100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: State secession movement grows :) (article) | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
But that's not anarchy. Corruption, maybe. But not anarchy. And it's not like either side hasn't had its bad apples. For every Dan Rostenkowski I can probably name someone like John Ensign. During the administration of Bush I, we saw that the Keating 5 could count among it's members both Democrats and Republicans. That said, I think Obama's extracurricular activities this week with the Olympics committee was dumb politics just begging to be compared to Chicago machine politics of the past. But I don't think it rose to the level of being called 'Evil' by objective observers. -Kerry O. I agree with you. Take anarchy out of the topic. As for corrupt or criminals in power, I don't care what side they bat for, if they are either corrupt or criminal, call 'em out and take action. That goes also for politicians or Gov. officials who break Laws by not enforcing them. I just posted a list of corrupt Politicians. How do we go about getting them out of power? Did you ever try to catch sunfish with your hands? Pretty impossible, isn't it? You have to get 'em on a hook or in a net because they're just too slippery to latch onto by hand. Money in political campaigns is like that. No matter how much regulation you put on it, you can't really get a handle on it. Yet you _have_ to get a handle on it, because when you come right down the nitty-gritty, money IS the kingmaker. That's not to say it can't be done, though. But you won't like my answer to it. :) First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack. Second, I think everyone should be required to have to have read things like the Federalist Papers and pass a test on them to be qualified to vote. The Federalist Papers have one of the best explanations of the term 'faction' ever invented by a political mind, as well as the result of the passions of factions. In Federalist #9, for example, Hamilton examines the past republics of Greece and Italy and notes how factions turned both into 'petty republics.' Lastly, I think we need to remember what Edward R. Murrow meant when he quoted Shakespeare: "Cassius was right, 'The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.' " -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But that's not anarchy. Corruption, maybe. But not anarchy. And it's not like either side hasn't had its bad apples. For every Dan Rostenkowski I can probably name someone like John Ensign. During the administration of Bush I, we saw that the Keating 5 could count among it's members both Democrats and Republicans. That said, I think Obama's extracurricular activities this week with the Olympics committee was dumb politics just begging to be compared to Chicago machine politics of the past. But I don't think it rose to the level of being called 'Evil' by objective observers. -Kerry O. I agree with you. Take anarchy out of the topic. As for corrupt or criminals in power, I don't care what side they bat for, if they are either corrupt or criminal, call 'em out and take action. That goes also for politicians or Gov. officials who break Laws by not enforcing them. I just posted a list of corrupt Politicians. How do we go about getting them out of power? Did you ever try to catch sunfish with your hands? Pretty impossible, isn't it? You have to get 'em on a hook or in a net because they're just too slippery to latch onto by hand. Money in political campaigns is like that. No matter how much regulation you put on it, you can't really get a handle on it. Yet you _have_ to get a handle on it, because when you come right down the nitty-gritty, money IS the kingmaker. That's not to say it can't be done, though. But you won't like my answer to it. :) First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack. Second, I think everyone should be required to have to have read things like the Federalist Papers and pass a test on them to be qualified to vote. The Federalist Papers have one of the best explanations of the term 'faction' ever invented by a political mind, as well as the result of the passions of factions. In Federalist #9, for example, Hamilton examines the past republics of Greece and Italy and notes how factions turned both into 'petty republics.' Lastly, I think we need to remember what Edward R. Murrow meant when he quoted Shakespeare: "Cassius was right, 'The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.' " -Kerry O.  Very well put. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But to Texas separatists like Miller and Republican gubernatorial candidate Larry Kilgore of Mansfield, secession is no laughing matter. hahaha. then why am i laughing at the absurd notion that texas will secede. hahahahaha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But that's not anarchy. Corruption, maybe. But not anarchy. And it's not like either side hasn't had its bad apples. For every Dan Rostenkowski I can probably name someone like John Ensign. During the administration of Bush I, we saw that the Keating 5 could count among it's members both Democrats and Republicans. That said, I think Obama's extracurricular activities this week with the Olympics committee was dumb politics just begging to be compared to Chicago machine politics of the past. But I don't think it rose to the level of being called 'Evil' by objective observers. -Kerry O. I agree with you. Take anarchy out of the topic. As for corrupt or criminals in power, I don't care what side they bat for, if they are either corrupt or criminal, call 'em out and take action. That goes also for politicians or Gov. officials who break Laws by not enforcing them. I just posted a list of corrupt Politicians. How do we go about getting them out of power? Did you ever try to catch sunfish with your hands? Pretty impossible, isn't it? You have to get 'em on a hook or in a net because they're just too slippery to latch onto by hand. Money in political campaigns is like that. No matter how much regulation you put on it, you can't really get a handle on it. Yet you _have_ to get a handle on it, because when you come right down the nitty-gritty, money IS the kingmaker. That's not to say it can't be done, though. But you won't like my answer to it. :) First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack. Second, I think everyone should be required to have to have read things like the Federalist Papers and pass a test on them to be qualified to vote. The Federalist Papers have one of the best explanations of the term 'faction' ever invented by a political mind, as well as the result of the passions of factions. In Federalist #9, for example, Hamilton examines the past republics of Greece and Italy and notes how factions turned both into 'petty republics.' Lastly, I think we need to remember what Edward R. Murrow meant when he quoted Shakespeare: "Cassius was right, 'The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.' " -Kerry O. Very well put. Thank you. Thanks. Just a suggestion, but you might find the movie "Good Luck and Good Night", a sort of docudrama about Murrow's run-in with CBS sponsors over his going after McCarthy on his program "See it Now", somewhat enlightening. They just don't make 'em like Murrow anymore. -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack."
Great shades of statism!  This violates the first ammendement (which protects free speech, especially political speech). Further, where does the money to pay for this boondoggle come from? Robbing the public via inflation/taxation (the politicians never pay for things themselves, of course). If "Joe Sixpack" is too uninformed to make a decision, he should stay home! There's more information available than ever before, so there's no excuse anymore. I wonder why you think that the government "can't play favors" when they already do-they use money to bail out their corporate friends who donate big money to politicians, for example. (remember the bailout fiasco?) Even the Federalists (statists as many of them were) knew that the government is prone to corruption and insisted on Constitutional limits (incredibly weak as they are). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack." Great shades of statism! This violates the first ammendement (which protects free speech, especially political speech). Further, where does the money to pay for this boondoggle come from? Robbing the public via inflation/taxation (the politicians never pay for things themselves, of course). If "Joe Sixpack" is too uninformed to make a decision, he should stay home! There's more information available than ever before, so there's no excuse anymore. I wonder why you think that the government "can't play favors" when they already do-they use money to bail out their corporate friends who donate big money to politicians, for example. (remember the bailout fiasco?) Even the Federalists (statists as many of them were) knew that the government is prone to corruption and insisted on Constitutional limits (incredibly weak as they are). Isn't it funny how there are slews of folks willing to be "concerned" at the very least about who should or shouldn't be able to vot and then there are those like me who say if you don't vote you don't get to b-itch about what you get. Voting is a priviledge that to many don't take the time to do All of these hate Obama threads, hate the government threads are done for the most part by those who do not vote or participate in our government at all. So they try to incite hatred, fear and distrust for a government they don't even contribute to as the forefathers design it. It is sickening. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack." Great shades of statism! This violates the first ammendement (which protects free speech, especially political speech). Further, where does the money to pay for this boondoggle come from? Robbing the public via inflation/taxation (the politicians never pay for things themselves, of course). If "Joe Sixpack" is too uninformed to make a decision, he should stay home! There's more information available than ever before, so there's no excuse anymore. I wonder why you think that the government "can't play favors" when they already do-they use money to bail out their corporate friends who donate big money to politicians, for example. (remember the bailout fiasco?) Even the Federalists (statists as many of them were) knew that the government is prone to corruption and insisted on Constitutional limits (incredibly weak as they are). Isn't it funny how there are slews of folks willing to be "concerned" at the very least about who should or shouldn't be able to vot and then there are those like me who say if you don't vote you don't get to b-itch about what you get. Voting is a priviledge that to many don't take the time to do All of these hate Obama threads, hate the government threads are done for the most part by those who do not vote or participate in our government at all. So they try to incite hatred, fear and distrust for a government they don't even contribute to as the forefathers design it. It is sickening. Back up your words with proof. I challange you claims as false. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"First, I think the government needs to get in the business of being the only source of political advertising, with all the qualified candidates getting the same amount of time, free or otherwise. That takes the corporate angle out of the equation. They can't ply favors out of the winners, because they have no hooks in them. They're on an equal footing with Joe Sixpack." Great shades of statism! This violates the first ammendement (which protects free speech, especially political speech). Read it again. I thought it was obvious I was talking about the means, not the content. In other words, just like the government oversees and pays for the actual physical means to conduct elections, the government-- read: We the People-- would finance the means and the arenas and the airtime on which the advertising ran. We'd own the whole process with an eye towards making the politicians beholden unto flesh and blood citizens, NOT souless entities like corporations who hide their incestuous relations behind the corporate veil. Further, where does the money to pay for this boondoggle come from? Robbing the public via inflation/taxation (the politicians never pay for things themselves, of course). Where do you think it comes from now? How'd you like that $4/gallon gas last summer? (Arguably, the thing that started the whole recession rolling down hill.) I'm sure more people would not mind seeing twenty dollars of their tax refunds going towards direct financing of political campaigns with rules that insure a level playing field with no corporate or special interest group mischief. If "Joe Sixpack" is too uninformed to make a decision, he should stay home! There's more information available than ever before, so there's no excuse anymore. I wonder why you think that the government "can't play favors" when they already do-they use money to bail out their corporate friends who donate big money to politicians, for example. (remember the bailout fiasco?) Even the Federalists (statists as many of them were) knew that the government is prone to corruption and insisted on Constitutional limits (incredibly weak as they are). That's _ply_ favors. It's sort of ironic that your opening sentence of this post said "shades of statism". 'Shade' is just another word for ghost. Ghosts are imaginary creatures whose power is often based only upon fear. In actuality, they lack any substance whatsoever. Just like your statement about my and the Federalists' statism. It's a figment of the RonPaulist's imagination, used to foment a 'revolution'. But yanno what John Lennon's song 'Revolution' said, right? You say you want a revolution, Well-elllll you knooooooow oh-oh, We all want to change the world. You say you got a real solution. Well-ell you knooooooow oh-oh, We'd all love to see the plan.... -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
except a civil war would be non-existent if going by popular consensus in the forums here. From what I have seen here most people are dead against draft or conscription, and in the case of a civil war, that is exactly what would happen is everyone of a certain age, men at the least, would be drafted by their state. Well, at least a big, fat, Civil War would create jobs... anything is better than the current citywide Detroit unemployment rate of 28.9% http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/the_role_of_government_in_hard_times/ I don't see any reason to fight a civil war over this .... I'd vote to get rid of texas . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secession will not happen in these here United States, you can bank on it. I wouldn't bank on anything at this time. There was a time when people believed the government would never start undeclared wars or take over private businesses or regulate interstate commerce or education or medicine. That all changed as each generation grew more and more dependent on the government and the State gave itself more power. Secession has already happened twice (once from Britain, once from the tyrannical Northern States), so there is no reason to say "it won't happen again". (especially considering the volatile situation the last 20 years of neocons and left liberals have put us in) If the dollar crashes, all the old rules are gone, and it seems the government is determined to do that with its wars and welfare (corporate and otherwise) and insane debts. Oh so true and we can never say never when it comes to this. I hope it grabs hold and spreads like wildfire. The common day American knows how to run this Country better than the polish*tans that have taken over our Country and running it amok. Thanks for such a great and encouraging post! Better to look like Jesus than any polish*tan we have in office  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is what it is like in my neighborhood....
 These flags are flown with absolute respect for the men and women who have (and still do) sacrifice thier blood sweat and tears to serve this country. It is meant to be an act of defiance and disrespect to the federal government.....not to any one individual who feels indignation at the concept of peaceful protest. You people who got such big mouths about getting rid of Texas can go f*** yourselves. I and the rest of my family served you and your families when I was in the military. Many of us here did. We didn't just serve Texas....We served America. If we chose to consider seccesion...that is our business. You wanna disrespect us for it....bl#w me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secession will not happen in these here United States, you can bank on it. I wouldn't bank on anything at this time. There was a time when people believed the government would never start undeclared wars or take over private businesses or regulate interstate commerce or education or medicine. That all changed as each generation grew more and more dependent on the government and the State gave itself more power. Secession has already happened twice (once from Britain, once from the tyrannical Northern States), so there is no reason to say "it won't happen again". (especially considering the volatile situation the last 20 years of neocons and left liberals have put us in) If the dollar crashes, all the old rules are gone, and it seems the government is determined to do that with its wars and welfare (corporate and otherwise) and insane debts. Oh so true and we can never say never when it comes to this. I hope it grabs hold and spreads like wildfire. The common day American knows how to run this Country better than the polish*tans that have taken over our Country and running it amok. Thanks for such a great and encouraging post! Better to look like Jesus than any polish*tan we have in office Thank you for the kind and encouraging words, and thank to any others out there who also agree with me. xoxoxo! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, at least a big, fat, Civil War would create jobs... anything is better than the current citywide Detroit unemployment rate of 28.9% http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/the_role_of_government_in_hard_times/ would you still say that when those you care about are maimed and/or killed if not worse in their own homes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well this thread certainly got weird enough
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering secession is a laughable matter anyway, it is no wonder.
I guess the feds could let them secede and then take the state back just to show them something but I think secession will be stopped prior to that point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They will not need to resort to secession...
The federal government will colapse to some extent on its own. Leaving the states to fend for themselves for a time. Can't sustain the growth of the federal government without squeezing the life out of its citizens. At some point the size of the government will be to large for the base of its citizens to support it... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering secession is a laughable matter anyway, it is no wonder. I guess the feds could let them secede and then take the state back just to show them something but I think secession will be stopped prior to that point. I wonder if all the great patriots so eager for seccession have stopped saying the Pledge of Alliegance? I pledge alliegance to the Flag of the United States of America. And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands. One nation, under God, INDIVISIBLE, with Liberty and Justice for all. -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They will not need to resort to secession... The federal government will colapse to some extent on its own. Leaving the states to fend for themselves for a time. Can't sustain the growth of the federal government without squeezing the life out of its citizens. At some point the size of the government will be to large for the base of its citizens to support it... Current events seem to foretell the opposite-- that it's the states that are on the verge of collapse. What's even more curious is that fact that most Red States get more federal money than they pay into the Federal government, while the Blue States are footing the bill. Yet, most of rebel-rousing is happening in the Red States. Nose:Face:Spite-- Secession. -Kerry O. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering secession is a laughable matter anyway, it is no wonder. I guess the feds could let them secede and then take the state back just to show them something but I think secession will be stopped prior to that point. I wonder if all the great patriots so eager for seccession have stopped saying the Pledge of Alliegance? I pledge alliegance to the Flag of the United States of America. And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands. One nation, under God, INDIVISIBLE, with Liberty and Justice for all. -Kerry O. Good question but that pledge is about as meaningful as our prayers to alot of people. (unfortunately) Have you not noticed a movement to totally dismiss GOD as relevant to anything? People want to make their own rules and not be told what to do,,,kind of like children. And like children, sometimes you have to let them wander off and see that its not as easy as they think before they come back. I say, let those who wish to secede go on their way,, In my opinion,, they would come back. If they didnt,, we wouldnt be any worse off for it. we are still mostly a nation of people with common culture and interests who have become powerful because we worked TOGETHER, I dont think that will change anytime soon. What that culture is becoming is a different matter altogether though. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Considering secession is a laughable matter anyway, it is no wonder. I guess the feds could let them secede and then take the state back just to show them something but I think secession will be stopped prior to that point. I wonder if all the great patriots so eager for seccession have stopped saying the Pledge of Alliegance? I pledge alliegance to the Flag of the United States of America. And to the REPUBLIC for which it stands. One nation, under God, INDIVISIBLE, with Liberty and Justice for all. -Kerry O. Good question but that pledge is about as meaningful as our prayers to alot of people. (unfortunately) Have you not noticed a movement to totally dismiss GOD as relevant to anything? People want to make their own rules and not be told what to do,,,kind of like children. And like children, sometimes you have to let them wander off and see that its not as easy as they think before they come back. I say, let those who wish to secede go on their way,, In my opinion,, they would come back. If they didnt,, we wouldnt be any worse off for it. we are still mostly a nation of people with common culture and interests who have become powerful because we worked TOGETHER, I dont think that will change anytime soon. What that culture is becoming is a different matter altogether though. God doesn't belong in anything to do with the government. And god coming out of it has nothing to do with the problems in society. The religious just like to believe it is so. I say let them secede and then the feds can take the little tiny country inside our country back and that will be that. People in that state will leave it in droves if they believe secession was even a close possibility. To not have the protection of the feds and be under dictatorship of some fringe character in a revolt situation won't appeal to the normal everyday folks you can be sure. We will be saving those folks who did not get out soon enough and then taking the state back by force if necessary. |
|
|
|
|
