heart a sense of duty to stand firmly against enemies of our Constitution and America, whether foreign or domestic?

Or, are you okay with the agenda to systematically destroy the American system?

I'm sure that your sense of duty as a Citizen, if you have it, will affect your reaction to the content of this meeting.

[toddwquigley]

My question to YOU, theindependenteye, is this. Are you an American? Do you have in your heart a sense of duty to stand firmly against enemies of our Constitution and America, whether foreign or domestic?

Or, are you okay with the agenda to systematically destroy the American system?

I'm sure that your sense of duty as a Citizen, if you have it, will affect your reaction to the content of this meeting.[/quote]



The problem here is that you are talking to Conrad, who is a complete socialist, and was probably at that particular meeting, trying to figure out how to get more money from the government, while working less.

He isn't really a bad person like Franklin (The guy that stands in front of the Post Office handing out Communist literature).He is just very emotional and completely lacking in logic.

You will find that most of the Waccos are completely illogical because they are entirely driven by their emotions. Most of them are on some sort of government handout program of one form or another, because real work is anathema to them.

However if you want to find out how to get by in life, by comfortably living off the government, there is plenty of advice to be had here.

Unfortunately you will find that many Waccos are among the most close minded and prejudiced people you are likely to meet, because they are so completely to the left, and so completely married to their theories and opinions, that there's no room for anything else, such as the truth.

As such, Wacco is pretty a mutual admiration society for victims.

It is however, occasionally entertaining to poke holes in their World with logic.

[toddwquigley]

Here ya' go, just in from Yahoo News. Yes, more regulations, more government, more Fed, all brought to you by Comrade Obama and friends.

WASHINGTON – Setting up a certain fight with big business, President Barack Obama is about to recommend creation of a regulatory agency to protect consumers in their credit, savings and other banking transactions. The new agency and a newly empowered Federal Reserve will be two of the central elements of a broad overhaul of the financial regulatory system that the president will announce on Wednesday, officials said.
Already the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve would supervise large financial institutions that are considered so big that their failure could undermine America's economy, according to the administration proposal.
But even as the Fed gains new powers, Obama also would transfer some banking authority that now rests with the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department to a new consumer agency — the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.
The expanded Fed role and the new consumer regulator are likely to be the two main political flash points in the administration's proposal. Many bankers oppose a new consumer protection regulator and many lawmakers in Congress worry the Fed could turn into a too-powerful and independent financial overseer. Friction over those points could slow any major overhaul of banking and market regulations.
In addition to having the Federal Reserve supervise "systemically significant" institutions, Obama will recommend a council of regulators, which would include the Fed, to monitor risk throughout the broader financial system.
The arrangement is designed to prevent any more crashes like those that felled AIG and Lehman Brothers.
Obama said Tuesday the new rules will try to eliminate the kind of excessive risk-taking by financial institutions that proved "very dangerous to the American people."
"It's going to be, as usual, a heavy lift because there are going to be people who want to keep on taking these risks, counting on U.S. taxpayers to bail them out if their bets go bad," he said.
Obama's decision to create a consumer agency comes amid criticism that mortgage lenders and credit card companies have taken advantage of unwitting customers and saddled them with debt. The financial crisis was precipitated in part by the preponderance of securities backed by mortgages that went sour when the housing market collapsed.
Treasury spokesman Andrew Williams said lax consumer protections contributed to the financial crisis and that the recession revealed even more weaknesses in consumer protections across the spectrum of financial markets. The new agency, he said, will "help ensure that consumers have the protection and the representation they deserve."
The new regulator would have the power to impose fines and allow states to pass laws that are stricter than the federal standards — an approach favored by consumer advocates. Consumer protections are now spread among various state and federal authorities, including the Fed, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and banking regulators.
"Tremendous problems could have been avoided had such an agency weighed in against some of the abusive practices that Congress acted on only recently," said Travis Plunkett, legislative director of the Consumer Federation of America, citing excessive bank fees and misleading practices.
But business leaders made their opposition clear.
David Hirschmann, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Center for Capital Markets, said the chamber will oppose a standalone agency "that cannibalizes regulatory expertise, adding yet another regulatory layer."
The administration will also have to use its political skills to strengthen the Fed. While Democrats generally agree with a need for regulatory changes, many oppose relying too heavily on the Fed.
They say its status as a politically independent organization would make it difficult to keep the newly empowered organization in check.
"What happens if the representatives of the people and the president want a certain action and it's not taken?" asked Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania, a senior Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee.

"You can't fire the chairman of the Federal Reserve," Kanjorski said.
Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Banking Committee, is likely to become Obama's toughest opponent on Capitol Hill.
In private deliberations with the administration, Dodd has advocated an alternative plan to strip the Fed of its regulatory role entirely. Dodd's plan would create a new consolidated bank regulator that would assume the roles that the Fed and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. now play in helping regulate state-chartered banks.
Under this scenario, the Fed would focus on its existing mission as the nation's central bank — setting monetary policy and acting as a "lender of last resort."
Lawmakers, including Dodd, also say they are open to the administration's proposal that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. be put in charge of dismantling financial institutions that the Fed and Treasury Department decide pose a threat to the economy.
Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has not taken a position on the administration's plan to bolster the powers of the Fed.
But a number of other House members, including Republicans, say it's a terrible idea.
In a staff document circulated last week, House Republicans on the committee argued that expanding the Fed's responsibilities and increasing government spending pose "a far more significant source of 'systemic risk' to our nation's economy than the failure of any specific financial institution."
___ Associated Press writers Alan Zibel, Jeannine Aversa and David Carpenter contributed to this report.

[Speak2Truth]

Most of them are on some sort of government handout program of one form or another, because real work is anathema to them.

Sounds like the Prophet of the Left, Karl Marx. I mentioned earlier that the guy was so damned lazy he would not work to feed his starving wife and daughters. He mooched off everybody else, especially Engels.

When Marx DID get a large chunk of money, enough to pay off his debts and feed his family, he instead booked himself a train tour of Germany and other countries, living large. When he returned home he informed his horrified wife that he had spent all the money.

If you look at how the Left operates, Karl Marx is decisively their prophet.


Unfortunately you will find that many Waccos are among the most close minded and prejudiced people you are likely to meet

Barry did warn me my time here is short, that there is little room for tolerance of diversity here.

I'm doing my absolute best to be polite and informative and not stoop to the childish name-calling some other posters here have hurled my direction. I won't be banned for joining in their bad behavior. I'll be banned for daring to speak the truth.

I notice an interesting trend in talk radio, too, especially on BlogTalkRadio.com

Conservative show hosts welcome callers of all stripes and are willing to compare facts and ideas. They know Truth is on their side.

Progressive show hosts quickly ban anyone who challenges the notions they put forth. I've been banned from quite a few shows by Progressives for doing what I do here - merely pointing them to the facts.

Don't even get me started on the 2nd Amendment. Whatever you do. Don't even suggest the ACLU fights for our Bill of Rights because I'm done proving them wrong on the 1st Amendment and am ready to move to the 2nd Amendment.

Don't tempt me!

[Speak2Truth]

Deja Vu all over again?

https://www.silcom.com/%7Evikman/PD/OldCommieCartoon.jpg

[theindependenteye]

>>My question to YOU, theindependenteye, is this. Are you an American?

Yes. Born in Denver, I'm 67, paid taxes all my life, raised two kids, voted in every election, carried a few protest signs for causes I believed in, never been arrested, and spend more time than I should in discussions like this.

>>Do you have in your heart a sense of duty to stand firmly against enemies of our Constitution and America, whether foreign or domestic?

I think so, though I've never had to shoot anyone. But I've lived through a lot of bullshit about who, exactly, are the enemies of America. I'd say you are; you'd disagree.

>>I attended a gathering in Santa Barbara. Cindy Sheehan was invited by the "Veterans for Peace" group and local Democrat leaders...

So this was a public talk by anti-war people, some of whom were Democrats.

>>The hand-out was the Revolutionary Communist Party Newspaper. ... On the back the stated agenda included destruction of the American system.

Which system? Capitalism? Constitutional democracy? The oil industry? People can hand out anything; I've been handed right-wing garbage at all kinds of public events. I don't know the particular fringe group you're talking about, but it's probably about a dozen people who spout rhetoric dating back to the 1930's -- pretty much like you, except they're nominally on the other side of the fence.

>>We watched a FOX news van pull up, a well-dressed reporter get out, speak briefly with the folks at the door, then return to the van which promptly departed. I've met a few FOX street reporters - Democrats who have asserted their support for illegal immigrants and other leftist issues.

I think I missed something here. FOX is a Marxist media organ? The conspiracy does go deep.

>>Inside, a video was dispensed called "Arlington West". The speaker promoting it asserted it was crafted to frighten young people from joining the military. It was to be dispensed throughout High Schools to help break down willingness to enlist.

Yes, there are a number of community movements to discourage military recruiting in high schools. As far as I can tell, this and other elements of the talk you attended are protected by the First Amendment. I assume your argument would be that this weakens the military, thus leading to the destruction of America. But that mode of reasoning can be stretched, and has been, to include virtually anything critical of government policy -- certainly including your promotion of the idea that we should all arm ourselves in order to overthrow the Government if we don't like it.

>>Cindy Sheehan said some fun things, such as Hugo Chavez should be the next President of the United States. Her loyalties are clear. Another speaker explained how they were doing their part towards destruction of the US military so that the world would be "safe" again.

Yes, their political views seem very clear. You don't agree with it, but a coherent case can be presented that American military power has on many occasions been used in ways causing immense destruction, not to mention the destruction of the American economy for the benefit of our own plutocrats. That's a subject of serious debate and much disagreement. If you think the debate itself is treasonous, well...

>>Made 'em nervous.

Given the extensive record of local police keeping files of "subversives," they'd be absolute fools not to be nervous.

>>And that was a typical meeting.

Well, if that was a typical meeting of the Democratic Party to plan the destruction of America, it seems to me that America is pretty safe. It sounds to me as if it were a anti-Iraq War rally, where people go to hear speakers who're promoting what *they* deem to be core American values. But, true, they may have been passing coded notes around during the laughs.

I wonder if someone who's involved with the Democratic Party in Santa Rosa could write to let us know what their local plans for the destruction of America. Since the secret's out.

>>I suppose I could tell you of meeting a former member of the Communist government of Afghanistan at another meeting, where which the password to get in was "Jimmy Carter".

This is investigative journalism?

Feel free to respond to the rest of the list, but you've at last lost one reader at least. My mind has slammed tight shut. I've heard this crap all my life, and so I can only think you've recently undergone some radical conversion or that you're a high school geek with nothing better to do for the summer. Enjoy your frothing patriotism.

Cheers--
Conrad

[Speak2Truth]

So, you attempt to dismiss the overt assertions regarding who our next President should be, the planned attacks (through the school system) on military recruiting, assertions that our military must be eliminated (as Clinton and Obama work towards by de-funding our technological R&D), that the American system must be destroyed (and don't pretend ignorance of the Communist agenda on that)....

I think perhaps you are not closed minded so much as being okay with the stated goals. And this "dismissive" attitude is just another game - an effort to avoid Truth.

One thing Communists really laugh about is the "useful idiots" who help them gain power. As Yuri Bezmenov explained, those people are the ones who scream loudest when the "change" is not what was promised, when they finally realize they were duped, when they realize it is too late. And if they continue screaming, they get into re-education camps, many are simply disposed of...

Oh, but it can't happen here. Right? Just as we could never have a guy whose campaign office flew the Communist banner, a man backed by an ideology determined to destroy the America our Founders created, elected President. It could never happen in America.

Woops. It just happened.

[Braggi]

... Some argue that only if the "invasion" is by persons with guns should it be repelled - which is ridiculous. That notion provides a foreign country easy avenue to demographically conquer then, through our democratic processes, rule our nation. Mexico is testing those waters and so far America has failed to fight back. ...

Speak2, you're so verbose I just don't have time to answer your every expression of ignorance, but I'll just fix this tired notion for you with a single statement: the children of Mexicans aren't Mexicans. They're U.S. citizens. That makes them ... U.S. citizens. Know what I mean?

This is besides the point that most of the Mexicans that come here with the idea in mind they're going to stay aren't so interested in the welfare of Mexico as they are in the welfare of the United States (and no, I don't mean the Welfare System, such as it is). So give it a rest. You're obviously upsetting yourself for little reason.

If you don't believe what I'm saying above, it's because you don't know the people from Mexico as well as I do. I've done a lot of work with them and I can't think of any who were obviously trying to have any influence at all on the U.S., good or ill. They were just doing what they do with their work and their families. You ascribe a vast, ambitious intention to them that does not exist.

Please don't give me a bunch of links to those who support the Atlan notion and nation. Got it. Those people exist. A handful of them. Noted.


... We condemn Christians who stray from the teachings of their Prophet. We condemn Socialists who adhere to theirs. ...

So stop it with the condemnation and stop it with the "We" and learn to think for yourself. You're a sucker for right wing nonsense which can only be fostered in an atmosphere of ignorance. Once you've developed a little on your own you might want to learn to expand the notion of "We" to include everyone. Everyone isn't your enemy. Ignorance and narrow thinking are your enemies.


... Our nation was squarely founded in the Protestant religion, not even Catholicism. I can make the case for this and I'd love to debate John Adams on the matter.

Well, besides your ignorant notion here, it doesn't matter, does it? We have what we have and those of us who think progressively (liberal or leftist or however you'd like to label us) will continue to push for further separation of the Protestant religion and its destructive influence on our legal and political systems. Nice if we could keep the Catholics hands off our policy makers too. And let's not forget the Mormons. And so on ...

Religion has been humankind's biggest problem since the invention of writing.

All that aside, how about discussing "Free Market Capitalism?" I'd like to see a return to it as opposed to the current Corporatism that's busy consuming all the resources on Earth including our civil rights.

Bless you,

-Jeff

[Speak2Truth]

Yes, there are a number of community movements to discourage military recruiting in high schools. As far as I can tell, this and other elements of the talk you attended are protected by the First Amendment. I assume your argument would be that this weakens the military, thus leading to the destruction of America. But that mode of reasoning can be stretched, and has been, to include virtually anything critical of government policy

I'd say no to that. I've watched the Marxists organize on campus, screaming hate at the US military, the ROTC, then claiming their 'hate' means the military should not be there.

But what is the primary function of Government? The common defense. Marxists are determined to make America vulnerable to enemies, not to make America stronger. They are ENEMIES of America and thank goodness the 1st Amendment encourages them to expose themselves.

It's fine to be critical of government policy on many issues. However, direct efforts to wreck America's ability to defend itself are treasonous. This is not mere debate over specific military actions - it is a stated goal to render the US defenseless so that other nations can become militarily dominant.

And it is the Marxists, not me, who insist their goal is to weaken and eliminate the US military. I'm just reporting what they said.

[Speak2Truth]

the children of Mexicans aren't Mexicans. They're U.S. citizens. That makes them ... U.S. citizens. Know what I mean?

Yes, that is part of the problem. A criminal act creates an "anchor baby" that, by current interpretation of the law, negates the criminal act because the baby can then have all its relatives stay in the US. Clearly, this is a loophole being taken advantage of to defy our Constitution.


This is besides the point that most of the Mexicans that come here with the idea in mind they're going to stay aren't so interested in the welfare of Mexico as they are in the welfare of the United States

Demonstrated by their absolute disregard for the laws of this nation that actual Americans uphold and respect. Uh huh.

Those who respect this nation apply for immigration legally.

The reasons to oppose this invasion, orchestrated by Mexico that provides survival backpacks for invaders crossing the desert, pamphlets on how to get into the US, how to take advantage of the medical system and other services... are HUGE. The cost to America is HUGE. And dangerous, considering they bypass health screening - then handle your food.

Cases of leprosy, untreatable tuberculosis and other diseases are on the rise as a result.


I can't think of any who were obviously trying to have any influence at all on the U.S., good or ill.

That's an important point. All that is necessary is for them to vote for the Chicano politician who promises to "represent" them. Marxists, who organize those May 1 marches every year across the nation, are using them as "cattle" to build a voting bloc to get more Marxists into power. That is one of the threats posed by persons who are urged to vote on racial identity.

That scheme just gave us Obama.

It is putting Mexican-loyal Marxists into political power all over the nation.

These enemies of America have established a recruiting arm in most schools in the Southwest called MECHA. The "A" in MECHA stands for Aztlan, the name of the new nation they are carving out. Their motto is, "For the Race, everything. For the rest, nothing." This is not a small movement. It has ever-expanding power and is not dependent on immigrants to bolster its numbers.

The Aztlanists sent emissaries back around 1995 to visit Yasser Arafat to learn the process of Jihad. They call themselves, "America's Palestinians". Their banner, used in all the schools where MECHA meets, portrays a bird of prey holding an Aztec war club in one talon and a lit stick of dynamite in the other - a terrorist banner.

You claim there are a "handful" of them - your ignorance is on display for all to see.


Religion has been humankind's biggest problem since the invention of writing.

A broad and ignorant statement. You equate all religions? How about the one that founded this Nation of Liberty? Read our Declaration of Independence and note that our Liberty is founded on belief in God. You don't want liberty? Try living as a Cuban or a North Korean. Then make a better informed choice.

Atheism murdered over a hundred million people last century - and we're not talking about war.


All that aside, how about discussing "Free Market Capitalism?" I'd like to see a return to it as opposed to the current Corporatism that's busy consuming all the resources on Earth including our civil rights.

Okay, you're probably as annoyed as I am that Obama is seizing trillions of dollars of tax money to stuff in the pockets of his corporate backers and Union bosses. The Left put into power an absolute Communist and Communists are corporatists.

What they object to is Free Market Capitalism in which free men choose to form a corporation to create products and services and to earn money by their productive choice. A free-market Corporation protects the rights of the workers who join it and become co-owners of it.

It is quite the opposite of what the Left is doing - creating a dictatorship that can command corporations, violate the contracts and rights of shareholders, pick and choose winners and losers (with the Unions and Party backers winning, of course) and so on.

I'll point out that all our discussion has really been about that Free Market Capitalism. Even the Mexican demographic conquest is one branch of Leftist takeover that is destroying our Free Market - FORCING Americans to adapt to the ovewhelming financial burden of providing for the criminal population of a foreign nation.

That is, according to Marx's plan, an element of the destruction of our Free Market Capitalist system.

[toddwquigley]

I'll point out that all our discussion has really been about that Free Market Capitalism. Even the Mexican demographic conquest is one branch of Leftist takeover that is destroying our Free Market - FORCING Americans to adapt to the ovewhelming financial burden of providing for the criminal population of a foreign nation.

That is, according to Marx's plan, an element of the destruction of our Free Market Capitalist system.[/quote]

Ah, I see you've run into Jeff. Usually where Conrad goes, Jeff is soon to follow, and he will say about the same things as Conrad, all of which is based on opinions and emotions. Check through what he wrote you and see if you can find any facts except for his reference to the act of entering the country illegally, not paying taxes, abusing our social system, and then having children who are American citizens, so we can also pay to raise them.

The average child will cost the State over $500,000 to raise to age 18. Notice I said average, average being a child where the parents actually bear the lion's share of the costs, but we are talking Mexicans, the same Mexicans that go to classes in Mexico on how to abuse our social system and get every handout available to them, all the while working and not paying taxes. All in all, it actually costs the State about $800,000 to raise each illegal child.

Wait, he said "illegal child", yep, it's against the law to purposely enter the country illegally in order to have children so that they are Americans (Talk about "You were conceived in sin, and born into sin like your father before you" LOL!).

Did you know that this child is then not eligible for citizenship? Yes, it's true, but of course you have to get the mother to admit that she purposely entered the country in order to break this law, which we all know isn't going to happen.

Ever notice who the most vocal opponent to anti-immigration is? The Mexican Government! Yes, great idea, let's send everyone to America so they can make money and send it back here. It kills two stoned birds, Mexico gets rid of their unproductive trouble makers, and they get American dollars. export enough people, and eventually you carry the vote in America.

Per a recent BBC show, the Mexican government actually pays for classes on how to take advantage of the American system, as you noted, they also give out free supplies for making the crossing, and subsidize the coyotes, but lately they have found it cheaper to just pay the drug gangs to use their smuggling tunnels. Of course, it's sometimes impossible to tell the difference between the Mexican gangs and the Mexican government.

I have a breakdown of all the tax dollars that are spent on illegals and their activities which I will find and post. Suffice it to say, it's about 30% of the State budget. Remember when California had the best roads in the country, what happened? We spent that money on Mexicans...

[Speak2Truth]

At the end of a May 1 rally in Santa Barbara, I had a chat with one of the organizers. She was a tall white woman with a Che Guevara pin in her hat. She explained what they were up to.

She is actually Mexican, one of the ruling class. She is also Communist. They look down on the "brown" Mexicans, think of them as cattle. They figured out that by starving the "cattle", they force 'em to migrate to the US where money is earned and sent back to Mexico. Most of that money, through the bribe system, works its way up to the ruling class. They're making billions of dollars by starving a portion of their population and driving them like cattle to graze and fatten in the US.

Mexico is an oil-rich nation run by greedy Leftists who, working with leftists in the US, are seizing control of US assets by sheer force of numbers.

The only reason it's not a shooting war is that Americans are, so far, too stupid to fight back. She laughed about that.

I went down to Los Angeles to cover an event and saw these fliers posted around...

https://www.silcom.com/%7Evikman/PD/whitesgetout2.jpg

[toddwquigley]

[quote=Speak2Truth;91864]At the end of a May 1 rally in Santa Barbara, I had a chat with one of the organizers. She was a tall white woman with a Che Guevara pin in her hat. She explained what they were up to.

Yes, there are plenty of rich "White" European Mexicans with loads of money, they are the ones that actually run the show, the show being the government and the Narcos, which are of course one and the same. Many can trace their lineage back to individual Conquistadors, and/or Spanish aristocracy. They consider themselves Spaniards first and Mexicans second, and still act and think like it's the Sixteenth century, in that they are there to rule the poor, stupid Indians by whatever means necessary.

The treaty of Hildago riles them, because the sale of California was done behind their back, and then a year later we found gold. As far as they are concerned Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California were stolen from them, and they plan to use the wetbacks to get it back by sheer birth rate.

They don't have any respect for those descended from Indians, and even having more than 1/2 Indian blood will forever keep you out of their society no matter how much money or power you think you have.

Yes, they have been raping their country, and they could care less who is hurt in the process. They are keeping the oil in reserve until there isn't much left and the price goes up, because there's plenty to be made right now by exporting labor to America. They are close with American leftists, of course, but they also have significant investments in many manufacturing business, and anywhere cheap labor is needed in large amounts.

Yes, they are all communists, but not communists as in a regular comrade, who works to support the state, but the communists that call the shots, and live like royalty while the populace is enslaved to the government. They dole out choice government jobs to those who best do their bidding, and those who don't, they feed to the narcos.

In America, their action arm is of course the Mexican mafia, which along with the guards union, runs the State prisons. Many of the most powerful Mexicans in California sit in the maximum security section of Pelican Bay State Prison. When they are released, they are called to Mexico, where they either get treated as special guests or get a bullet, depending on their behavior.

The Mexican Mafia is also known as MF13, and they are the action arm of La Raza AKA: Aztlan. Sonya, our dear white hating Supreme Court Nominee is a top member of La Raza, and takes her orders from Mexico, even though she technically isn't Mexican.

Using MF13, the narcos, and the Mexican government, The Mexican Elite have consolidated control of all the Hispanics north of El Salvador as La Raza, (MF 13 started in El Salvador).

I can go on and on about this subject, but it's not any big secret, this information is all over the internet, starting with here: National Council of La Raza (https://www.nclr.org/)

Why you ask? Because when the elites get together a divvy up the World, everyone wants to have a big a piece as they can get, so that there are plenty of resources and plenty of comrades to work for them.

They are all going to have a problem though, and it's called Islam, but that's a whole different subject.