Revolution?

[amicus]

Each and every one of the protagonists on this issue know full well the point of order that I am raising.

The complete takeover of the health system in America is an unconstitutional act as our limited form of government does not authorize such powers.

This administration in meddling with the Financial Sector, is essence to defray the fault ot Fannie and Freddie as government entities that enacted faulty programs, also overstepped the constitutional authority of government.

The bailout of most of the automobile industry is also a violation of basic constitutional issues and is a travesty in terms of interfering in the free market functions.

An accumulation of legislation beginning back in the Theodore Roosevelt era and continuing to the present day, highlights by FDR's grandiose efforts in the "New Deal" of socialist legislation, much of which was challenged and overturned by the Surpreme Court, followed by the 'Great Society' transgression of the Johnson adminstration are background for an even larged degradation of constitutinal principles by the Obama administration.

I certainly do no wish for a bloody revolution to put a stop to the increasingly rapid drift into socialism and a command economy but I am quite willing to consider that alternative as a solution to the gradual loss of human individual freedom to an every increasing and increasingly powerful centralized government that deeply intrudes into the guaranteed and protected rights of individuals and corporations.

The Chief Executive, the President, sets the moral tone of government, but it is the entrenched bureaucrats, all two million of them and their Unionized security that is truly the machinery that moves government into an even more powerful factor in American life.

It is the opinion of many, who function within the letter and spirit of the Constitution, our Republic and free market economy, that government has grown beyond the control of the electorate and the ballot box and that other means of rectifying the situation must be considered.

Most of the nay-sayers to the use of force to change government are either Americans who do not comprehend our basic documents, Europeans and Canadians who have never known a free society based on equality before the law within the guidelines of Constitutional authority, simply do not understand the primacy of the individual and the rights acknowledged and protected by our basic documents.

The overwhelming belief that the ends justify the means and that individual rights can be abolished in the name of the majority or the 'greater good'; the pragmatic or cost/benefit ratio of legislation without regard to those enumerated rights and liberties of the individual is a philosophical failure to understand the true nature of basic individual human rights.

You find it impossible to understand that individual rights and liberties transcend the socialist concept of sacrificing individual rights for a cost effective greater good.

In the current conflict in the Congress of the United States wherein a single political party is passig legislation without discussion and without conventional congressional procedures, should shed light on the basic conflict between those who advocate intrusive government actions and those who remain loyal to constitutional edicts and precedence in law.

Bur those on this forum and elsewhere deny and ignore that there is a major constitutional conflict at hand that cannot be resolved by civil action and demands a greater effort to preserve that which is America.

It has long been far beyond the talking stage and a time for action has arrived, like it or not.

Up the Revolution!

Amicus

 

[Dragonlipz]

Mon Ami,
You lost your freedom when you started watching FOX 24-7........
You are pathetic, maybe some medication would help? But nothing will change the fact that your kid voted for Obama, will it?
That's the stake in heart for you social vampires: Your children never follow you down that broken path.....

 

[TxRad]

Just a couple of question for ya Ami:

1. Who is going to fight this revolution you keep talking about.

2. Who are these revolutionaries going to fight?

1776 Was quite a number of years ago. Even the Civil War is the far past. Times have changed and so has society and the people in it. By the way, the Civil War had nothing to do with the constitution or a revolt. It was a dispute between the northern industrial states and the southern farm states. So you can quit trying to use it as an example of revolution. It was a states rights issue.

Unless you're going to hire mercenaries or use the nut job militia hiding in the mountains and woods, you don't have any troops. The average Joe is to busy trying to keep his head above water and the rich have nothing to gain. Anyway, the revolution is already over and you lost. What? You didn't know there was a social revolution going on for the last hundred years?

The days of the old west are also long past and that's where you belong. People outgrew your brand of America. They became civilized as compared to the times you want to bring back.

Keep talking out your ass, it makes you look like a fool and the nut job you are. You lost and that's all there is to it so take it like a man and quit whining.

 

[amicus]

Rather than me supplying you with the information you ask, why not use your own mind?

I have no idea at what point you would feel compelled to distrust your own government and ponder what actons you might take, but let us say, for the sake of discussion, that there is such a point and you are faced with the decision of what to do and how to resist.

I have three novels in progress that address those questions and of course, my particular vision or speculation is subject to criticism.

For one thing, the firepower of even local LEO's precludes a frontal assault of any arm of government.

Secondly, military personnel, under orders, might only go so far when ordered to attack civilians.

Some form of guerrila tactics would certainly get the attention of government officials and I guarantee you that interrupting the electric supply of City Halls and County Seats would certainly put a hitch in their gitalongs.

I write fiction, perhaps even future fiction but not science fiction that often surpasses the possible and deals with the theoretical.

I think itwas Heinlein that noted that the people greatly outnumber local law enforcement officials and that a determined effort to shut down a city is a relatively simple process and requires less than a dozen determined men.

Again I ask you, at what point would you view government as a threat and feel compelled to resist?

I tend to conclude that Americans are not the Jews of Warsaw and would not quietly go into that dark night.

Amicus

 

[Boxlicker101]

Just a couple of question for ya Ami:

1. Who is going to fight this revolution you keep talking about.

2. Who are these revolutionaries going to fight?

1776 Was quite a number of years ago. Even the Civil War is the far past. Times have changed and so has society and the people in it. By the way, the Civil War had nothing to do with the constitution or a revolt. It was a dispute between the northern industrial states and the southern farm states. So you can quit trying to use it as an example of revolution. It was a states rights issue.

Unless you're going to hire mercenaries or use the nut job militia hiding in the mountains and woods, you don't have any troops. The average Joe is to busy trying to keep his head above water and the rich have nothing to gain. Anyway, the revolution is already over and you lost. What? You didn't know there was a social revolution going on for the last hundred years?

The days of the old west are also long past and that's where you belong. People outgrew your brand of America. They became civilized as compared to the times you want to bring back.

Keep talking out your ass, it makes you look like a fool and the nut job you are. You lost and that's all there is to it so take it like a man and quit whining.

Although I agree with your opinion of Amicus, I don't agree with everything you say. I predict that this year, voters will be so fed up with the Socialistic programs of The Big O they will vote many of the Dems out of office, and prevent Obama from doing any more damage, unless he can somehow pull off a coup. Two years later, they will boot him out of office, along with enough senators to give the Reps control, and they will repeal everything the Dems have done and more, possibly even passing The Defense of Marriage as an amendment to the Constitution, and doing a lot of damage to the good things that have been done over the last hundred years you mention. I don't like all the possibilities I mention, and the only thing I am actually predicting is the Reps. taking over the House of Representatives next Jan, following their victories in November.

 

[TxRad]

Although I agree with your opinion of Amicus, I don't agree with everything you say. I predict that this year, voters will be so fed up with the Socialistic programs of The Big O they will vote many of the Dems out of office, and prevent Obama from doing any more damage, unless he can somehow pull off a coup. Two years later, they will boot him out of office, along with enough senators to give the Reps control, and they will repeal everything the Dems have done and more, possibly even passing The Defense of Marriage as an amendment to the Constitution, and doing a lot of damage to the good things that have been done over the last hundred years you mention. I don't like all the possibilities I mentkion, and the only thing I am actually predicting is the Reps. taking over the House of Representatives next Jan, following their victories in November.

I don't see it that way. In fact I see the opposite happening. Most people aren't fools. They may still be the silent majority as they were once called but they do listen and the do react to the people who block things that they see as advancement.

I think the Republican party and their mouth pieces on FOX are in for a rude awakening. The tide has turned somewhat and the old guard have stepped on too many dicks over the past few years.

It might be a pipe dream but then again.

 

[TxRad]

Rather than me supplying you with the information you ask, why not use your own mind?

I have no idea at what point you would feel compelled to distrust your own government and ponder what actons you might take, but let us say, for the sake of discussion, that there is such a point and you are faced with the decision of what to do and how to resist.

I have three novels in progress that address those questions and of course, my particular vision or speculation is subject to criticism.

For one thing, the firepower of even local LEO's precludes a frontal assault of any arm of government.

Secondly, military personnel, under orders, might only go so far when ordered to attack civilians.

Some form of guerrila tactics would certainly get the attention of government officials and I guarantee you that interrupting the electric supply of City Halls and County Seats would certainly put a hitch in their gitalongs.

I write fiction, perhaps even future fiction but not science fiction that often surpasses the possible and deals with the theoretical.

I think itwas Heinlein that noted that the people greatly outnumber local law enforcement officials and that a determined effort to shut down a city is a relatively simple process and requires less than a dozen determined men.

Again I ask you, at what point would you view government as a threat and feel compelled to resist?

I tend to conclude that Americans are not the Jews of Warsaw and would not quietly go into that dark night.

Amicus

Ami, I'm ex marine, first force recon. Shutting down a town is no problem except for people like me and there are a lot of us. We might not agree with the Government but I be damned if some half baked idiot is going to shut my town down. Not to mention the street gangs in most cities. They have the fire power and organization. They could own cities if they had the right leadership. They will be against your revolutionaries in a heartbeat. It's their town and their president.

As for withholding taxes and such. Companies won't do it. IRS and the feds would have their asses in a New York second. Anyway, there isn't a way to get it organized without the fed knowing about it well in advance. You said you delt with these people in Hawaii, well what do you think will happen.

If this stuff is in your book, you need to rethink a few things from the man on the streets viewpoint. The real man on the street, not the version you have in your head.

 

[xssve]

So basically, you morons are invoking your constitutional right to... abolish the constitution?

There was an election, you lost, get over it.

Otherwise, don't be such a pussy, just jump if you feel froggy.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I don't know where this is from, came to me via Facebook:

This morning I was awoken by my alarm clock powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy. I then took a shower in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility. After that, I turned on the TV to one of the FCC regulated channels to see what the National Weather Service of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration determined the weather was going to be like using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I watched this while eating breakfast of US Department of Agriculture inspected food and taking the drugs which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration.

At the appropriate time as regulated by the US Congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the US Naval Observatory. I get into my National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved automobile and set out to work on the roads built by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation, possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency, using legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve bank. On the way out the door I deposit any mail I have to send via the US Postal Service and drop the kids off at the public school.

After work, I drive my NHTSA car back home on the DOT roads, to a house which has not burned down in my absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all it's valuables thanks to the local police department.

I then log on to the internet which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration and post on freerepublic.com and Fox News forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Dear Reader,

Huck cant distinguish between socialism and commonwealth.

 

[LaRocha]

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania doesn't plow their northern roads east of Erie. Most of northern Pennsylvania is gunfighters and Amish. It's real socialism around here.

 

[FreshlyDirty]

We live in a democracy. If they are doing something the Country does not want with healthcare reform and financial reform, then they will be voted out. Are you against democracy?

The Constitution set up democracy for our political system. The Constitution did not set up capitalism for our economic system. It makes no mention of capitalism.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

We live in a democracy. If they are doing something the Country does not want with healthcare reform and financial reform, then they will be voted out. Are you against democracy?

The Constitution set up democracy for our political system. The Constitution did not set up capitalism for our economic system. It makes no mention of capitalism.

No. The Founders created a Republic.

 

[LaRocha]

just to beat a dead horse even deader. Al Gore won the popular vote, but he wasn't elected president. It's still a joke calling our system a democratic-republic, it's just a plain old republic like the french and romans had. arito-cats elect each other to run your life. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNEraxj559Y

As far as capitalism is concerned, most of those guys who founded the republic made their money as feudal land lords with indentured servants and poor ass whites who couldn't afford their own land and had no voice or representation in local or state government.

 

[stephen55]

Let's have a closer look.....

According to amicus...

You find it impossible to understand that individual rights and liberties transcend the socialist concept of sacrificing individual rights for a cost effective greater good.

I've just finished reading the book Fashionable Nonsense by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. It's about how postmodernist thinkers, usually the Leftist Intelligentsia abuse science and mathematics when writing about sociology, philosophy and politics. I can't help but think that statements like the one above use some of the same muddled tactics, such as linking one idea to another in a way which may look reasonable, but on closer inspection, may not be the case. Tossing out words that have specific meaning and linking them to concepts that don't apply is yet another tactic.

You find it impossible to understand...
In reality I and others find it easy to understand what you're saying. Understanding does not mean agreeing. Accusing us of not understanding, much less having no ability to understand in the first place, hardly means that your understanding is the only acceptable one.

individual rights and liberties...
You're very fond of that phrase. You keep using it as if your concept of individual rights and liberties is the one and only one that can exist. This implies that anyone who doesn't share your exact concepts is wrong. You create a self referencing idea and then attack any other idea that fails to live up to it. This leaves no room for discussion as you have preset the agenda and automatically toss out dissent as meaningless. It's kind of like your past assertion that human morality is an absolute science, which was merely your way of saying that not believing your values makes someone an idiot.

transcend the socialist concept...
Your ideas do not climb above or go beyond anyone else's ideas. You're welcome to believe that. Just don't expect others to put their ideas aside because you have implied that yours are better.
Your definition of socialism (implied but not defined, which is another way to persuade with fuzzy thinking) doesn't have to set the agenda for a discussion on health care. Working together is not a socialist concept. Nor is it a capitalist, free enterprise or what have you concept. It simply means that in some situations people working together can get more accomplished than people working individually. That's why General Motors doesn't assign the complete assembly of one vehicle to one employee. Working independently is not anti-socialist or ant-capitalist etc. In some situations it simply makes sense to work independently.

sacrificing individual rights for a cost effective greater good...

Something tells me that employees of General Motors haven't sacrificed any of their individual rights. Anyone of them is free to quit and go into the one person vehicle assembly business. In Canada no one has sacrificed any individual rights because of our medical system. Just because you feel that any government hand in Canadian health care is socialist (again undefined) doesn't mean that it is. You have repeatedly cast out comments about docs being forced to do this, patients being abandoned because of that and tried to convince us by repetition that your comments have a basis in reality. They don't. That the Canadian health care system gets more done for less cost is true. But repeatedly stating that we have sacrificed individual rights is rubbish. Unless you actually believe that having access to health cars deprives one of the individual right to not have access to health care. No one in Canada is forced to accept government sponsored health care. Anyone wanting to pay privately is free to do so. That those people are few in number simply speaks to the common sense of having health insurance. Insurance is hardly a socialist concept. Having an efficient insurance plan is also common sense. Actually, providing good service at a better price sounds quite capitalist to me.

 

[Pure]

simple questions for the revolutionary.

ami I certainly do no wish for a bloody revolution to put a stop to the increasingly rapid drift into socialism and a command economy but I am quite willing to consider that alternative as a solution to the gradual loss of human individual freedom to an every increasing and increasingly powerful centralized government that deeply intrudes into the guaranteed and protected rights of individuals and corporations

what individual freedoms have you lost since Jan 2009?

do you consider the emergency 17 billion dollar infusion to General Motors, an intrusion on their corporate rights? (which one, to go belly up?)

 

[Pure]

stephen55

you are probably aware of this, but for the general information, and to illustrate the slippery definitions of some folks around here:

http://www.researchmag.com/Issues/2008/8/Pages/From-Bismarck-to-Bush.aspx

On November 17, 1881, German Kaiser Wilhelm I issued an imperial decree stating that “those who are disabled from work by age and invalidity have a well-grounded claim to care from the state.” The driving force behind this pronouncement was Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, who had unified Germany, unleashed victorious wars against Austria and France and was now intent on creating the world’s first broadly available pension system.

Throughout the 1880s, Bismarck pushed for the creation of government social programs. The German pension system, financed by mandatory contributions from employers and employees, was enacted in 1889. When critics contended that such measures were socialistic, Bismarck replied insouciantly: “Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me.”

At the same time, Bismarck sought to inoculate the public against more radical types of socialism. His goal, above all, was to secure the power of the authoritarian state he had built over the decades. And in seeking to set up retirement pay, the chancellor was pretty candid about these political calculations. “Whoever has a pension for his old age,” he said, “is far more content and far easier to handle than one who has no such prospect.”

===

That nasty old "socialist" Bismarck got "socialism" going in Germany. Old age pensions (paid for by the workers who would later collect them).

He took away the right of retired workers to go hungry, if they were sick.

 

[LaRocha]

Germany's pension plan is currently a bigger millstone than social security.

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

~~~


It is the Metropolitan Liberal that will fall to pieces once the lights go off.

It is the city bred left wing progressives who have lost contact with nature and values and visit city parks and zoo's to acquaint themselves with their roots.

Those who will begin this revolution will simply turn your lights off and wait for the chaos to subside before herding you into the pens you belong in.

In my view of the coming upheaval, you will be transported to barren land, given material to build a shelter and seeds to start a garden and pretty much left to weed yourselves out.

Those that survive may be fit to join the human race again...but that is pure speculation, I think you would just give up and die.

Amicus

By God, Amicus is a Commie! A dyed in wool Stalinist! Red must his favorite color and Bolshoi Bullshit his favorite meal.

Now, in all seriousness, isn't what you're advocating the same as what the Khmer Rouge did in Cambodia?

What's going on Amicus? Have you watched Chuckie Heston one too many times in "The Omega Man?"

Here's the view from my chair. I've still got my job. My house is still worth more than what I owe. I have practiced sound financial restraint for the past decade, I don't have any credit cards. My health is okay. In short, life is good, it could be better, but it could be a hell of lot worse.

And worse is what it seems that you and your ilk want. You're openly advocating the overthrow of a legally elected government. Sort of sounds like sedition and treason to me.

But then, you are a communist, aren't you, Komrade Amicus...