INTRO: Some have said that Chief Justice Roberts "rewrote" ObamaCare to be a tax, to make it pass muster. No, he really did not do that. What Roberts did was rationalize ObamaCare to be a Tax, and then claimed an all-encompassing authority to tax <virtually anything> by the federal government, which is a patently false claim <and why he may have done this is discussed elsewhere>. However to first even HEAR the Case, the court had to agree that ObamaCare was not a tax, thereby not excluded from judgement under the Anti-Injunction Act.
Actually the distinction of it being a "Tax" or a "fine/penalty" should not really matter, as both were deliberately prohibited by the nation's founders. Do we honestly believe that this nation's founders were so naive that they would allow a prohibited "tax" to be redefined as a penalty, or a prohibited penalty to be redefined as a tax, and thereby allow the government engage tyrannous abuse of authority by simply redefining it?
"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words"
Samuel Adams
Well, as it turns out, those Founders did not do so. There are prohibitions in the Constitution to both ObamaCare being applied as a "Tax", and a "Penalty".
"A TAX"As originally written and intended, the Constitution prohibited this sort of Direct Tax or fine to Congress, because both allowed the Congress to enact AGENDAS, you know, such as "tax the rich" and redistribution of wealth. Originally "direct tax" was recognized by our founders to included income from "trades" or "occupations". I have notes from Pennsylvania's ratification of the Constitution which recognizes "trades" and "occupations" in the primary definition of direct tax, with property and things which can be transferred being only in the secondary definition.
The Constitution indicates in
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 4 under "Limits to Congress":
- "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."
After government attempted to enact various direct taxations, the Supreme Court ruled in 1895,
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429, that even <secondary definition> taxes upon on interest, dividends, and rents imposed by the
Income Tax Act of 1894 were indeed direct taxes, and were unconstitutional because they violated the rule that direct taxes must be apportioned.
In 1913 the
16th Amendment changed this, by allowing tax on income "from whatever source derived."
Shortly thereafter (1916) the Court went even further to change "direct" tax, and redefine income, in
Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co, in which the Court stated that the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation but simply prevented the courts from taking the power of income taxation possessed by Congress from the beginning out of the category of indirect taxation to which it inherently belonged.
This claim in Stanton was a falsehood and utter corruption. The Court was saying that income from employment was now an indirect "event-tax", or "excise tax" rather than a direct tax to the individual, equivalent to a tax on purchasing clothes, food, or filling our gas tanks, with our labor from our employment being essentially ... worthless, rather than the equal exchange of labor for payment - something fundamentally different from an excise event-tax! This was a corruption of not only intent of the founders, but also corrupted the very definition of "direct tax" itself which the founders recognized!
However, since ObamCare is not based on income, but rather the absence of a property (insurance), it is undeniably a "direct tax" to the individual, and remains prohibited by the Constitution unless it is apportioned in each state according to the census!
FINE OR PENALTYThe founders, in their wisdom, had another check, an insurance to prevent "agendas", and prevent a "direct tax" from simply being re-defined as a "fine" or "penalty"
The United States Constitution, Article I, Section 9 "Limits on Congress", has the strong prohibition:
- No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
A
bill of attainder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder) is a judgment levied on an individual or groups intending to pronounce guilt without the benefit of a trial.
A
Bill of attainder is prohibited not only because 1) it is a
usurpation of the judicial authority by the Legislative branch, but also because 2) it can so readily be abused to corrupt the legislative process with political intent (AGENDAS!).
A prime example of a bill of attainder would be the threats from Congress to legislate taxes on AIG executives receiving bonuses - particularly given the fact that those bonuses were a contractual part of the employment contract predating any government involvement.
Bills of Attainder invariably involve
"A Taking", which is the confiscation by mere statute of property (money), or individual rights themselves, and doing so without benefit of any due process.
In the case of the mandate for health care insurance, the government is declaring every American guilty if not covered by health care insurance, and then providing a penalty, a 'taking', for this guilt, without any benefit of due process of law, bypassing the judiciary entirely - a bill of attainder.
The
"takings" in the case of ObamaCare (and RomneyCare) also involve the abrogation of a full 80% of the Bill of Rights, inclusive of the 1st Amendment, and then from the 4th Amendment protection of personal papers and effects from unreasonable search and seizure, unless following due process of an individual court hearing, on up through violation of the 10th Amendment. Furthermore, even more takings may occur by the mere "deeming" of the Secretary of Health & Human Services, again without any sort of due process on an individual basis.
As shown, the Government's difficulty in consistently defining the ObamaCare as either a "tax" or a "penalty" is no coincidence , but rather only an attempt to simultaneously bypass two deliberate prohibitions to Congress in the Constitution. Essentially the government was trying to find the most convenient definition for the given moment so as to push it past the people and the Court, a "high-wire balancing act", and this was clearly evident throughout the court hearing.
In the OP I reference the original understanding of "direct tax" at the time of this nation's founding. Here is that definition from the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention.
PROHIBITION OF A "DIRECT TAX":
- "The power of direct taxation applies to every individual, as congress under this government is expressly vested with the authority of laying a capitation or poll-tax upon every person to any amount. This is a tax that, however oppressive in its nature, and unequal in its operation, is certain as to its produce and simple in it collection; it cannot be evaded like the objects of imposts or excise, and will be paid, because all that a man hath will he give for his head. This tax is so congenial to the nature of despotism, that it has ever been a favorite under such governments.
Some of those who were in the late general convention from this state, have long labored to introduce a poll-tax among us.The power of direct taxation will further apply to every individual, as congress may tax land, cattle, trades, occupations, &c. to any amount, and every object of internal taxation is of that nature, that however oppressive, the people will have but this alternative, either to pay the tax, or let their property be taken for all resistance will be vain. The standing army and select militia would enforce the collection."
THE ADDRESS AND REASONS OF DISSENT OF THE MINORITY of the CONVENTION, (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/bdsdcc:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28bdsdccc0401%29%29)
Of the State of Pennsylvania, to their Constituents.Signed on p. 3 by Nathaniel Breading and twenty others; followed by the vote of the convention on ratification of the Constitution. Dated: Philadelphia, Dec. 12, 1787.
As is clear in the above reference, a direct tax includes incomes from trades and occupations.
As described in that definition, ObamaCare also cannot be avoided. We cannot "sell" anything to "save our heads", any more so than we can not be employed, to avoid having our wages taken from us.
We are to be taxed and directed by compulsion, command, and our freedoms violated by mere virtue of being citizens of the country.
Those who already do comply with the un-enumerated power of those numerous directives, are not penalized financially, but will similarly lose their freedoms, lose their ability to choose what care they receive (and pay for), lose their right of Freedom of Association in who they contract with, and will have their personal information accessed at will, without any sort of due process whatsoever.
It's worse than unconstitutional. It's pure socialism.
It is specifically designed to collapse our healthcare system, put private insurers out of business, and, (I'm guessing), eventually make all doctors into unionized government employees....with the fines/penalties, combined with the insurance premiums, (paid directly to government), to pay for all of it. There will be no turning back, once it is implemented.
My neighbor used to work in the, (private), student loan industry. I believe the government takeover of that entire industry, was a trial balloon; and it was done with barely a wimper from the public.
It also put thousands out of work, and is a complete bureaucratic nightmare.
They've already laid all of the groundwork, using loan forgiveness as the carrot.
http://www.finaid.org/loans/forgiveness.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/forgiveness.phtml)
Quote from: kramarat on August 06, 2013, 05:41:59 AM
They've already laid all of the groundwork, using loan forgiveness as the carrot.
http://www.finaid.org/loans/forgiveness.phtml (http://www.finaid.org/loans/forgiveness.phtml)
Good find K, I'm sure not many on the Right even knows about this list of giveaways.
WOW, the only program not mentioned was just getting a damn job and paying it off like the rest of the country.
Quote from: Solar on August 06, 2013, 06:41:25 AM
Good find K, I'm sure not many on the Right even knows about this list of giveaways.
WOW, the only program not mentioned was just getting a damn job and paying it off like the rest of the country.
With government now running the student loan business, the list will quietly keep growing, and every path to loan forgiveness will be to become involved with some form of government, guaranteeing continued government growth, continued redistribution of wealth, and larger blocs of democrat voters.
You can't actually sell personal responsibility, selflessness, or paying back your damned debts to a majority lol.
But you can sell the Obama menu to them. Too bad.
Maybe we'll get lucky with a Hail Mary based in IRS, NSA, Benghazi, etc.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 06, 2013, 01:08:51 PM
You can't actually sell personal responsibility, selflessness, or paying back your damned debts to a majority lol.
But you can sell the Obama menu to them. Too bad.
Maybe we'll get lucky with a Hail Mary based in IRS, NSA, Benghazi, etc.
Apparently you like to "whistle as you walk thorough the graveyard".
The whole reason I posted this thread was because you believe that RomneyCare is a perfectly reasonable representation of the 10th Amendment as "Fifty Flavors of Democracy".
Curiously those same States all recognize in their constitutions that Bills of Attainder are prohibited to any government, and inherently tyrannous. In fact bills of attainder were prohibited by British common law, even before this Nation's founding.
We don't need to "get lucky" by hoping for some enormous event to remove the Obama administration. The problem is not just the Obama administration itself, but the Republican party as well, and RomneyCare is "Exhibit A" for this, but there are many other similar exhibits.
What we need is the restoration of reliance on the U.S. Constitution, and for that to happen we first need to stand up.
I was literally not responding to you, or your tangent, in the least.
My post was a personal take on the sorry state of affairs today (Obama voters), as were the 2 prior to mine.
Do you have a problem that should be helped by somebody besides the random strangers on this board ?
You really can't turn every thread on this board into an angry standoff with somebody.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 07, 2013, 07:34:28 AM
I was literally not responding to you, or your tangent, in the least.
My post was a personal take on the sorry state of affairs today (Obama voters), as were the 2 prior to mine.
Do you have a problem that should be helped by somebody besides the random strangers on this board ?
You really can't turn every thread on this board into an angry standoff with somebody.
Curiously, in a thread I posted, specifically in response to your support of Romney, so as to define why RomneyCare is equally a gross violation as is ObamaCare, ... yet you're "not responding to me".
Which is WHY I indicated you were "whistling through the graveyard". You got that, right?
Your post is a myopic view that can decry those ignorant "Obama voters", while you ignore the enormous ignorance you yourself promote, resulting in just a different flavor of statism, both of which are entirely incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, and individual freedoms! Yet you don't get that the Republicans are every bit as much a hazard.
Yes, I do have a real problem with the ignorance of Republican voters, particularly the idiots that call themselves Conservatives, and should know better, when they really don't have any clue what the Constitution indicates, and that their own perversion is every bit as much destroying this nation and our freedoms as Obama's Marxism.
It is not I that turned this issue into an angry personalized standoff. It was actually
you who did so (http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/the-constitution/%27fifty-flavors-of-democracy%27-%2810th-amendment%29/msg139922/#msg139922), and have still utterly failed to show any support whatsoever for yours and Romney's corruptions of the 10th Amendment.
Dude, you're a f-n hazard, an ignoramus so blind to what is going on around him that you're a threat to this country, our freedoms and our future. I really don't mind you being ignorant; but what I do mind is that you had the profound ignorance to be so ignorant, and yet imagine you actually have a clue, and
then engage an extended ad hominem attack against me (http://conservativepoliticalforum.com/the-constitution/%27fifty-flavors-of-democracy%27-%2810th-amendment%29/msg139922/#msg139922). As a result of that, I'm endeavoring to teach you, one way or t'other.
If you cannot figure out on your own, even at this late date so long after the election, that something is going on seriously wrong in this country for us to have Romney as our Candidate in 2012, the absolute worst candidate at the absolute worst time, when he was influential in RomneyCare, and also ObamaCare's structure.
And Romney's candidacy actually prohibited the GOP from taking ANY STANCE AT ALL against the biggest issue of the election, and threat to our very freedoms, so big it has resulted in the total discard of the Constitution: O-care.
Why the flock can't you figure that out on your own?
Look shithead, why can't you just stop being so needy as to annoy the hell out of a whole message board with your cloying, whining appeal for someone, anyone to agree with your n-e-v-e-r-e-n-d-i-n-g-b-o-r-i-n-g-a-s-h-e-l-l-s-l-e-e-p-i-n-d-u-c-i-n-g-e-y-e-g-o-u-g-i-n-g-c-r-a-p ?
Did you notice that nobody but me is responding ? They just want it to stop.
The long winded arguments are getting old.
We could fill volumes of books with exactly how the constitution has been so derailed...by both parties.
Now that the SCOTUS has determined that Obamacare is constitutional, barring armed conflict, I don't know what else to do, but work toward the effort to get it defunded.
It took a long time to get to this point; we aren't going to spin back to a constitutional government overnight.
Which is why I don't really like fighting with liberals; I'd prefer to get them to understand that the constitution is just as important to them, too.
A lot of us, including me, appreciate and read the long posts, even if we reply or not. The forum isn't going anywhere.
Quote from: taxed on August 07, 2013, 04:14:56 PM
A lot of us, including me, appreciate and read the long posts, even if we reply or not. The forum isn't going anywhere.
I agree. I even like the arguments; but after they get into two or three days.... :blink:
I go cross eyed getting into the stuff that Trip is posting, on my own, but I consider his threads and post to be pretty good, bite sized nuggets of info.
Quote from: kramarat on August 07, 2013, 04:40:02 PM
I agree. I even like the arguments; but after they get into two or three days.... :blink:
I go cross eyed getting into the stuff that Trip is posting, on my own, but I consider his threads and post to be pretty good, bite sized nuggets of info.
I agree. One thing I hate in modern sound-bite media world are the short "discussions" that don't get into the meat of anything. I like those who take the time to really get into it.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 07, 2013, 03:15:39 PM
Look shithead, why can't you just stop being so needy as to annoy the hell out of a whole message board with your cloying, whining appeal for someone, anyone to agree with your n-e-v-e-r-e-n-d-i-n-g-b-o-r-i-n-g-a-s-h-e-l-l-s-l-e-e-p-i-n-d-u-c-i-n-g-e-y-e-g-o-u-g-i-n-g-c-r-a-p ?
Did you notice that nobody but me is responding ? They just want it to stop.
Shithead. :biggrin: I love it when they care to "send the very best". You're getting desperate, actually beyond desperate.
I'm not needy. I just wanted to engage a discussion that should be important to us all. You started the personalized mudslinging and those watching (but not responding) have undoubtedly noticed you're getting your ass handed to you. Probably most of those watching recognize that, "fools go where angels fear to tread."
People choose to read these threads, or not. I'm sure we'd all appreciate you actually attempting to address the subject matter.
The only person I'm having trouble with, even across numerous threads here and in the main board, is you. The problem with you is a result of your short grasp, and shorter attention span, and the fact that you imagine that you've actually 'got game". However you're actually going to have find a longer reach and better grasp to defend Romney's "Fifty Flavors" effectively.
Any time you want to actually make an attempt at addressing the subject, you just let me know. I'm more than happy to make peace, but I'm not going to endure more of your empty, personalized posts without you ending up with bruises.
Until then, you jus' keep on whistling through the graveyard, ya' hear?
Quote from: kramarat on August 07, 2013, 04:10:26 PM
The long winded arguments are getting old.
We could fill volumes of books with exactly how the constitution has been so derailed...by both parties.
Now that the SCOTUS has determined that Obamacare is constitutional, barring armed conflict, I don't know what else to do, but work toward the effort to get it defunded.
It took a long time to get to this point; we aren't going to spin back to a constitutional government overnight.
Which is why I don't really like fighting with liberals; I'd prefer to get them to understand that the constitution is just as important to them, too.
I guess I wont be passing you a copy of my book when it comes out. (kidding)
I haven't decided on whether or not to use a pseudonym, but I have decided on a title.
The point of my posting on various aspects of the Constitution is that we're never going to bet back to a Constitutional government if we don't recognize all the varied ways that government has exceeded the Constituition. If we only pull back certain things, then we're going to get back to the same place we are now, but probably in much shorter time period.
This is only my own opinion, but I'm very certain we won't get anything back without a revolution of sorts, at least an uprising. We have people on the Court that are dead-set on engaging Social Justice, and Socialism, and whitewashing both what the Excutive and state legislatures are doing. Ignoring the fact these justice never should have been allowed to sit there in the first place, we're never going to get the proper perspective in the Court back until we first clean house in Congress. And it still may require removing some by force.
I only caught a bit of Levin tonight, but he was alluding to this very same thing in an extended rant, and other conservative mouthpieces are as well. I'm about to download tonight's show, as soon as it becomes available, which should be shortly. Ah, here it is now, Levin's show from Aug 7th! (http://www.stationcaster.com/download.php?file=http://cdn.stationcaster.com/stations/mark/media/mpeg/8_7_13_Mark_Levin_Audio_Rewind-1375924736.mp3&id=1683171)
In any event, it is my sincere hope that my long posts (along with supporting references) encourage people to join this forum and either argue with me, or against me.
However even those that don't join in on the discussion will at least start thinking about things, and that's the first step to our recovery - for all of us, myself included.
Quote from: kramarat on August 07, 2013, 04:10:26 PM
Now that the SCOTUS has determined that Obamacare is constitutional, barring armed conflict, I don't know what else to do, but work toward the effort to get it defunded.
Actually, I'm quite certain that a great many would disagree with this, but SCOTUS didn't actually "determine that ObamaCare is constitutional".
The constitutional authority of "judicial review" does not directly indicate, nor imply, that the SCOTUS is the final word on constitutionality, nor the only word.
Unfortunately this misconception has come about through the federal government's own deliberate misrepresentation, and the people's negligence regarding their own authority, and responsibility.
There are at least 3 other paths to take before armed conflict:
1)
State nullification. References
Video:Nullification: The Rightful Remedy (http://youtu.be/kwqluxtql3c)
Article: "How do we get rid of Obamacare? Nullify it!" (http://www.newswithviews.com/Publius/huldah112.htm)
"A nullification is the rightful remedy whenever the government violates the Constitution"
~Thomas Jefferson
2)
Federal Grand Jury. Leo Donofrio Esq., has an excellent article about Grand Juries, and shows how the federal government has deliberately misrepresented these being no longer valid, when it is untrue.
Donofrio: "The Federal Grand Jury is the 4th Branch of Government" (http://web.archive.org/web/20090220133950/http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/01/22/the-federal-grand-jury-is-the-4th-branch-of-government)
3)
Civil Disobedience. We have the right to refuse to participate in ObamaCare, and to on our own take a stand. We can refuse to participate in the health car process, and refuse to pay any fine for not having health care.
Reference this Declaration, also in my signature:
Declaration: ObamCare Null & Void (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/obamacare-unconstitutional/)
Quote from: kramarat on August 07, 2013, 04:10:26 PM
Which is why I don't really like fighting with liberals; I'd prefer to get them to understand that the constitution is just as important to them, too.
Unfortunately those "Liberals", by deliberate and conscious choice, do not want to understand and regard the Constitution, and must necessarily reject its tenets in support of their beliefs. Their entire ideology revolves around big government fascistic dictate of all the terms of our lives, and society overall - Social Engineering.
Those so-called "Liberals" don't really regard individual liberty any more than the statist globalists that occupy the Republican party. However those statist globalists in the Republican party have done a much better job of hiding their agenda - they lie.
We have about as much chance of getting those Progressives to regard the Constitution, as we do of fixing the problems by "voting harder".
It is unreasonable to believe that we might fix the problems we now face by the same means that created those problems in the first place.
QuoteUnfortunately those "Liberals", by deliberate and conscious choice, do not want to understand and regard the Constitution, and must necessarily reject its tenets in support of their beliefs. Their entire ideology revolves around big government fascistic dictate of all the terms of our lives, and society overall - Social Engineering.
Those so-called "Liberals" don't really regard individual liberty any more than the statist globalists that occupy the Republican party. However those statist globalists in the Republican party have done a much better job of hiding their agenda - they lie.
We have about as much chance of getting those Progressives to regard the Constitution, as we do of fixing the problems by "voting harder".
It is unreasonable to believe that we might fix the problems we now face by the same means that created those problems in the first place.
I completely disagree with this part.
Liberals, progressives, socialists, etc., are
made, not born; and they are being spewn out by our public education system.
When kids are taught "rights", there is no mention of the constitution. They learn that they have a "right" to not be bullied; a "right" to participate in high school sports, regardless of ability; a "right" to free school lunch; a "right" to move to the next grade, regardless of their grasp of the material; a "right" to go to college; a "right" to a well paying job.
It's socialist indoctrination from the moment they hit the classroom...
Having lived in Santa Cruz for 11 years, I got to know, (and like), a lot of "liberals". They aren't much different...there are even droves of "Joe six pack" liberals; they just happen to drink expensive boutique beer and smoke a joint after work, as opposed to Budweiser and a shot of whiskey. :wink:
Many of these people just yearn to be associated with a cause, want to belong to something that matters, and are willing to fully embrace things, based on little information:
Save the whales.
...Trees
...Earth
Armed with some basic information, I believe that they can be convinced that the REPUBLIC is worth saving. Hell, the entire 60's revolution was based on cutting down an out of control government...imagine if that movement was based on returning the government to constitutional responsibility. We'd be living in a much different place.
The Washington elite are
banking on these people being ignored and vilified by conservatives; meanwhile, they are becoming a majority. None of your ideas will work, if conservatives continue to become a minority in this country.
One does not have to be a constitutional scholar to convince people of the benefits of a limited government. Our debt
alone can be used as an ice breaker. Without winning converts, our numbers will continue to dwindle; and we have zero representation in Washington.
Quote from: kramarat on August 08, 2013, 03:44:20 AM
I completely disagree with this part.
Liberals, progressives, socialists, etc., are made, not born; and they are being spewn out by our public education system.
When kids are taught "rights", there is no mention of the constitution. They learn that they have a "right" to not be bullied; a "right" to participate in high school sports, regardless of ability; a "right" to free school lunch; a "right" to move to the next grade, regardless of their grasp of the material; a "right" to go to college; a "right" to a well paying job.
It's socialist indoctrination from the moment they hit the classroom...
Having lived in Santa Cruz for 11 years, I got to know, (and like), a lot of "liberals". They aren't much different...there are even droves of "Joe six pack" liberals; they just happen to drink expensive boutique beer and smoke a joint after work, as opposed to Budweiser and a shot of whiskey. :wink:
Many of these people just yearn to be associated with a cause, want to belong to something that matters, and are willing to fully embrace things, based on little information:
Save the whales.
...Trees
...Earth
Armed with some basic information, I believe that they can be convinced that the REPUBLIC is worth saving. Hell, the entire 60's revolution was based on cutting down an out of control government...imagine if that movement was based on returning the government to constitutional responsibility. We'd be living in a much different place.
The Washington elite are banking on these people being ignored and vilified by conservatives; meanwhile, they are becoming a majority. None of your ideas will work, if conservatives continue to become a minority in this country.
One does not have to be a constitutional scholar to convince people of the benefits of a limited government. Our debt alone can be used as an ice breaker. Without winning converts, our numbers will continue to dwindle; and we have zero representation in Washington.
True K, they've been indoctrinated, they are taught that being rich is somehow the equivalent of evil and that all things bad stem from Capitalism, men and women are equal on every level biologically, regardless of the laws of nature, that perversion is to be accepted as a lifestyle choice.
No, these are not by nature right, these need to be taught/indoctrinated, because it goes against the natural law of human nature, right and wrong are only relative to popular opinion, something the left has been working extremely hard at over the last 35 years to cvhange.
Quote from: Trip on August 07, 2013, 06:23:14 PM
Shithead. :biggrin: I love it when they care to "send the very best". You're getting desperate, actually beyond desperate.
I think if someone took the time to go back and hi-lite all of the childish little insults that permeate all of your novels, it would tell a different story.
I just wanted to cut to the chase, instead of writing (or lifting) 2000 words of repetitive, mind-numbing quicksand.
Now go to bed.....whether in mama's basement or the assisted living facility.....not totally sure which is your reality yet.
Don't be too needy for attention and approval !
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 07:26:03 AM
I think if someone took the time to go back and hi-lite all of the childish little insults that permeate all of your novels, it would tell a different story.
I just wanted to cut to the chase, instead of writing (or lifting) 2000 words of repetitive, mind-numbing quicksand.
Now go to bed.....whether in mama's basement or the assisted living facility.....not totally sure which is your reality yet.
Don't be too needy for attention and approval !
Let me get this straight. You call me "shithead" and then quote my response and you're the one claiming "childish insults"?
Evidently your memory is even shorter than both your reach and your grasp. Allow me to refresh it, since it's close at hand. This is how you started things in your first post in this Constitution forum, over in the "Fifty Flavors" thread as you sought to defend Romney's corruption of the 10th:
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 04, 2013, 05:39:50 AM
"Refugees in our own country"
"extremely alienable rights"
"our rights pilfered locally"
"subversion"
"state-sponsored corruption"
A bunch of dramatic, activist crap that reads like something babbled by Sharpton, or Pelosi, or Barney Frank.
Impressive.
Since that post, you've not had one direct reference to the Constitution,
- not one reference to the Federalist,
- not one reference to the Founders letters,
- not one reference to supreme court opinion.
- not even any attempt at only a superficial argument of how Romney might be correct!
All you've had is ad hominem attacks, which goes along way to establishing you as the flunky of this forum.
This is beyond tiresome and you're serving as nothing but a disruption to real discussion, like some child in the backseat that won't stop being objectionable on a long road trip.
Here's your ass. Come back when you have something more.
Quote from: Solar on August 08, 2013, 05:40:53 AM
True K, they've been indoctrinated, they are taught that being rich is somehow the equivalent of evil and that all things bad stem from Capitalism, men and women are equal on every level biologically, regardless of the laws of nature, that perversion is to be accepted as a lifestyle choice.
No, these are not by nature right, these need to be taught/indoctrinated, because it goes against the natural law of human nature, right and wrong are only relative to popular opinion, something the left has been working extremely hard at over the last 35 years to cvhange.
A quirky little thing about liberals....they can be turned.
I mean the masses of street level libs.
They don't have to fully understand a subject, to become passionate about it; this can be applied to the constitution, big government, and be used to our advantage. These people love to picket, protest and demonstrate.
Using the debt as a wedge to get them engaged against big government, is a minor one. A few of the big ones, are, Obama's domestic drone program, Obama's incestuous relationship with the big banks and Monsanto, Obama's domestic NSA spying program.
I don't have a requirement for someone to label themselves as a conservative, to have them join in the fight against the government take over of our lives. The more the merrier.
I didn't claim to be innocent.
I stated that if one peruses your boat-anchor-posts.....they'll find a gigantic disparity of insults that will favor you, in sheer poundage.
I've done a few myself, that's the truth.
And quite fitting for the conservative version of shenanigans.
Liberals by and large need to feel that they are part of the "good / smart / caring / loving" group, that is going to "save the world, or specific wonderful thing" (i.e. bug, worm, weed, etc.)
They need to receive pats on the head for being special in those regards. And do not care at all about the details, truth, logic, or likelihood of it actually happening. It works on teeny boppers who just took their first socialism-tinged HS social studies class......all the way up to doddering old fossils who need something to do, somewhere to be.
There certainly are a bunch of traditional liberal gripes and fixations that can be directed at Obama now.
It's just that he and the MSM are far too successful with the pied-piper / santa claus / JFK-Camelot routine so far, and still.
It's tough to get them pissed when they're still gobbling up the fake promises and myths.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 08:25:16 AM
Liberals by and large need to feel that they are part of the "good / smart / caring / loving" group, that is going to "save the world, or specific wonderful thing" (i.e. bug, worm, weed, etc.)
They need to receive pats on the head for being special in those regards. And do not care at all about the details, truth, logic, or likelihood of it actually happening. It works on teeny boppers who just took their first socialism-tinged HS social studies class......all the way up to doddering old fossils who need something to do, somewhere to be.
There certainly are a bunch of traditional liberal gripes and fixations that can be directed at Obama now.
It's just that he and the MSM are far too successful with the pied-piper / santa claus / JFK-Camelot routine so far, and still.
It's tough to get them pissed when they're still gobbling up the fake promises and myths.
Monsanto and invasion of privacy/government prying, are two subjects that get them riled. Once they get fired up, making the Obama connection is pretty easy.
I will also make Obama/Bush connections. The truth hurts; and if the truth leads them to not trusting the government...that's exactly the road that I want them on.
Yeah, Bush was culpable in a lot of this stuff too.
Funny thing is that we conservatives admit this, and that he failed everyone as a presumptive conservative.
Yet the wall of protection, cone of silence, and zero dissent are still in place for BO, by libs.
I guess it's up to us to foment dissent on the lib side. We should, it's a tried & true tactic that they use on us 24/7.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 08:08:46 AM
I didn't claim to be innocent.
I stated that if one peruses your boat-anchor-posts.....they'll find a gigantic disparity of insults that will favor you, in sheer poundage.
I've done a few myself, that's the truth.
And quite fitting for the conservative version of shenanigans.
A few? That the facts, and Constitution itself stand with me is not an insult. It only shows your knowledge to be lacking.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 08:35:16 AM
Yeah, Bush was culpable in a lot of this stuff too.
Funny thing is that we conservatives admit this, and that he failed everyone as a presumptive conservative.
Yet the wall of protection, cone of silence, and zero dissent are still in place for BO, by libs.
I guess it's up to us to foment dissent on the lib side. We should, it's a tried & true tactic that they use on us 24/7.
Yep. It doesn't have to be threatening either.
There is a damned good reason that Reagan won on a "government sucks" platform.
Quote from: kramarat on August 08, 2013, 08:07:37 AM
A quirky little thing about liberals....they can be turned.
I mean the masses of street level libs.
They don't have to fully understand a subject, to become passionate about it; this can be applied to the constitution, big government, and be used to our advantage. These people love to picket, protest and demonstrate.
Using the debt as a wedge to get them engaged against big government, is a minor one. A few of the big ones, are, Obama's domestic drone program, Obama's incestuous relationship with the big banks and Monsanto, Obama's domestic NSA spying program.
I don't have a requirement for someone to label themselves as a conservative, to have them join in the fight against the government take over of our lives. The more the merrier.
Yes, they can be turned, but it's very difficult for us to do with facts, it requires breaking through their emotional wall and connection to their leftist religion.
However, with that said, Hussein has been a blessing in disguise, he, with the help of the Dim party managed to rip freedoms away from their supporters, his need to spy on Americans, use personal information via the IRS to hurt his opposition, all this has taken a toll on what they believed to be the right path.
Now they are beginning to look at liberalism and it's end goals with an eye of severe distrust, which will be reflected in 2014.
Many of these libs that bought the Hope and Change BS are now a little older and after being beaten across the knees with the socialist agenda, are beginning to look for yet another political option, one that touts more freedoms, less Govt intrusion, and that leads them towards Libertarianism, and who do they see as representative of that movement?
Rand Paul, who happens to be Tea party, which makes them look further into what the Tea party is, and what they are discovering is that it's not the lie the Dims sold them, it's about a return towards the Founders dreams.
In other words, these kids are angry and will be looking for an alternative to the Dim party and even if they don't vote Tea, they won't be voting Dim.
Quote from: Solar on August 08, 2013, 10:23:34 AM
Yes, they can be turned, but it's very difficult for us to do with facts, it requires breaking through their emotional wall and connection to their leftist religion.
However, with that said, Hussein has been a blessing in disguise, he, with the help of the Dim party managed to rip freedoms away from their supporters, his need to spy on Americans, use personal information via the IRS to hurt his opposition, all this has taken a toll on what they believed to be the right path.
Now they are beginning to look at liberalism and it's end goals with an eye of severe distrust, which will be reflected in 2014.
Many of these libs that bought the Hope and Change BS are now a little older and after being beaten across the knees with the socialist agenda, are beginning to look for yet another political option, one that touts more freedoms, less Govt intrusion, and that leads them towards Libertarianism, and who do they see as representative of that movement?
Rand Paul, who happens to be Tea party, which makes them look further into what the Tea party is, and what they are discovering is that it's not the lie the Dims sold them, it's about a return towards the Founders dreams.
In other words, these kids are angry and will be looking for an alternative to the Dim party and even if they don't vote Tea, they won't be voting Dim.
I swear... I talk to these people, and I think a republican, conservative, or
anybody else, (preferably a small government constitutionally conservative republican, (if there are any)), could sweep the lib vote, if part of the platform was phasing out GMO crops until they have had further study. A person that utters those words will have the backing of a huge portion of the lib population. Maybe Rand will do it.
I talked to a friend in Santa Cruz last weekend, and they marched in the streets, (against Obama), over the nomination of Taylor, and his Monsanto connections.
Quote from: kramarat on August 08, 2013, 10:34:39 AM
I swear... I talk to these people, and I think a republican, conservative, or anybody else, (preferably a small government constitutionally conservative republican, (if there are any)), could sweep the lib vote, if part of the platform was phasing out GMO crops until they have had further study. A person that utters those words will have the backing of a huge portion of the lib population. Maybe Rand will do it.
I talked to a friend in Santa Cruz last weekend, and they marched in the streets, (against Obama), over the nomination of Taylor, and his Monsanto connections.
Ya know, that's a good idea for someone wanting to get the recognition of these people.
It could easily be approached as a self sufficient/independent kind of issue, not attacking GMO, but rather steer them towards community farms, campaign to free up Govt land for farming and tell them to buy heirloom seeds in an effort to preserve natural seed lines, natural DNA.
Yeah, I know, community farming sounds like a socialist ideal, but it's what rings through to these people, especially Santa Cruz hippies.
Anyone that uses that as a platform will only gain support. It's not like they insulted GMO, rather touted a natural way of life, again, something that really appeals to a large part of the Dims base.
Especially if they can use public land for the purpose of growing food.
wow, that's a pretty nice idea.
Tea Partiers could be customizing / tailoring their campaigns to these liberal hot buttons, and they're good solid issues for conservative / libertarian beliefs anyway.
I'm dead serious, somebody should somehow put this strategy in the ear of the TP hopefuls out there. Finally a tactical effort to rival the rabid libs.
Out with the gifts to DNC-MSM that keep killing us...abortion, religion, budget cuts to handouts, etc........in with Monsanto, NSA, IRS, AP, drones, etc.
I'm not saying abandon the former beliefs, just go a whole campaign with nothing but the things that will confuse the libs. Conservatives will know what's up.
Then revisit the other stuff when you're safely elected.
Quote from: Trip on August 08, 2013, 08:44:13 AM
A few? That the facts, and Constitution itself stand with me is not an insult. It only shows your knowledge to be lacking.
One of us will have to yield, lol.
OK......I yield to the genitalman from the state of confusion.....
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 10:57:41 AM
wow, that's a pretty nice idea.
Tea Partiers could be customizing / tailoring their campaigns to these liberal hot buttons, and they're good solid issues for conservative / libertarian beliefs anyway.
I'm dead serious, somebody should somehow put this strategy in the ear of the TP hopefuls out there. Finally a tactical effort to rival the rabid libs.
Out with the gifts to DNC-MSM that keep killing us...abortion, religion, budget cuts to handouts, etc........in with Monsanto, NSA, IRS, AP, drones, etc.
I'm not saying abandon the former beliefs, just go a whole campaign with nothing but the things that will confuse the libs. Conservatives will know what's up.
Then revisit the other stuff when you're safely elected.
There's nothing confusing.
Roundup ready food crops are a freaking disaster waiting to happen. Combined with the spliced in bt toxin, and it's a nightmare.
This can be completely used to expose government corruption and crony capitalism at it's absolute worst. Obama's in it up to his big ears.
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 10:57:41 AM
wow, that's a pretty nice idea.
Tea Partiers could be customizing / tailoring their campaigns to these liberal hot buttons, and they're good solid issues for conservative / libertarian beliefs anyway.
I'm dead serious, somebody should somehow put this strategy in the ear of the TP hopefuls out there. Finally a tactical effort to rival the rabid libs.
Out with the gifts to DNC-MSM that keep killing us...abortion, religion, budget cuts to handouts, etc........in with Monsanto, NSA, IRS, AP, drones, etc.
I'm not saying abandon the former beliefs, just go a whole campaign with nothing but the things that will confuse the libs. Conservatives will know what's up.
Then revisit the other stuff when you're safely elected.
I guarantee you, they'll see this and run with it.
Keep an ear out for a campaign based on this or something similar, should be interesting.
Hell, maybe they'll even join and we can support them. :wink:
Quote from: kramarat on August 08, 2013, 11:13:34 AM
There's nothing confusing.
Roundup ready food crops are a freaking disaster waiting to happen. Combined with the spliced in bt toxin, and it's a nightmare.
This can be completely used to expose government corruption and crony capitalism at it's absolute worst. Obama's in it up to his big ears.
Confusing for them only in the context that they expect, at all times, for us to hand everything to them on a silver platter, with which to beat us.
If we don't, they'll be confused for a while, then scream "unfair !"
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 08, 2013, 07:37:34 PM
Confusing for them only in the context that they expect, at all times, for us to hand everything to them on a silver platter, with which to beat us.
If we don't, they'll be confused for a while, then scream "unfair !"
Some of them. MSM makes it look like all libs are political activists...they aren't.
You'd be surprised how many people, that would be considered libs, are completely disengaged.
When I was talking to my Santa Cruz buddy last weekend, I brought up Benghazi, and he didn't have the slightest clue what I was talking about. As incredible as that was, I shifted gears and started talking about GMO and Monsanto, and he was all over it...we ended up talking for an hour.
Quote from: Solar on August 08, 2013, 10:23:34 AM
Yes, they can be turned, but it's very difficult for us to do with facts, it requires breaking through their emotional wall and connection to their leftist religion.
However, with that said, Hussein has been a blessing in disguise, he, with the help of the Dim party managed to rip freedoms away from their supporters, his need to spy on Americans, use personal information via the IRS to hurt his opposition, all this has taken a toll on what they believed to be the right path.
Now they are beginning to look at liberalism and it's end goals with an eye of severe distrust, which will be reflected in 2014.
Many of these libs that bought the Hope and Change BS are now a little older and after being beaten across the knees with the socialist agenda, are beginning to look for yet another political option, one that touts more freedoms, less Govt intrusion, and that leads them towards Libertarianism, and who do they see as representative of that movement?
Rand Paul, who happens to be Tea party, which makes them look further into what the Tea party is, and what they are discovering is that it's not the lie the Dims sold them, it's about a return towards the Founders dreams.
In other words, these kids are angry and will be looking for an alternative to the Dim party and even if they don't vote Tea, they won't be voting Dim.
HOW do you actually dissuade those who are undeniably "rabid ideologues"?
Ideologues do not care about real-world outcome. Instead they embrace ideology with outcome being sacrificed, and often tens of millions of lives along with it.
We see the same rabid ideology being repeated again and again in Communism into modern times Progressivism, but it didn't start when Marx first put pen to paper either.
The same big-government Utopian planers and Keynesian economists have never ever given into outcome. The fact is that no country ever in the history of man has actually stimulated the economy with government directed economic impulse. America's attempts during and after WWII failed and only extended the depression. The Chinese, with the biggest stimulus ever in proportion to the economy, did not accomplish even a blip. Despite these realities this is what they still chose to do for our own economy, and despite it failing and no recovery in sight, they still insist that it only needs "more". It's still possible to turn on the News talk programs and hear them talk about the need for further stimulus, government investment in infrastructure, and mocking supply-side "trickle down" Reaganomics.
Have these "libs" actually abandoned their ideological bent? Maybe a few, but not really all that many of them. They just feel that Obama has betrayed them in his corporate associations. And that is what they're protesting with nominations like Taylor, and his association with Monsanto.
The problem is these rabid ideologues, in disregard to outcome, are not limited to the radical Progressive Marxists, but all also represented by other idealized (Utopian) groups that are somewhat more "moderate" in government involvement, such as the Libertarians whose intended outcome is virtually identical with the Progressives.
It's very disturbing to hear that our salvation to the current Progressive destruction is somehow seen to be in the Libertarian Rand Paul, even as recently voiced by Chris Matthews.
I'm reminded of the Robert Frost poem, Fire and Ice.
- Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice....
The truth is.... either would suffice.
Our form of government is a fine balance between limited government, and the social responsibility of the citizenry, and not just unfettered individual freedom.
Quote from: Trip on August 09, 2013, 03:58:22 AM
HOW do you actually dissuade those who are undeniably "rabid ideologues"?
Ideologues do not care about real-world outcome. Instead they embrace ideology with outcome being sacrificed, and often tens of millions of lives along with it.
We see the same rabid ideology being repeated again and again in Communism into modern times Progressivism, but it didn't start when Marx first put pen to paper either.
The same big-government Utopian planers and Keynesian economists have never ever given into outcome. The fact is that no country ever in the history of man has actually stimulated the economy with government directed economic impulse. America's attempts during and after WWII failed and only extended the depression. The Chinese, with the biggest stimulus ever in proportion to the economy, did not accomplish even a blip. Despite these realities this is what they still chose to do for our own economy, and despite it failing and no recovery in sight, they still insist that it only needs "more". It's still possible to turn on the News talk programs and hear them talk about the need for further stimulus, government investment in infrastructure, and mocking supply-side "trickle down" Reaganomics.
Have these "libs" actually abandoned their ideological bent? Maybe a few, but not really all that many of them. They just feel that Obama has betrayed them in his corporate associations. And that is what they're protesting with nominations like Taylor, and his association with Monsanto.
The problem is these rabid ideologues, in disregard to outcome, are not limited to the radical Progressive Marxists, but all also represented by other idealized (Utopian) groups that are somewhat more "moderate" in government involvement, such as the Libertarians whose intended outcome is virtually identical with the Progressives.
It's very disturbing to hear that our salvation to the current Progressive destruction is somehow seen to be in the Libertarian Rand Paul, even as recently voiced by Chris Matthews.
I'm reminded of the Robert Frost poem, Fire and Ice.
- Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice....
The truth is.... either would suffice.
Here's the problem Trip...as I see it.
As interesting as your posts and threads are, you act as though there is some strict constitutionalist, not only waiting in the wings, but also electable. If that person exists, who is it, and how do they get elected?
It seems as if you feel that, in order to be in the "club", a person has to have gone through some kind of constitutional "enlightenment". Ain't gonna happen.
When I talk to someone that leans toward "lib", about the dangers of GMO, (Roundup ready), crops, and that the government is complicit, I can easily draw them to the conclusion that "big government" is bad. We are agreeing.
Once the connection is made between GMO and big government, anyone that talks about shrinking the size and scope of government, will be listened to...no constitutional enlightenment required. If the candidate expresses a concern about the rapid expansion of glyphosate in our food supply, political affiliation ceases to matter...at least in the minds of millions of single issue voters.
I want them on my side. I want them voting to put a stop to crony capitalism, and the evil influences of big government. I don't care how deeply they understand the constitution.
I see your demand for constitutional understanding, to be akin to requiring that every soldier have a complete understanding of the specific strategy being employed, when we stormed the beaches of Normandy.
Brilliant generals are great, but they are completely useless without the infantry; and the infantry doesn't have to know every detail of every battle. They just have to be on the right side. :wink:
Quote from: Trip on August 09, 2013, 03:58:22 AM
HOW do you actually dissuade those who are undeniably "rabid ideologues"?
Ideologues do not care about real-world outcome. Instead they embrace ideology with outcome being sacrificed, and often tens of millions of lives along with it.
We see the same rabid ideology being repeated again and again in Communism into modern times Progressivism, but it didn't start when Marx first put pen to paper either.
The same big-government Utopian planers and Keynesian economists have never ever given into outcome. The fact is that no country ever in the history of man has actually stimulated the economy with government directed economic impulse. America's attempts during and after WWII failed and only extended the depression. The Chinese, with the biggest stimulus ever in proportion to the economy, did not accomplish even a blip. Despite these realities this is what they still chose to do for our own economy, and despite it failing and no recovery in sight, they still insist that it only needs "more". It's still possible to turn on the News talk programs and hear them talk about the need for further stimulus, government investment in infrastructure, and mocking supply-side "trickle down" Reaganomics.
Have these "libs" actually abandoned their ideological bent? Maybe a few, but not really all that many of them. They just feel that Obama has betrayed them in his corporate associations. And that is what they're protesting with nominations like Taylor, and his association with Monsanto.
The problem is these rabid ideologues, in disregard to outcome, are not limited to the radical Progressive Marxists, but all also represented by other idealized (Utopian) groups that are somewhat more "moderate" in government involvement, such as the Libertarians whose intended outcome is virtually identical with the Progressives.
It's very disturbing to hear that our salvation to the current Progressive destruction is somehow seen to be in the Libertarian Rand Paul, even as recently voiced by Chris Matthews.
I'm reminded of the Robert Frost poem, Fire and Ice.
- Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice....
The truth is.... either would suffice.
Our form of government is a fine balance between limited government, and the social responsibility of the citizenry, and not just unfettered individual freedom.
Trip, I know you love to type, but seriously, can you try and make your arguments a bit more concise, honestly, I still don't get your point.
What I did glean however, was you believe these libs are too stupid to see what is going on around them, or simply don't care, which is an extremely ignorant view.
These libs, many of them kids in their early 20 at the time knew nothing of politics, all they knew was Bush was evil because that was the message they saw on TV.
Yet now, 6 years older, they have lost Hope for Change, they believed that killing the energy industry was the right thing to do because we were all going to die from AGW, another lie exposed, IRS, NSA etc, these kids, now looking at their 30s or in their 30s are looking at a future they dreamed possible, gone, early years of production towards their future, gone.
Even the women in this same age group that are looking at their child bearing years and seeing them pissed away because of no real job prospects or a mate with future earning potential.
These are the people that swallowed the lie, they believed the Marxist when he promised so much, they believed in a dream, and now realize it was nothing but a lie.
These kids will do one of two things, either sit home mid term, or vote for change once again via the Tea movement, but don't shortchange them by lumping them in with the ideologues.
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2013, 06:27:51 AM
Trip, I know you love to type, but seriously, can you try and make your arguments a bit more concise, honestly, I still don't get your point.
What I did glean however, was you believe these libs are too stupid to see what is going on around them, or simply don't care, which is an extremely ignorant view.
What you seem to not recognize is most of those liberals are such rabid ideologues that they believe it is their duty to shut down industry, that America is an e-vil empire, and that "we" owe the world.
These libs, many of them kids in their early 20 at the time knew nothing of politics, all they knew was Bush was evil because that was the message they saw on TV.
Yet now, 6 years older, they have lost Hope for Change, they believed that killing the energy industry was the right thing to do because we were all going to die from AGW, another lie exposed, IRS, NSA etc, these kids, now looking at their 30s or in their 30s are looking at a future they dreamed possible, gone, early years of production towards their future, gone.
Even the women in this same age group that are looking at their child bearing years and seeing them pissed away because of no real job prospects or a mate with future earning potential.
These are the people that swallowed the lie, they believed the Marxist when he promised so much, they believed in a dream, and now realize it was nothing but a lie.
These kids will do one of two things, either sit home mid term, or vote for change once again via the Tea movement, but don't shortchange them by lumping them in with the ideologues.
The reality of ideologues is one doesn't change them because of a lot of wishful thinking and rationalizations on that exist only on their own part. That's what is extremely ignorant.
If these misnomered "libs" were really open to fact, then they would have taken note of the many times the CAGW was exposed, such as with "Climategate" and the East Anglia emails, and the trumped up hearings that followed those.
There wouldn't have been an "Occupy" movement.
If they were not already suffering from serious, habituated mental blocks, they would not be so rabidly socialist in the face of the European collapse, "austerity", and the ongoing mass violence there.
The Fact is that an enormous number of them truly believe that we are now on the crest of real change, to bring about a socialist globe, where a one world order is not only a positive thing, but something inevitable; where there are no more wars, and no famine, no starvation, and where we treat Mother Nature with respect, and America is put in its place. I've actually seen these discussions take place, more than once!
They actually believe that windmills, Birkenstocks, and globalist dictated direction are the salvation of mankind.
The truth is, it's a seriously naive mistake to imagine that rabid ideologues, no matter their stripe, are going to suddenly apply previously unused reasoning skills, and simple logic. If they actually thought for themselves, used applied logic, and took note of the actual outcome resulting from their beliefs, they wouldn't have been such rabid ideologues to begin with.
They are not us.
(** And here I thought I was doing well cutting down Fire & Ice to only the first two lines!)
Quote from: Trip on August 09, 2013, 08:10:28 AM
The reality of ideologues is one doesn't change them because of a lot of wishful thinking and rationalizations on that exist only on their own part. That's what is extremely ignorant.
If these misnomered "libs" were really open to fact, then they would have taken note of the many times the CAGW was exposed, such as with "Climategate" and the East Anglia emails, and the trumped up hearings that followed those.
There wouldn't have been an "Occupy" movement.
If they were not already suffering from serious, habituated mental blocks, they would not be so rabidly socialist in the face of the European collapse, "austerity", and the ongoing mass violence there.
The Fact is that an enormous number of them truly believe that we are now on the crest of real change, to bring about a socialist globe, where a one world order is not only a positive thing, but something inevitable; where there are no more wars, and no famine, no starvation, and where we treat Mother Nature with respect, and America is put in its place. I've actually seen these discussions take place, more than once!
They actually believe that windmills, Birkenstocks, and globalist dictated direction are the salvation of mankind.
The truth is, it's a seriously naive mistake to imagine that rabid ideologues, no matter their stripe, are going to suddenly apply previously unused reasoning skills, and simple logic. If they actually thought for themselves, used applied logic, and took note of the actual outcome resulting from their beliefs, they wouldn't have been such rabid ideologues to begin with.
They are not us.
(** And here I thought I was doing well cutting down Fire & Ice to only the first two lines!)
You completely missed my point about many of those that voted for change, weren't voting for Hussein, rather against RINO/Bush, they are not ideologues, they are pissed at politics as usual, it was a protest vote, one that won't be repeated in the Marxists favor.
Not everyone that voted for Hussein were liberal, just angry, and rightly so.
Quote from: kramarat on August 06, 2013, 05:23:11 AM
It's worse than unconstitutional. It's pure socialism.
It is specifically designed to collapse our healthcare system, put private insurers out of business, and, (I'm guessing), eventually make all doctors into unionized government employees....with the fines/penalties, combined with the insurance premiums, (paid directly to government), to pay for all of it. There will be no turning back, once it is implemented.
My neighbor used to work in the, (private), student loan industry. I believe the government takeover of that entire industry, was a trial balloon; and it was done with barely a wimper from the public.
It also put thousands out of work, and is a complete bureaucratic nightmare.
Oh it's more nefarious than that.
You name it, everything we as beings do, in this life, is somehow either connected too, or has an affect on your health.
And is now, thanks to this unconstitutional law, and unconstitutional ruling on this law, subject to regulation by the Federal Government.
Thank you Justice turncoat Roberts.
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2013, 09:38:43 AM
You completely missed my point about many of those that voted for change, weren't voting for Hussein, rather against RINO/Bush, they are not ideologues, they are pissed at politics as usual, it was a protest vote, one that won't be repeated in the Marxists favor.
Not everyone that voted for Hussein were liberal, just angry, and rightly so.
Not to mention many first time voters who believed his BS. Also, there were many who felt this guy was the real "healer" he portrayed himself as.
Quote from: supsalemgr on August 09, 2013, 11:13:05 AM
Not to mention many first time voters who believed his BS. Also, there were many who felt this guy was the real "healer" he portrayed himself as.
Exactly the point I'm trying to get across, and these young voters have already aged another quarter of the life they've already lived since the day they first voted, meaning they have matured a bit and won't be making the same mistake again, ever.
Quote from: Solar on August 09, 2013, 09:38:43 AM
You completely missed my point about many of those that voted for change, weren't voting for Hussein, rather against RINO/Bush, they are not ideologues, they are pissed at politics as usual, it was a protest vote, one that won't be repeated in the Marxists favor.
Not everyone that voted for Hussein were liberal, just angry, and rightly so.
No, I got the point, and yes, they are actually ideologues,
It's just that you imagine that point to involve some profound fact when it that's not the case.
Those few that voted for Obama out of anger for the economic collapse, are too ignorant to begin with, given their disregard for facts.
Those Marxist-Socialist voters are ideologues; that's how one becomes a Marxist in the most free country in the world. They don't need to be voting for Obama. THey were voting for an ideology and the symbolism that is Obama. These include the enviro-weenies, and the Hate-America crowd, and the Global Warming Crowd, and the Abortion Crowd, and the femi-nazi crowd, and many more. To vote against that, much less vote for Republican, or to not vote at all, they have to abandon their ideology, and that's not likely to happen because they are the strongest social advocates out there.
Beyond that, no one should actually have to point out that they blame the Republicans for Obama's shortcomings and failures.
The last several elections have been knee-jerk rejections of the party and platform before.
Obama benefitted from liberal motivation against everything conservative, GOP, and DC. As well as GOP voter malaise at that point.
Bush benefitted from the same Clinton fatigue.
Reagan from Carter disgust, Carter from Nixon disgust, Nixon from LBJ disgust.
The only anomalies are Clinton who wouldn't have beaten Bush 1 without Perot splitting the GOP vote, and Obama winning a second term, which doesn't have any possible rational explanation.
Expect the same Obama fatigue in 2016, unless he / they have truly figured out how to rig and blackmail the process permanently.
Quote from: Trip on August 09, 2013, 12:47:36 PM
No, I got the point, and yes, they are actually ideologues,
I don't imagine anything.
You are talking about a small percentage of the left, I'm talking about the rest, those that were angry with politics in general, the ones that don't eat, sleep and breath politics.
And to prove my point:
It's just that you imagine that point to involve some profound fact when it that's not the case.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsas-origin.onstreammedia.com%2Forigin%2Fgallupinc%2FGallupSpaces%2FProduction%2FCms%2FPOLL%2F-60f1jmap0mb6cyic5vrlq.gif&hash=5c7928d13cad09ea7e0aad8b69e4a8e854f973b3)
Those few that voted for Obama out of anger for the economic collapse, are too ignorant to begin with, given their disregard for facts.
Yes, you're right, but they do know they don't like the way things were going and voted for change.
QuoteThose Marxist-Socialist voters are ideologues; that's how one becomes a Marxist in the most free country in the world. They don't need to be voting for Obama. THey were voting for an ideology and the symbolism that is Obama. These include the enviro-weenies, and the Hate-America crowd, and the Global Warming Crowd, and the Abortion Crowd, and the femi-nazi crowd, and many more. To vote against that, much less vote for Republican, or to not vote at all, they have to abandon their ideology, and that's not likely to happen because they are the strongest social advocates out there.
Yes, and according to the graph, they are a minority in the country.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/Conservatives-Remain-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx (http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/Conservatives-Remain-Largest-Ideological-Group.aspx)
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 09, 2013, 02:45:20 PM
The last several elections have been knee-jerk rejections of the party and platform before.
Obama benefitted from liberal motivation against everything conservative, GOP, and DC. As well as GOP voter malaise at that point.
Bush benefitted from the same Clinton fatigue.
Reagan from Carter disgust, Carter from Nixon disgust, Nixon from LBJ disgust.
The only anomalies are Clinton who wouldn't have beaten Bush 1 without Perot splitting the GOP vote, and Obama winning a second term, which doesn't have any possible rational explanation.
Expect the same Obama fatigue in 2016, unless he / they have truly figured out how to rig and blackmail the process permanently.
Exactly! Cycles, it's always been that way, and 2010 was a bellwether for 2014, a slaughter in the making.