America has Turned Into an Orwellian Nightmare [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : America has Turned Into an Orwellian Nightmare


Ruble Noon
04-26-2012, 15:19
http://www.crimefilenews.com/2012/04/america-has-turned-into-orwellian.html

The Machinist
04-26-2012, 15:27
The author states that we must do something while we still can, but aside from voting for constitutionalists, there is nothing we can do but prepare for the end of the American way of life as we know it, and hope that the impending depression and collapse takes Big Brother with it.

syntaxerrorsix
04-26-2012, 19:48
The author states that we must do something while we still can, but aside from voting for constitutionalists, there is nothing we can do but prepare for the end of the American way of life as we know it, and hope that the impending depression and collapse takes Big Brother with it.

Agreed. The momentum is building. It's likely only a matter of time.

JBnTX
04-26-2012, 21:19
I must live in a different country?:dunno:

JBnTX
04-26-2012, 21:41
"We have become a nation of cowards and fools".


There's the centerpiece of the entire article.

It always comes down to an assault on the intelligence of the American people.

Obviously the author is mentally superior to the rest of America and is qualified to pass judgement on America and it's citizens.

If it's that bad then why do millions risk their lives to come to this "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country?

Millions have the dream of someday making it to America so they can live free.

America is the freest country on Earth and that just burns some people up.

Those people hate their own country, and for whatever reason they feel they need to write articles condemning this great country.

Only in America can they do that, so this country can't be all that bad?

snerd
04-26-2012, 22:04
I must live in a different country?:dunno:
http://thesmartlysocal.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/WearingBlinders.jpg

snerd
04-26-2012, 22:05
http://flatrock.org.nz/static/frontpage/assets/terrorism/blinders.jpg

juggy4711
04-26-2012, 22:20
"We have become a nation of cowards and fools".


There's the centerpiece of the entire article.

It always comes down to an assault on the intelligence of the American people.

Obviously the author is mentally superior to the rest of America and is qualified to pass judgement on America and it's citizens.

If it's that bad then why do millions risk their lives to come to this "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country?

Millions have the dream of someday making it to America so they can live free.

America is the freest country on Earth and that just burns some people up.

Those people hate their own country, and for whatever reason they feel they need to write articles condemning this great country.

Only in America can they do that, so this country can't be all that bad?

You consistently mistake the current state of the US as being the best country on Earth with how much better it was intended to be by the Founders. In context and comparison to other nations sure we may still be the best. Compared to what we should be as the Founders intended we have lost our way. Some of the more insightful Founders predicted this would happen.

I will extend the challenge once again, which I guess you will ignore once again. Ben Franklin, via a surrogate, stated as much at the adoption of the CotUS.

"...In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other...."

It isn't an assault on the intelligence of the American people as you continue to state, it is an indictment of humans in general. That there is likely nothing that can be done about it isn't a specific attack on America or Americans but simply a historically accurate observation of all human history.

So don't argue with me all high and mighty, argue with Franklin.

Allfal
04-27-2012, 00:03
You consistently mistake the current state of the US as being the best country on Earth with how much better it was intended to be by the Founders. In context and comparison to other nations sure we may still be the best. Compared to what we should be as the Founders intended we have lost our way. Some of the more insightful Founders predicted this would happen.

I will extend the challenge once again, which I guess you will ignore once again. Ben Franklin, via a surrogate, stated as much at the adoption of the CotUS.

"...In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other...."

It isn't an assault on the intelligence of the American people as you continue to state, it is an indictment of humans in general. That there is likely nothing that can be done about it isn't a specific attack on America or Americans but simply a historically accurate observation of all human history.

So don't argue with me all high and mighty, argue with Franklin.

I agree completely. I only add the observation that the Founding Fathers were evidently more observant and intelligent than the majority of today's population.

ScubaSven
04-27-2012, 00:25
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

Allfal
04-27-2012, 00:43
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

Given your join date I have to assume that you are trolling. "original intent" has always been and should be at the very least a partial basis for a USSC decision. original intent in this case is fairly clear.

ScubaSven
04-27-2012, 01:01
Given your join date I have to assume that you are trolling. "original intent" has always been and should be at the very least a partial basis for a USSC decision. original intent in this case is fairly clear.

I don't understand your correlation about my join date. I've been here too long, so I'm a troll??? Please explain.

"Original intent" and "founding fathers" arguments are different things. The original intent was never to have a static constitution - they built in provisions for amendments to adopt to the changing times - and never to be stuck with a tradition-steeped, monarchial-type rule - which seems to be what the "founding fathers" supporters prefer.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 04:17
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.
.


You're exactly right!

Some people like to hide behind the founding fathers and throw rocks
at their own country.

They feel safe and secure from that position because no one in their right mind would criticize or disagree with the almighty founding fathers, right?

Clearly these people have a problem with this country. Maybe they feel
left out or just want attention, who knows?

They ignore the good and positive qualities of this country, and exaggerate and embellish what's wrong with this country.

I feel sorry for them because they live in the greatest, freest and most prosperous country on Earth, and all they can do is find fault with it.

:patriot:



..

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 04:19
I don't understand your correlation about my join date. I've been here too long, so I'm a troll??? Please explain.

"Original intent" and "founding fathers" arguments are different things. The original intent was never to have a static constitution - they built in provisions for amendments to adopt to the changing times - and never to be stuck with a tradition-steeped, monarchial-type rule - which seems to be what the "founding fathers" supporters prefer.

They also included rules to be followed for that to occur.

No one is playing by them anymore. Is that the founders intent as well?

Bren
04-27-2012, 04:36
America has Turned Into an Orwellian Nightmare



Yes, it definitely has...but we can't move out because every other place in the world makes Orwell look like a comedy writing optimist.

Bren
04-27-2012, 04:40
I don't understand your correlation about my join date. I've been here too long, so I'm a troll??? Please explain.

"Original intent" and "founding fathers" arguments are different things. The original intent was never to have a static constitution - they built in provisions for amendments to adopt to the changing times - and never to be stuck with a tradition-steeped, monarchial-type rule - which seems to be what the "founding fathers" supporters prefer.

Most of the major changes conservatives complain about did not come from constitutional amendments...now that prohibition is repealed, none of them did actually. They came when the supreme court realized they could amend the constitution and expand the pwers of federal government without amending it. Most of the federal law that exists today would have been considered far beyond the authorioty of congress in 1800 or even 1900. If the interstate commerce clause was given its original intent, there would be no federal war on drugs, no gun control act of 1968, almost no federal criminal law, etc.

Bren
04-27-2012, 04:43
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

You are worng on both counts. The "founding fathers" argument is the only one that keeps the federal government from doing virtually as they please. And, if you were a little older, you'd have seen enough of the sky fall to know better. I'm 46 and the loss of freedom for Americans since I was born is shocking.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 04:46
You're exactly right!

Some people like to hide behind the founding fathers and throw rocks
at their own country.

They feel safe and secure from that position because no one in their right mind would criticize or disagree with the almighty founding fathers, right?

Clearly these people have a problem with this country. Maybe they feel
left out or just want attention, who knows?

They ignore the good and positive qualities of this country, and exaggerate and embellish what's wrong with this country.

I feel sorry for them because they live in the greatest, freest and most prosperous country on Earth, and all they can do is find fault with it.

:patriot:



..



Kind of like how you throw rocks at our Constitution and the founders intent so that you can progress your agenda?

We don't have a problem with our country. We have problems with progressives trying to change it without following well established rules to do so.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 04:47
I get the distinct feel some folks here have never read any Orwell.

Ruble Noon
04-27-2012, 04:59
"We have become a nation of cowards and fools".


There's the centerpiece of the entire article.

It always comes down to an assault on the intelligence of the American people.

Obviously the author is mentally superior to the rest of America and is qualified to pass judgement on America and it's citizens.

If it's that bad then why do millions risk their lives to come to this "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country?

Millions have the dream of someday making it to America so they can live free.

America is the freest country on Earth and that just burns some people up.

Those people hate their own country, and for whatever reason they feel they need to write articles condemning this great country.

Only in America can they do that, so this country can't be all that bad?

You should change your avatar JB as you are a disgrace to those brave souls that fought at the Alamo. I imagine if you were there with them they would have stuck you in a cannon and shot you at Santa Anna just to be rid of you.

Ruble Noon
04-27-2012, 05:00
You are worng on both counts. The "founding fathers" argument is the only one that keeps the federal government from doing virtually as they please. And, if you were a little older, you'd have seen enough of the sky fall to know better. I'm 46 and the loss of freedom for Americans since I was born is shocking.

I'm 41 and I agree.

BobbyT
04-27-2012, 05:04
I don't understand the "we're still better than other places" argument.

Does that change how intrusive government has become here? The majority of the world lives in collectivist poverty under thug government. Are we supposed to wait until we've lost enough freedoms to drag our standard of living down to the average?

It's not about where we are now relative to others, it's about the direction we're headed. Eastern Europe isn't better off than us, and much of it is still less free, but they're recovering from the days of Omnipotent Government, rediscovering individual rights, and moving toward more freedom. We're running full speed toward every failure they're trying to put behind them...should we just cover our ears and say "things are better here" until they aren't any more?

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 05:04
You should change your avatar JB as you are a disgrace to those brave souls that fought at the Alamo. I imagine if you were there with them they would have stuck you in a cannon and shot you at Santa Anna just to be rid of you.


That's all you've got?:rofl:

Instead of insulting me, why not tell us how you really feel about this country and it's people.

Don't hold back. You're among friends here because there's clearly more posters agreeing with you than me.

series1811
04-27-2012, 05:09
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

I was just about to post that most liberals really don't think much of the founding fathers, or the country and government that they set up.

And, then one of them beat me to it.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 05:09
Does that change how intrusive government has become here?

Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

kenpoprofessor
04-27-2012, 05:22
Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

Really? You have to ask? And if you do, it's obvious you're blind to what's going on.

The last few bills signed into law limit/curtail/stop my free speech, my right to criticize and say what I choose. The 1986 GCA removed my ability to buy newly manufactured machine guns. And the IRS can literally steal money from me, and has, even when they owe me money.

That's just an example of but a few.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Bren
04-27-2012, 05:32
I don't understand the "we're still better than other places" argument.

Does that change how intrusive government has become here?

It doesn't - if you mean my statement, I wasn't saying it's OK because the others are even less free, I was saying there's no place we can go to escape it, like there was many years ago.

Bren
04-27-2012, 05:37
Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

Well, let's see - how about "the government regulates everything I do all day long, every day."

You too, by the way.

From my guns and where and when I can buy and sell them to the registration, insurance, etc., on my motorcycle, to the traffic laws I have to obey to how much my employer can afford to pay me, because part of my work day goes to finance the government and those the government chooses to support. It goes on and on.

Even what I can post here is subject to the worry that if I ever advocated what I really thought, I'd get a visit from the secret service and maybe put in jail.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 05:47
Really? You have to ask? And if you do, it's obvious you're blind to what's going on.

The last few bills signed into law limit/curtail/stop my free speech, my right to criticize and say what I choose. The 1986 GCA removed my ability to buy newly manufactured machine guns. And the IRS can literally steal money from me, and has, even when they owe me money.

Can you be more specific?

What bills curtailed your freedom of speech?
What did they stop you from saying?

You can't buy a new made machine gun.
I feel your pain on that one.

Has the IRS "stolen" money from you?
How much? Have you hired an attorney?

Fred Hansen
04-27-2012, 05:54
"We have become a nation of cowards and fools".


There's the centerpiece of the entire article.

It always comes down to an assault on the intelligence of the American people.

Obviously the author is mentally superior to the rest of America and is qualified to pass judgement on America and it's citizens.

If it's that bad then why do millions risk their lives to come to this "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country?

Millions have the dream of someday making it to America so they can live free.

America is the freest country on Earth and that just burns some people up.

Those people hate their own country, and for whatever reason they feel they need to write articles condemning this great country.

Only in America can they do that, so this country can't be all that bad?Doubleplusgood!

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 05:54
Well, let's see - how about "the government regulates everything I do all day long, every day."

You too, by the way.

From my guns and where and when I can buy and sell them to the registration, insurance, etc., on my motorcycle, to the traffic laws I have to obey to how much my employer can afford to pay me, because part of my work day goes to finance the government and those the government chooses to support. It goes on and on. .

But, what has the government stopped you from doing?
Do you have guns the government is stopping you from selling or buying?
Would you not buy insurance if it wasn't required?
What about the other guy that might cause your accident, don't you want him to have insurance?
What are traffic laws stopping you from doing?
Do you have a problem with taxes?

You say "the government regulates everything I do all day long, every day."
Would you rather we live in an unregulated society where anything goes?

What is the government STOPPING you from doing?
Not what they regulate, but what are they preventing you from doing that you'd otherwise do?

..

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 06:03
It doesn't - if you mean my statement, I wasn't saying it's OK because the others are even less free, I was saying there's no place we can go to escape it, like there was many years ago.

I don't recall anywhere in American history of anyone "escaping"
from this country.

Are we talking about the same country?

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 08:22
Well?

:impatient:

Bren
04-27-2012, 08:24
But, what has the government stopped you from doing?
Do you have guns the government is stopping you from selling or buying?
Would you not buy insurance if it wasn't required?
What about the other guy that might cause your accident, don't you want him to have insurance?
What are traffic laws stopping you from doing?
Do you have a problem with taxes?


Are you insane? yes, I have a problem with taxes - a big, big problem. I have a problem with not being able to order a gun from a catalog and have it delivered to my house, like my father could, when I was born. I have a problem with a guy who lives 60 miles from me not being able to meet kme half way and buy a gun I list for sale here, because his house is across the state line. I have a problem with not being able to drive at the speed I can safely drive or being required to wear a seatbelt or a motorcycle helmet, when it protects nobody but me. I could list books full of government regulation I have a problem with.

Are you going to act like you win the argument by pretending not to know things any person on the street or junior high school kid could tell you?


You say "the government regulates everything I do all day long, every day."
Would you rather we live in an unregulated society where anything goes?

Yes, but being an American, even moving to such a place has such negative consequences under U.S. law as to make it virtually impossible for anyone who isn't very rich (continuing to pay U.S. income tax on all income earned in another country for 10 years after becoming a citizen of another country, for example).


What is the government STOPPING you from doing?
Not what they regulate, but what are they preventing you from doing that you'd otherwise do?

..

The "I don't know anything about the world" response doesn't really advance your nonsense argument. Everything you do is also regulated - that you don't care doesn't change it, or make the rest of us care less.

Bren
04-27-2012, 08:27
I don't recall anywhere in American history of anyone "escaping"
from this country.

Are we talking about the same country?

Then you don't know much hsitory. Just American history, prior to the 20th century, is NOTHING BUT the story of people escaping government regulation, being followed by government and escaping again, all the way from England to the west coast and Alaska, Then we ran out of places to escape to.

A child would know that, so I must assume you are playing ignorant on purpose.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:37
You should change your avatar JB as you are a disgrace to those brave souls that fought at the Alamo. I imagine if you were there with them they would have stuck you in a cannon and shot you at Santa Anna just to be rid of you.

Now that's funny right there :thumbsup:

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:38
That's all you've got?:rofl:

Instead of insulting me, why not tell us how you really feel about this country and it's people.

Don't hold back. You're among friends here because there's clearly more posters agreeing with you than me.

That was more than enough. Don't you see a trend developing around your belief system?

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:42
Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

LOL

Ok..

Assault Weapons ban.

Keeping my money instead of paying for social programs.

Patriot Act

Public Education tax when I don't have any children.

Welfare.

Food stamps.

TARP

GE

GM

The FED

EPA FDA and every other alphabet soup organization not permitted by the COTUS.

That's just the tip of a really big iceberg that USS America has run into. We are sinking.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:50
Social Security

Medicare and Medicaid.

Inflation due to minimum wage.

Loss of jobs due to the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Soaring fuel costs due to lack of infrastructure.

Fishing permits

Hunting permits

Eminent domain shutting down my place of business.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 08:52
Then you don't know much hsitory. Just American history, prior to the 20th century, is NOTHING BUT the story of people escaping government regulation, being followed by government and escaping again, all the way from England to the west coast and Alaska, Then we ran out of places to escape to....

You're confusing the natural expansion of a country with escaping from that country.

You implied in an earlier post that people used to escape from this country, but now they can't because now there's no place to go.

Can you cite one example of someone escaping from America?

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:53
Gas tax

Tire tax

Road tax and tolls for roads that have been paid for already.

Federally controlled land restrictions.

The Machinist
04-27-2012, 08:53
The "founding fathers" argument is absolute bullcrap and has no relation to the real world in 2012.

The sky is not falling, Chicken Little.
Right. Liberty and free will have no place in "the real world." A truly scholarly observation on your part. Next to you, Franklin and Jefferson were clowns.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:54
You're confusing the natural expansion of a country with escaping from that country.

You implied in an earlier post that people used to escape from this country, but now they can't because now there's no place to go.

Can you cite one example of someone escaping from America?

Can you site one example of how your conservative values outweigh your progressive values?

snerd
04-27-2012, 08:55
...... What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?........
The easier way to put the question would be, what can you do without first having the government okay it?

Nothing. Between Federal, State and Local taxes, rules, regulations, permits, licensing and their power to enforce these and to create even more of them, there is literally "nothing" you can do on your own. Paraphrasing someone........... the more numerous the laws the more corrupt the state. And brother, do we have the laws. So many, in fact, there is no one who knows exactly how many. Most lawyers advise you to not talk to the police for this very reason...... you could be breaking or admitting to a law that you nor even they know about! Yet.

I find it hard to accept that this is what the Founders envisioned.

The Machinist
04-27-2012, 08:57
Can you site one example of how your conservative values outweigh your progressive values?
Come on! He's voting for Romney, and not Obama! His conservative credentials are solid! :whistling:

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 08:58
Come on! He's voting for Romney, and not Obama! His conservative credentials are solid! :whistling:


Oh..yeah. :yawn:

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 08:59
Social Security

Medicare and Medicaid.

Inflation due to minimum wage.

Loss of jobs due to the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Soaring fuel costs due to lack of infrastructure.

Fishing permits

Hunting permits

Eminent domain shutting down my place of business.


What has any of that stopped you from doing?

A fishing permit doesn't prohibit fishing, etc...

Sounds like you're just whinning and complaining about any and everything you have to pay for.

Most of what you listed results in a direct benefit to you.

The original question was: What has the government stopped you from doing?

If government is so damned evil and we live in an "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country, then tell us about your nightmare experiences.

...and try to do it without insulting me.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:02
What has any of that stopped you from doing?

A fishing permit doesn't prohibit fishing, etc...


Yes it does. I closes out full species and limits other.


Sounds like you're just whinning and complaining about any and everything you have to pay for.

Well no ****! I shouldn't have to pay for anything not provided for in the COTUS.


Most of what you listed results in a direct benefit to you.

The original question was: What has the government stopped you from doing?

If government is so damned evil and we live in an "Orwellian Nightmare" of a country, then tell us about your nightmare experiences.

...and try to do it without insulting me.

None of those things benefit me nor are they permitted by the COTUS.

You are nothing more than a progressive tool getting the word out. I'm embarrassed for Texas.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:03
The government stops us and taxes us for everything we do and you're cool with that.

Big government is your idea of the great society. Freedom and Liberty from big government is mine.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:07
Fishing permits forbid me from target or taking certain species.

EPA charges me money to dispose of my tires and PREVENTS me from doing so unless I pay.

Every single item I listed is a stop measure from the government.

Go see if you can purchase an automatic weapon made after 1986 and let me know how far you get

Let me know when you stop paying taxes on anything I listed and see if the IRS comes with guns to take you away. Why am I paying for public education again?

The Machinist
04-27-2012, 09:16
Another thing we can't do is fly without being sexually molested or nuked with ineffective body scanners. I'm taking a road trip from Oregon to Colorado this July to visit a friend and his wife. It's more expensive to rent a car and buy gas, than to buy a plane ticket, not to mention far more time-consuming. But I'll be damned if I let those little Hitlers put their hands down my pants, and abuse me for the sake of their Constitution-stomping charade.

There's your freedom, JB. There's your America.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 09:21
The government stops us and taxes us for everything we do and you're cool with that.

Big government is your idea of the great society. Freedom and Liberty from big government is mine.

None of that is true. Your insults betray a lack of confidence in your political views.

I'm just trying to understand your point of view about this country.

You complain about insignificant annoyances in your life while people in other countries dare not even speak anything bad about their country or its leaders.

People in other countries are literally starving to death and are being physically abused and tortured by their government.

People in this world live without hope for tomorrow and many
are glad to just survive today.

...and you complain about fishing and hunting permits.
You sound like a selfish little rich boy.

You condemn this country and its people at every chance.
You predict nothing but gloom and doom for this country.

You hide behind liberty and freedom, when in reality your perfect country would be an uncivilized and barbaric mob of confusion and despair.

A winner take all society were the less fortunate starve and the rich get richer.

It's sad that you live in the greatest country on Earth and have absolutely nothing good to say about it.

What's even worse is the deafening silence of those who agree with me. I can't be the only one.

The Machinist
04-27-2012, 09:27
People in this world live without hope for tomorrow and many are glad to just survive today.

...and you complain about fishing and hunting permits.
You sound like a selfish little rich boy.

You hide behind liberty and freedom, when in reality your perfect country would be an uncivilized and barbaric mob of confusion and despair.

A winner take all society were the less fortunate starve and the rich get richer.
If there was ever any doubt as to your liberal progressive nature, there is none now. You're a fraud, masquerading as a patriot. You're no conservative, and you never were. Conservatives don't spout Democrat talking points.

snerd
04-27-2012, 09:29
....... you complain about fishing and hunting permits. You sound like a selfish little rich boy.
......
I gotta say, you do have those Alynsky tactics working in pretty good fashion. Attack the messenger. Isolate him. Ridicule him. Make the story about him.

The day that we change the definition of "individualism" to "selfishness", we are doomed as a free country. You do know what it means to be a progressive, don't you?

snerd
04-27-2012, 09:32
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/548465_10151082941074657_41632789656_12993498_513692449_n.jpg

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:34
None of that is true. Your insults betray a lack of confidence in your political views.

I'm just trying to understand your point of view about this country.

You complain about insignificant annoyances in your life while people in other countries dare not even speak anything bad about their country or its leaders.

There is NOTHING insignificant about the Patriot Act or Tarp money spent or the removal of my freedom and liberties!


People in other countries are literally starving to death and are being physically abused and tortured by their government.

People in this world live without hope for tomorrow and many
are glad to just survive today.

...and you complain about fishing and hunting permits.
You sound like a selfish little rich boy.

Not one damn was given about other countries. I am talking about THIS country and the egregious reduction of our freedoms. You sound like an ignorant fool spouting off about how I'm suppose to accept my wealth being redistributed to fund things I do not approve of our have had a vote on.

Every heard of taxation without representation? You know we fought an effing WAR over that right?


You condemn this country and its people at every chance.
You predict nothing but gloom and doom for this country.

No I condemn what this country has become because lackadaisical mutton heads think all issues I've mentioned are ok even though they do not pass the rule of law.



You hide behind liberty and freedom, when in reality your perfect country would be an uncivilized and barbaric mob of confusion and despair.

I defended it for more than decade don't pretend to tell me what I hide behind. The COTUS is to be upheld and all you and your progressive bags do is circumvent it.


A winner take all society were the less fortunate starve and the rich get richer.

It's sad that you live in the greatest country on Earth and have absolutely nothing good to say about it.

What's even worse is the deafening silence of those who agree with me. I can't be the only one.

You ARE the only one that claims to be a conservative but preaches progressive tactics. If I hadn't given that helmet to 40 you'd be wearing right now.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 09:41
The author states that we must do something while we still can, but aside from voting for constitutionalists, there is nothing we can do but prepare for the end of the American way of life as we know it, and hope that the impending depression and collapse takes Big Brother with it.

No - what happens is people give more power to the government.

The last depression made the federal gov't stronger, not weaker.

JBnTX
04-27-2012, 09:47
Keep the insults coming.
Keep all the negativism and hatred for this country coming.

Don't hold back, let it all out and tell us what you really think
about this evil, oppressive hell hole of a country you think you live in.

Tell us how people like me are destroying this country and how
stupid we are and that we shouldn't even be allowed to vote.

Keep talking about slamming the government back to the 1700's
and make it obey the constitution to the letter.

The good people of this country need to know they were right
about Ron Paul and his supporters.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:48
Keep the insults coming.
Keep all the negativism and hatred for this country coming.

Don't hold back, let it all out and tell us what you really think
about this evil, oppressive hell hole of a country you think you live in.

Tell us how people like me are destroying this country and how
stupid we are and that we shouldn't even be allowed to vote.

Keep talking about slamming the government back to the 1700's
and make it obey the constitution to the letter.

The good people of this country need to know they were right
about Ron Paul and his supporters.

You and people like you are destroying this country and that is stupid.

Keep talking about how you ignore the COTUS as a means to an end. How conservative of you.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 09:49
Anything else I can do for you?

Wake_jumper
04-27-2012, 10:13
One more freedom under assault:

SAN ANTONIO, April 26 (Reuters) - U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood called on Thursday for a federal law to ban talking on a cell phone or texting while driving any type of vehicle on any road in the country.

Tough federal legislation is the only way to deal with what he called a "national epidemic," he said at a distracted-driving summit in San Antonio, Texas, that drew doctors, advocates and government officials.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/usa-driving-idUSL2E8FQOK820120427

barbedwiresmile
04-27-2012, 10:22
These types of threads, and the resultant entertaining exchanges, pop up from time to time. I hesitated to comment, but for posterity and whatever else it's worth to my fellow posters, I will attempt to paint as simplistic a picture of our current state dynamic as possible. While I am happy that more and more people are becoming aware of the realities around them, it is too late to achieve any significant changes to these dynamics (as should be evident by our upcoming election landscape).

JB, your tax dollars are forcibly collected by Washington to pay interest on the money that Washington has borrowed to enact enforcement regimes that create barriers to entry and protect the interests of large, politically connected corporations that spent enormous amounts of money and lobbied to get these laws enacted in the first place - at federal, state, and even local levels. Why? - in order to protect their shared monopoly on everything from what types of food are available for you to eat to what types of banking services you have access to. *This process is brazen, yet often misunderstood by those who have no first-hand experience with or observation of how our modern state actually works. *

Your money is therefore filtered up via a state-controlled filtration mechanism into the pockets of those who hold leadership positions at those politically connected corporations - and, of course, those who are employed by enforcement and regulatory regimes.

The impact of this has been an enormous acceleration in the amount of code on the books; a huge increase in enforcement personnel, and expansion of enforcement tactics; and a mortgage placed on your future labor (and those of your progeny).*

The results include an increasing inability to produce or otherwise acquire natural food; an enormous increase in preventable diseases (and associated, unnecessary health care and drug costs - also filtered into large, politically connected corporations); restrictions and threats of future restrictions on your movements, communications, and privacy; the socialization of private business losses; frequent back-and-forth of political appointees between regulatory agencies (when their party is in power) and the companies being regulated (when their party is out of power); massive budget deficits, cost overruns, and corruption of the procurement and project-bidding processes; and the continued funding of the rapidly accelerating and evolving sham republic that protects the interests of the resultant crony-capitalist and political class. This is, quite technically and exactly, proto-fascism. *While these terms often illicit emotional reactions from those who incorrectly associate them with inaccurate historic context, the technical definitions are what they are.

In order to create an intellectual comfort zone, and make sense of the world around us, we use terms like "socialist" (to describe Obama) or "capitalist" (to describe Romney). *This line of reasoning is, of course, encouraged by the media (part of that crony-capitalist dynamic). *In reality, however, Obama and Romney are neither socialists nor capitalists. *They are proto-fascists, and neither will change the dynamics described above. *The scope and scale of state will continue to grow as directed by the patrons of the modern state. *In this regard, those patrons, as well as those employed by the state, all get a pretty good deal. *The private citizen, however, loses money, choice, privacy, and liberty. *Often, these regulatory and enforcement regimes are cleverly masked as 'grass roots' or 'local' legislation, ordinances, zoning codes, etc. *But they all have the same root, and are endorsed by the same controlling interests. *

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:38
One more freedom under assault:

SAN ANTONIO, April 26 (Reuters) - U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood called on Thursday for a federal law to ban talking on a cell phone or texting while driving any type of vehicle on any road in the country.

Tough federal legislation is the only way to deal with what he called a "national epidemic," he said at a distracted-driving summit in San Antonio, Texas, that drew doctors, advocates and government officials.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/usa-driving-idUSL2E8FQOK820120427

You are an example of what is wrong with this country. Driving is not a constitutional right. Nor is texting "I love Glee xox " while driving a right.

Javelin
04-27-2012, 10:40
Keep the insults coming.
Keep all the negativism and hatred for this country coming.

Don't hold back, let it all out and tell us what you really think
about this evil, oppressive hell hole of a country you think you live in.

Tell us how people like me are destroying this country and how
stupid we are and that we shouldn't even be allowed to vote.

Keep talking about slamming the government back to the 1700's
and make it obey the constitution to the letter.

The good people of this country need to know they were right
about Ron Paul and his supporters.

You are such a Progressive JBnTX.

Just let it all out. It's ok. You are among friends here.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 10:45
You are an example of what is wrong with this country. Driving is not a constitutional right. Nor is texting "I love Glee xox " while driving a right.

How does federal law get to dictate the rules of any road in the country. Why isn't it a state matter for state roads and a federal matter for federal roads?

I'd say that's an over reach.

Naelbis
04-27-2012, 10:47
You are an example of what is wrong with this country. Driving is not a constitutional right. Nor is texting "I love Glee xox " while driving a right.
And yet neither action falls under the power of the federal government to regulate so it is a misuse of power however you look at it.

Wake_jumper
04-27-2012, 10:49
You are an example of what is wrong with this country. Driving is not a constitutional right. Nor is texting "I love Glee xox " while driving a right.

I am an example of what is wrong with this country? :rofl:

There is a big difference between a "right" and a "freedom".

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:53
How does federal law get to dictate the rules of any road in the country. Why isn't it a state matter for state roads and a federal matter for federal roads?

I'd say that's an over reach.

The same way federal authorities got the states to enact seat belt laws and other things related to driving. The feds said you want highway $ you enact seat belt laws in your state.

I think they did the same thing with raising the drinking age from 18 to 21 - check on that one.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:54
I am an example of what is wrong with this country? :rofl:


Yes


There is a big difference between a "right" and a "freedom".

And you don't know the difference.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 10:56
And yet neither action falls under the power of the federal government to regulate so it is a misuse of power however you look at it.

Another person who doesn't know how it works.

See my post above.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 10:58
The same way federal authorities got the states to enact seat belt laws and other things related to driving. The feds said you want highway $ you enact seat belt laws in your state.

I think they did the same thing with raising the drinking age from 18 to 21 - check on that one.

That however is not a direct power afforded the federal government.

It's still an over reach of power that the states bowed to.

The states did not have to comply. They only complied for the money and then became beholden to the fed.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 11:13
That however is not a direct power afforded the federal government.

It's still an over reach of power that the states bowed to.

The states did not have to comply. They only complied for the money and then became beholden to the fed.

That's right - no one said it was a fed gov't power - and when the law is written it will be written like past legislation - enact the law or you won't get $.

Wake_jumper
04-27-2012, 11:24
Yes



And you don't know the difference.

Congratulations! You have been added to my ignore list. :wavey:

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 11:50
That's right - no one said it was a fed gov't power - and when the law is written it will be written like past legislation - enact the law or you won't get $.

No but Wake_jumper pointed that out and you told him he was wrong and assumed (as am I right now) that he was referring to texting while driving.

I took it differently. The freedom of movement was upheld by the courts as a right but did not grant the federal government the ability to protect that right. Instead they left it up to the states.

It is in fact a right according to courts since 1869, "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." and was supported by the privileges and immunities clause.

RC-RAMIE
04-27-2012, 11:50
I don't understand your correlation about my join date. I've been here too long, so I'm a troll??? Please explain.

"Original intent" and "founding fathers" arguments are different things. The original intent was never to have a static constitution - they built in provisions for amendments to adopt to the changing times - and never to be stuck with a tradition-steeped, monarchial-type rule - which seems to be what the "founding fathers" supporters prefer.

If the government would use the amendment process like they should we wouldn't be gripping.

RC-RAMIE
04-27-2012, 11:52
You are worng on both counts. The "founding fathers" argument is the only one that keeps the federal government from doing virtually as they please. And, if you were a little older, you'd have seen enough of the sky fall to know better. I'm 46 and the loss of freedom for Americans since I was born is shocking.

Im 34 and the changes in my lifetime are shocking I feel for my son.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 11:52
But I digress. What was the thread topic again?

RC-RAMIE
04-27-2012, 12:01
Keep talking about slamming the government back to the 1700's
and make it obey the constitution to the letter.

The good people of this country need to know they were right
about Ron Paul and his supporters.

WTF you have against the constitution?

Dexters
04-27-2012, 12:03
No but Wake_jumper pointed that out and you told him he was wrong and assumed (as am I right now) that he was referring to texting while driving.

The linked to article mentions texting


I took it differently. The freedom of movement was upheld by the courts as a right but did not grant the federal government the ability to protect that right. Instead they left it up to the states.

It is in fact a right according to courts since 1869, "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." and was supported by the privileges and immunities clause.

I'm not sure how the 1869 law relates - there are many ways you can 'egress from them' without driving.

RC-RAMIE
04-27-2012, 12:03
The same way federal authorities got the states to enact seat belt laws and other things related to driving. The feds said you want highway $ you enact seat belt laws in your state.

I think they did the same thing with raising the drinking age from 18 to 21 - check on that one.

Make sure I understand you right are you ok with this?

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 12:05
The linked to article mentions texting.

I understand that, I may be mistaken but I don't think that was Wake_jumper's primary point however.




I'm not sure how the 1869 law relates - there are many ways you can 'egress from them' without driving.

This is true, and by law the only people that can restrict that is the State.

Not the Fed.

syntaxerrorsix
04-27-2012, 12:08
Just like only states can issue licenses. No federal licenses that I know of for driving.

Dexters
04-27-2012, 12:12
Make sure I understand you right are you ok with this?

Not at all. It is a back door way for the Feds to control the states.

Fed highway funds comes from the Fed tax on gas.

So, they tax the gas in a state, collect it and then say if you want some of the $ back you have to enact this law in your state.

No approval on my part - just explaining how it works.

Until last year Georgia didn't get Fed $ for the seat belt Fed law because GA exempted pick up trucks - due to pressure from rural legislators.

Ruble Noon
04-27-2012, 15:06
Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

How about you list the things in your life that the government is not involved in?

Ruble Noon
04-27-2012, 15:08
Not at all. It is a back door way for the Feds to control the states.

Fed highway funds comes from the Fed tax on gas.

So, they tax the gas in a state, collect it and then say if you want some of the $ back you have to enact this law in your state.

No approval on my part - just explaining how it works.

Until last year Georgia didn't get Fed $ for the seat belt Fed law because GA exempted pick up trucks - due to pressure from rural legislators.

That is how the Feds finally got my state to enact a primary seat belt law.

kirgi08
04-27-2012, 16:49
:popcorn:

RC-RAMIE
04-27-2012, 17:28
Not at all. It is a back door way for the Feds to control the states.

Fed highway funds comes from the Fed tax on gas.

So, they tax the gas in a state, collect it and then say if you want some of the $ back you have to enact this law in your state.

No approval on my part - just explaining how it works.

Until last year Georgia didn't get Fed $ for the seat belt Fed law because GA exempted pick up trucks - due to pressure from rural legislators.

That's how they got my state to raise the drinking level, I think. I was 19 at the time I know that's what we blamed it on. Guess I need to look that up.

Thanks, it's hard to tell in post sometimes.


Disclaimer my post might be based on my opinion and perception of your post, if you don't agree with my opinion I don't care.

series1811
04-27-2012, 18:51
Just like only states can issue licenses. No federal licenses that I know of for driving.

Actually, you can have a federal driving license issued that is only good for driving federal vehicles. You used to see them more, when less people had regular state issued driving licenses.

Just_plinking
04-27-2012, 19:47
I haven't read this whole thread. I Just wanted to say thanks to the op. That was a well written and concise article that I will pass on.

juggy4711
04-27-2012, 20:46
You should change your avatar JB as you are a disgrace to those brave souls that fought at the Alamo. I imagine if you were there with them they would have stuck you in a cannon and shot you at Santa Anna just to be rid of you.

I second that. As someone that had an ancestor that fought and died at the Alamo, JB is no representative of what they fought for.

...A child would know that, so I must assume you are playing ignorant on purpose.

Sadly I think JB is dead serious as far as I can tell. He's one of those that can not separate the country from the government and America can do no wrong type.

Right. Liberty and free will have no place in "the real world." A truly scholarly observation on your part. Next to you, Franklin and Jefferson were clowns.

:rofl:

These types of threads, and the resultant entertaining exchanges, pop up from time to time. I hesitated to comment, but for posterity and whatever else it's worth to my fellow posters, I will attempt to paint as simplistic a picture of our current state dynamic as possible. While I am happy that more and more people are becoming aware of the realities around them, it is too late to achieve any significant changes to these dynamics (as should be evident by our upcoming election landscape).

JB, your tax dollars are forcibly collected by Washington to pay interest on the money that Washington has borrowed to enact enforcement regimes that create barriers to entry and protect the interests of large, politically connected corporations that spent enormous amounts of money and lobbied to get these laws enacted in the first place - at federal, state, and even local levels. Why? - in order to protect their shared monopoly on everything from what types of food are available for you to eat to what types of banking services you have access to. *This process is brazen, yet often misunderstood by those who have no first-hand experience with or observation of how our modern state actually works. *

Your money is therefore filtered up via a state-controlled filtration mechanism into the pockets of those who hold leadership positions at those politically connected corporations - and, of course, those who are employed by enforcement and regulatory regimes.

The impact of this has been an enormous acceleration in the amount of code on the books; a huge increase in enforcement personnel, and expansion of enforcement tactics; and a mortgage placed on your future labor (and those of your progeny).*

The results include an increasing inability to produce or otherwise acquire natural food; an enormous increase in preventable diseases (and associated, unnecessary health care and drug costs - also filtered into large, politically connected corporations); restrictions and threats of future restrictions on your movements, communications, and privacy; the socialization of private business losses; frequent back-and-forth of political appointees between regulatory agencies (when their party is in power) and the companies being regulated (when their party is out of power); massive budget deficits, cost overruns, and corruption of the procurement and project-bidding processes; and the continued funding of the rapidly accelerating and evolving sham republic that protects the interests of the resultant crony-capitalist and political class. This is, quite technically and exactly, proto-fascism. *While these terms often illicit emotional reactions from those who incorrectly associate them with inaccurate historic context, the technical definitions are what they are.

In order to create an intellectual comfort zone, and make sense of the world around us, we use terms like "socialist" (to describe Obama) or "capitalist" (to describe Romney). *This line of reasoning is, of course, encouraged by the media (part of that crony-capitalist dynamic). *In reality, however, Obama and Romney are neither socialists nor capitalists. *They are proto-fascists, and neither will change the dynamics described above. *The scope and scale of state will continue to grow as directed by the patrons of the modern state. *In this regard, those patrons, as well as those employed by the state, all get a pretty good deal. *The private citizen, however, loses money, choice, privacy, and liberty. *Often, these regulatory and enforcement regimes are cleverly masked as 'grass roots' or 'local' legislation, ordinances, zoning codes, etc. *But they all have the same root, and are endorsed by the same controlling interests. *

Sad thing isn't that JB won't even begin to understand that, it's that folks way more intelligent than he is won't either or are perfectly ok with it. It's the Law after all.

kirgi08
04-27-2012, 21:37
I second that. As someone that had an ancestor that fought and died at the Alamo, JB is no representative of what they fought for.



Sadly I think JB is dead serious as far as I can tell. He's one of those that can not separate the country from the government and America can do no wrong type.



:rofl:




Sad thing isn't that JB won't even begin to understand that, it's that folks way more intelligent than he is won't either or are perfectly ok with it. It's the Law after all.


BWS hit the nail on the head.'08.

Cavalry Doc
04-27-2012, 21:44
Just a question. But have any of the previous poster's that believe we are in an "Orwellian Nightmare" spent any time on the other side of the Iron Curtain before 1989?

If you think we are there, you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

janice6
04-27-2012, 21:48
Just a question. But have any of the previous poster's that believe we are in an "Orwellian Nightmare" spent any time on the other side of the Iron Curtain before 1989?

If you think we are there, you ain't seen nuthin' yet.


I agree:

This is very true. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't be extremely worried.

Cavalry Doc
04-27-2012, 21:59
I agree:

This is very true. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't be extremely worried.

Vigilance is called for. Surrender is not. It ain't over until it's over.



How many of you guys are driving one of these?

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78677&d=1260283777&sa=X&ei=p2mbT6XLIKjU2AXyytSDDw&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNFnC3Kv3yaL_mriH2oXerQO0D5GWA

If you think we are there, go ahead and say something bad (but not physically threatening) about the government, and even an individual government official, and go outside. Guess what, nothing happens. Get off the computer. Go fishing. Go buy a gun and go shoot it. Go build something. Work in the garden. Go buy 8 pounds of smokeless powder. Travel across two state lines. Leave the country and return. For the single guys and gals, choose your own spouse. For everyone, choose your line of work.

:dunno: Yes, it could and should be better. But it is still better than anywhere else. So why not aim for it not getting any worse. Seems reasonable to me.

lancesorbenson
04-27-2012, 22:08
Vigilance is called for. Surrender is not. It ain't over until it's over.



How many of you guys are driving one of these?

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78677&d=1260283777&sa=X&ei=p2mbT6XLIKjU2AXyytSDDw&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNFnC3Kv3yaL_mriH2oXerQO0D5GWA

If you think we are there, go ahead and say something bad (but not physically threatening) about the government, and even an individual government official, and go outside. Guess what, nothing happens. Get off the computer. Go fishing. Go buy a gun and go shoot it. Go build something. Work in the garden. Go buy 8 pounds of smokeless powder. Travel across two state lines. Leave the country and return. For the single guys and gals, choose your own spouse. For everyone, choose your line of work.

:dunno: Yes, it could and should be better. But it is still better than anywhere else. So why not aim for it not getting any worse. Seems reasonable to me.

Ah the Trabi! What a fine piece of machinery!

Cavalry Doc
04-27-2012, 22:42
Ah the Trabi! What a fine piece of machinery!

Saw one that had been in an accident. Ripped open like a beer can, two bodies lying next to it. They must have been going at least 40 MPH.

syntaxerrorsix
04-28-2012, 04:02
Actually, you can have a federal driving license issued that is only good for driving federal vehicles. You used to see them more, when less people had regular state issued driving licenses.


You mean like an Army 348? You have to be a federal employee of some sort as well correct?

syntaxerrorsix
04-28-2012, 04:06
Saw one that had been in an accident. Ripped open like a beer can, two bodies lying next to it. They must have been going at least 40 MPH.


Our convoy had run one over with a Hercules just South of the Sava River. There wasn't anything left.

series1811
04-28-2012, 04:59
You mean like an Army 348? You have to be a federal employee of some sort as well correct?

Affirmative.

series1811
04-28-2012, 05:06
Ah the Trabi! What a fine piece of machinery!

I went to school and worked as a lifeguard, with a guy from Yugoslavia, (in 83 when it was still communist and Tito was still in charge). He was a dedicated communist as well, the only ones they would let leave to go to school out of the country back then.

He was so proud of the car he had found and bought. When he showed it to me, it was a twenty year old Yugo, rusted to swiss cheese, would put out a smokescreen when you cranked it up, and looked like a family of rats had been living in the upholstery.

He was trying to figure out a way to take it back with him when I graduated.

He would have been the superpimp back home, I guess. :supergrin:

Fred Hansen
04-28-2012, 08:28
Vigilance is called for. Surrender is not. It ain't over until it's over.



How many of you guys are driving one of these?

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78677&d=1260283777&sa=X&ei=p2mbT6XLIKjU2AXyytSDDw&ved=0CAoQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNFnC3Kv3yaL_mriH2oXerQO0D5GWA

If you think we are there, go ahead and say something bad (but not physically threatening) about the government, and even an individual government official, and go outside. Guess what, nothing happens. Get off the computer. Go fishing. Go buy a gun and go shoot it. Go build something. Work in the garden. Go buy 8 pounds of smokeless powder. Travel across two state lines. Leave the country and return. For the single guys and gals, choose your own spouse. For everyone, choose your line of work.

:dunno: Yes, it could and should be better. But it is still better than anywhere else. So why not aim for it not getting any worse. Seems reasonable to me.While the spirit of what you are saying is both wise and true (as usual) it doesn't make the present state of our nation any less shameful.

barbedwiresmile
04-28-2012, 08:50
Just a question. But have any of the previous poster's that believe we are in an "Orwellian Nightmare" spent any time on the other side of the Iron Curtain before 1989?

Yes. As we have previously discussed.

If you think we are there, you ain't seen nuthin' yet.

I disagree. There was little 'Orwellian' about the DDR or USSR. They were straightforward authoritarian states. What our state has morphed into is far more profitable - for awhile. Unfortunately, the dynamics of state (like the law of bureaucracy) behave the same way here as they did (and do) there. In other words, "can't happen here" isn't an argument, it's akin to a religious belief system. Besides, pointing out that the modern US is better than the DDR isn't really much of a compliment.

Further, I remind you that Soviet HMFIC's liked living in the DDR, considering it a fine improvement over home. Fans of the DDR, by your logic, might wave the flag and compare it favorably to North Korea. Hardly a compliment. And hardly an argument.

Finally, comparison of non-static systems are about tragictory. These systems are always in flux. The question is: which way is ours heading?

Javelin
04-28-2012, 11:30
You're exactly right!

Some people like to hide behind the founding fathers and throw rocks
at their own country.

They feel safe and secure from that position because no one in their right mind would criticize or disagree with the almighty founding fathers, right?

Clearly these people have a problem with this country. Maybe they feel
left out or just want attention, who knows?

They ignore the good and positive qualities of this country, and exaggerate and embellish what's wrong with this country.

I feel sorry for them because they live in the greatest, freest and most prosperous country on Earth, and all they can do is find fault with it.

:patriot:



..

You find yourself agreeing with Obama supporters like Scuba a lot more lately JBnTX?

JBnTX I sometimes wonder if you are sure where you're beliefs really are. I really hope you read what I have to say.

If you are truly a conservative I feel that when you realize that the flag you are waving for these candidates you support is nothing more than a lie to the American people it's going to be too late. If you truly believe that the current Republican party is conservative with good intentions you have been deceived. Progressives have infiltrated.

Want to know what it looks like? Remember the 1930's turn on the Democratic Party which abandoned the Conservative base (you learned it in TX History Class in college). Well remember how long it took the South to realize that the Democrats did that and to stop voted Democrat even here in Texas? That's right 50 years later in the 1980s! Republican party is witnessing the same thing only there is no other party to go to as both are corrupt with Progressive liberals. We don't have a viable candidate in any sense of the word. Ron Paul is non-electable. Romney & Obama are both Progressives. The realism should set in and it is sobering. So it is the way it is and with everyone seemingly out for themselves I guess there really is nothing anyone can do about it. The Progressive movement is very strong and in my eyes extremely dangerous to a free society.


EDIT: Here is the video of Romney.
Romney "My Views Are Progressive" - self admitted in 2002. If you are a Progressive JBnTX then I apologize for wasting your time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu0zQRUCDlM

Ruble Noon
04-28-2012, 22:10
Just how intrusive is government into YOUR life.

Not the life of others, or things you've read on the internet or seen on TV, but specifically how is the government so intrusive in your life.

What is the government stopping you from doing, that you'd otherwise do?

And please be as specific as possible.

How about you list the things in your life that the government is not involved in?

:popcorn:

JBnTX
04-28-2012, 22:33
How about you list the things in your life that the government is not involved in?


Except for taxes (which are too high) the government has
very little say in my life.

Of course there are the rules and laws that I must obey,
but I see most of them as a benefit of living in a free and civilized society.

I go where I want and do what I want.
We have it a lot better here than most country's do.


..

DOC44
04-29-2012, 03:43
I go where I want and do what I want.



..

This has been true in my state and town until last night. I stopped at a new liquor store which has been open for about one month, "Favorite Liquors" on Madison Street. I had been there once before. Tonight there was a new Budweiser ad sign on the door but it said NO FIREARMS ALLOWED. I went back to the truck and unloaded and went in and asked it that was a new policy at this store. She said it was just on the door when I she came to work today. I handed her one of my cards that says, "We saw your sign and will honor it by taking our business elsewhere" and asked her to give it to the owner, left and did not buy anything.
:steamed:

Doc44

syntaxerrorsix
04-29-2012, 04:01
Except for taxes (which are too high) the government has
very little say in my life.

Of course there are the rules and laws that I must obey,
but I see most of them as a benefit of living in a free and civilized society.

I go where I want and do what I want.
We have it a lot better here than most country's do.


..

Apparently all is well from the view at your house.

https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRZF4CF09AAGkpHQzvrhGgaahi1zdE5mg7Ez4Nqd-uDJlJDf2Ly

Blast
04-29-2012, 04:36
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-l-pIGkQ2i0I/TWBeaFkTkNI/AAAAAAAAAM0/SGfFbmLTFjY/s1600/global%2Bwhining.bmp

DOC44
04-29-2012, 04:44
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-l-pIGkQ2i0I/TWBeaFkTkNI/AAAAAAAAAM0/SGfFbmLTFjY/s1600/global%2Bwhining.bmp

Yeah, just shut up, bend over and take it.:supergrin:

Doc44

syntaxerrorsix
04-29-2012, 04:47
Yeah, just shut up, bend over and take it.:supergrin:

Doc44


https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRoHJE9IMfLaCHyk-PKCuSRoSW0xeMTBvBlFIxKY0xxL3zbRgTA

Blast
04-29-2012, 05:05
Yeah, just shut up, bend over and take it.:supergrin:

Doc44
I'm not taking anything. There are no .govboogeymen treading on me.
No obstructions to my Constitutional freedom.
There are issues that need to be addressed to be sure, but whining and pissing in the wind will do knowing.
You going to do something tangible? Like taking care of the first priority such as ridding Obama from office come election day?
Unless you want Obama to have a second term, support the Republican candidate.
Lesser of evils is the only logical course.

kenpoprofessor
04-29-2012, 05:27
Lesser of evils is the only logical course.

So soon enough, we'll be voting for either a Stalin or a Hitler.

Have a great gun carryin' Kenpo day

Clyde

Electrikkoolaid
04-29-2012, 05:48
http://i.imgur.com/Vt7jq.jpg

Cavalry Doc
04-29-2012, 05:57
Yes. As we have previously discussed.



I disagree. There was little 'Orwellian' about the DDR or USSR. They were straightforward authoritarian states. What our state has morphed into is far more profitable - for awhile. Unfortunately, the dynamics of state (like the law of bureaucracy) behave the same way here as they did (and do) there. In other words, "can't happen here" isn't an argument, it's akin to a religious belief system. Besides, pointing out that the modern US is better than the DDR isn't really much of a compliment.

Further, I remind you that Soviet HMFIC's liked living in the DDR, considering it a fine improvement over home. Fans of the DDR, by your logic, might wave the flag and compare it favorably to North Korea. Hardly a compliment. And hardly an argument.

Finally, comparison of non-static systems are about tragictory. These systems are always in flux. The question is: which way is ours heading?

We could get there, but we have a long way to go. That's the point. If someone feels suppressed to that point, I don't know where you are living, but if the government is actually the problem, you should move..... oh wait, can't do that in Oceania. Or own guns. Or a lot of other stuff you can do today.

The title of the thread is an exercise in hyperbole.

JBnTX
04-29-2012, 06:00
So soon enough, we'll be voting for either a Stalin or a Hitler.



No, we won't! :steamed:

Why not try seeing the optimistic side of things for a change.
All that pessimism can't be healthy.

Cavalry Doc
04-29-2012, 06:10
This has been true in my state and town until last night. I stopped at a new liquor store which has been open for about one month, "Favorite Liquors" on Madison Street. I had been there once before. Tonight there was a new Budweiser ad sign on the door but it said NO FIREARMS ALLOWED. I went back to the truck and unloaded and went in and asked it that was a new policy at this store. She said it was just on the door when I she came to work today. I handed her one of my cards that says, "We saw your sign and will honor it by taking our business elsewhere" and asked her to give it to the owner, left and did not buy anything.
:steamed:

Doc44



Here, it is the owners right to limit carry on his property, and your right to shop where you want.

Freedom applies to everyone.

Another thing you can do, is go talk to the owner, and explain that there is very little liability in not stopping someone from legally carrying a firearm on the premises. If there were a problem, it would be the legislature that allowed a person to carry on his property. However, If a litigious gun owner is in his store, and becomes frightened, then he may have a problem. Because he took an action to stop someone from exercising their right, and may be negligent in not having provided for his security.

It took a while, but even the insurance companies caught on around here. The most common sign I see is a sign reminding people that the unlicensed possession of a firearm is a felony on the premises.

syntaxerrorsix
04-29-2012, 06:13
I'm not taking anything. There are no .govboogeymen treading on me.
No obstructions to my Constitutional freedom.
There are issues that need to be addressed to be sure, but whining and pissing in the wind will do knowing.
You going to do something tangible? Like taking care of the first priority such as ridding Obama from office come election day?
Unless you want Obama to have a second term, support the Republican candidate.
Lesser of evils is the only logical course.

If there aren't any constitutional issues affecting your freedoms why are you so adamant about getting Obama out of of office?

What's he done that's affected you?

Your post is rather conflicting.

JBnTX
04-29-2012, 06:18
Here, it is the owners right to limit carry on his property, and your right to shop where you want.

Freedom applies to everyone. ...


Exactly!

And no big "evil" government is forcing either side to do anything.

I love living in a free country.:patriot:

Blast
04-29-2012, 09:12
If there aren't any constitutional issues affecting your freedoms why are you so adamant about getting Obama out of of office?

What's he done that's affected you?

Your post is rather conflicting.
Obama is a democrat.

I don't like his liberal socialist policies... health care, entitlements, economics, etc.

He is gravitating toward stabbing Israel in the back.

There are a lot of reasons.

I don't care much for Romney, but I see far less liberalism and socialism from him.

There's the choice boys and girls, it will be Romney v Obama.
Remember, a third party vote will aid Obama.
Be warned.

snerd
04-29-2012, 11:17
........ Why not try seeing the optimistic side of things for a change. All that pessimism can't be healthy.
That sounds pretty hopey-changey-feely to me. Now where have I heard that before?! Oh yeah! Now I remember!

If you guys think we should "wait 'til they come for us" before we start to worry, well.................

DOC44
04-29-2012, 11:52
Here, it is the owners right to limit carry on his property, and your right to shop where you want.

Freedom applies to everyone.

Another thing you can do, is go talk to the owner, and explain that there is very little liability in not stopping someone from legally carrying a firearm on the premises. If there were a problem, it would be the legislature that allowed a person to carry on his property. However, If a litigious gun owner is in his store, and becomes frightened, then he may have a problem. Because he took an action to stop someone from exercising their right, and may be negligent in not having provided for his security.

It took a while, but even the insurance companies caught on around here. The most common sign I see is a sign reminding people that the unlicensed possession of a firearm is a felony on the premises.

I understand his right and agree with him having the right to do so on his own property. The thing that was so surpizing was that it was a colorful 12x16" Budweiser sign pictureing cans and bottles of Bud products along with the printed message "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED"........ its Miller time for me.

Doc44

Cavalry Doc
04-29-2012, 11:57
I understand his right and agree with him having the right to do so on his own property. The thing that was so surpizing was that it was a colorful 12x16" Budweiser sign pictureing cans and bottles of Bud products along with the printed message "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED"........ its Miller time for me.

Doc44

Any chance you have a picture of that? I find it hard to believe, even with Anheuser-Bush being foreign owned now, that they would swagger into such a controversial subject.

If they are making anti carry signs, I too would be willing to stop buying their products.

More likely, the owner added the offensive language. He needs a talking too, to let him know where his true liability lies.

juggy4711
04-29-2012, 11:59
...its Miller time for me. Doc44

Don't do it Doc. Black on black crime solves nothing. :whistling:

DOC44
04-29-2012, 12:09
Don't do it Doc. Black on black crime solves nothing. :whistling:

Had forgotten Uncle Jessie had said that....... always associated him with Colt 45 or Black Label.

Doc44

RC-RAMIE
04-29-2012, 12:19
Any chance you have a picture of that? I find it hard to believe, even with Anheuser-Bush being foreign owned now, that they would swagger into such a controversial subject.

If they are making anti carry signs, I too would be willing to stop buying their products.

More likely, the owner added the offensive language. He needs a talking too, to let him know where his true liability lies.

Agreed would be nice for a gun owner to email a pic making Anheuser-Bush aware they are using their sings for that purpose.


....

DOC44
04-29-2012, 12:26
Any chance you have a picture of that? I find it hard to believe, even with Anheuser-Bush being foreign owned now, that they would swagger into such a controversial subject.

If they are making anti carry signs, I too would be willing to stop buying their products.

More likely, the owner added the offensive language. He needs a talking too, to let him know where his true liability lies.

I looked on the Bush site to see it it might be available or pictured there but could not find it. Will take a picture of it tomorrow if it is still there.:supergrin:

I have spoken with "bosses" at a mall and at locally owned eatery before and the sign came down.

Doc44

Cavalry Doc
04-29-2012, 12:33
I looked on the Bush site to see it it might be available or pictured there but could not find it. Will take a picture of it tomorrow if it is still there.:supergrin:

I have spoken with "bosses" at a mall and at locally owned eatery before and the sign came down.

Doc44

Our local Wallmart hoisted a 51% sign a few years ago. They stated that they just put the signs up that they were sent. But I didn't buy that. I talked to the local and district managers, and told them that if the situation was not resolved, that I would contact "corporate". They obviously had it wrong, as the 51% sign is for businesses that allow consumption on the premises, and wallmart certainly did not. They even had another sign up saying that consumption on the premises was illegal.

The sign came down, and I continued to shop there. Not so much since the super H.E.B. opened up across the street. But it was the principle of the matter that mattered.

Keep after them. It will probably work out for the best.

juggy4711
04-29-2012, 12:34
Had forgotten Uncle Jessie had said that....... always associated him with Colt 45 or Black Label.

Doc44

That was Billy Dee Williams :supergrin:

DOC44
04-30-2012, 14:22
This has been true in my state and town until last night. I stopped at a new liquor store which has been open for about one month, "Favorite Liquors" on Madison Street. I had been there once before. Tonight there was a new Budweiser ad sign on the door but it said NO FIREARMS ALLOWED. I went back to the truck and unloaded and went in and asked it that was a new policy at this store. She said it was just on the door when I she came to work today. I handed her one of my cards that says, "We saw your sign and will honor it by taking our business elsewhere" and asked her to give it to the owner, left and did not buy anything.
:steamed:

Doc44

Spoke with Budweiser in St. Louis and local distributor this morning. Stopped by the store this afternoon and the sign is gone.... will wait to see if the owner puts up another generic NO FIREARMS ALLOWED sign which is his right. But I got the impression that Budweiser didn't want to be associated with a NO FIREARMS ALLOWED policy.

:beer:

Doc44

kirgi08
05-01-2012, 08:54
:cool: