The "Shut 'er downers"

I just read it, I believe what he was trying to say (rather passionately) is that the group of people that have steadfastly called for an end to the new health care law sadly also have some really ugly views about the president, and that those views & opinions of the president is guiding them politically more-so than policy.

I actually see where he’s coming from, and I agree.

I wouldn’t say that all Tea Partiers are consumed with the president's skin color, but like I have been saying for a long time now, I think there are too many of them that “are” to make a negative difference that shuts down Washington and the dialog.

 

I disagree. Take one picture and assign it to the rest of any group and I could easily claim that all democrats are members of the KKK. The Tea Party sprung out of disillusionment with government control and spending and Obama's policies were and are all about more control and more spending. Bush was progressive enough and a disappointment for conservatives.

 

I see your point, and believe it or not I would agree with you if you saw a ton of pictures or signs. (from either side)

But that’s where your (in my humble opinion) still missing the point.

Dude Google had to scrub all of the filthy pictures and video images of what was going on – on the capital lawn during that health care debate. And unless you were living in Russia or under a rock at the time, brother that picture that Natty Bumpo posted is one of the “nice” ones.

There were hundreds of folks out there with t-shirts, signs, and posters that were abusing the hell out of the president and most of it had nothing to do with policies or even healthcare, it was just one huge hate fest.

An ugly hate fest that had the secret service scrambling all day and following some folks home. I seriously have no reason to lie to you.

I respect the fact that you may not like the presidents polices, the new health care law, and many other things about the president. I take you at your word that his skin color means nothing to you.

But you’ve got to realize that there’s a lot of hatred towards the president that has not too much to do with his political acumen.

Like I said before, that’s nothing to get defensive about or internalize, it’s just a fact.

 

A ton? Please. You mean a few pictures, some only "interpreted" by the left as racist, over and over again and no worse than the signs that the left carried during Bush. The left wants to make this about race, and so does Obama while the rest of us want to make it about fiscal responsibility and limiting central control

 

Ok, fine...

I'm not getting through to you, and there's no way I'm going to stay on this laptop for the next few hours digging all the pictures up.

Well I can't because like I said a lot of them have been scrubbed.

You want to keep flipping this thing back to "I know I am but so are you" fine........

You don't need to keep reminding me of something that I’ve already admitted to, whats the point.

Yes, there was a lot of loony lefties while President Bush was in office and yes, they made some crazy signs too................happy.

It's late, I'm tired, and I'm not making any progress here so I'm moving on.................Ciao

 

You too are trying to make this about race instead of policy.

 

Yes, you found me out, I surrender.................

And as proof of your brilliant discover of the fraud that I am.....

I offer these.............

 

Thanks for proving my point.

 

Oh looky, more proof that I'm a fraud.......



- - - Updated - - -

I leave you to argue against yourself for the rest of the night denying all of this garbage and convincing yourself that it's not wide spread......

Not a race baiter pal, just trying to pull you out of your own denial.....................

 

More proof that you are only interested in race baiting than actual debate about policy. That is the problem with the left, an obsession with race.

 

Karl Marx would have loved you. Oh Goody, another useful idiot is what he may have said.

 

The Tail Wagging The Dog, Problem​

Okay, a little government may be a fine thing.
Problem: Governments by their very nature practice hegemony on the governed.
Today we are governed more then yesterday and I will bet tomorrow will yield more governing.
And of course all this increasing governing costs more.
No one wing of the RepubloCratic Party is responsible.
The Republican wing just extends their realms of governing in different areas then the Democratic wing.

And as it progresses, we have a "The Tail Wagging The Dog, Problem".
Professional Governmenters and their sycophants running the people. Dutifully passing laws supported by "their" judges if challenged.
The Plutocracy and their Government also own "The News" which has been trying to convince us we are in crisis.
All such political theater.

What part do you disagree godisnotreal ?

Our founding fathers gave us the Bill of Rights to avoid the natural tendency of
Government Hegemony on the Governed and the Rights of the Governed.
Notice how so much of the Bill of Rights is ignored, abrogated or over ruled with the 14th Amendment as a universal judicial trump card. The 14th Amendment with unrelated sections and passed under duress.
Hardly a beacon to trump the Bill of Rights without supporting law.
Yet, our Bill of Rights is trumped.

Maybe we should conclude governments by nature are malignant and difficult to contain.

This shut down may just demonstrate how much of our government is "fluff" and self serving D.C. staff.


Moi

 

I have two replies, the first from Benjamin Franklin, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

Second, that you are really saying that might makes right. No doubt the government has the power to make people pay taxes, and many may love the idea of using the government to take money from other people and give it to themselves. But there is a long stretch between saying the government has the power and saying that it has the right. If government could do anything, there would be no need for a Constitution. The reason for a Constitution is to specify what government can and can not do. It is an essential part of the American system to recognize that relations between government and people are governed by a contract in which the people cede some part of their liberty in return for the government performing certain services. The Fourth Amendment says "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated." Income redistribution violates this right. It is an unreasonable seizure of effects. (Assuming that "might makes right" does not supply a reason.)

Even were I to grant that income redistribution is legitimate, which I do not, it is certainly neither positive nor necessary. That's only to heap praise on tyranny.

 

well, rights are determined by the American public. The constitution itself is determined by the American public. And as the public evolves, our definition of what constitutes a "right" evolves.

Conservatives don't understand this. They think that "rights" are absolute. But that is not true. "rights" are constantly evolving, and our concept of what is a "right" is very different today than it was 50, 100, or 200 years ago. And that's a GOOD thing!

Your reference to the fourth amendment is nonsensical. Income redistribution does not fall under the definition of "unreasonable search and seizure". No court has ever interpreted it as such.

 

I disagree. Some governments in history have been quite oppressive to their people. But others have been quite beneficial to their people. There is no "tendency" towards "hegemony" as you say. I think that our country today is very different than the country during the time of our founding fathers. As such, we cannot listen to everything that our founding fathers said, because our society has changed. Our concept of rights has changed. So has our concept of what the proper role of government is. You conservatives want to turn the clock back to 1776. But that would be foolish. Our country is better today than it has ever been in its history. And it will continue to improve. It would make no sense to return to a more primitive form. And that's exactly the correct way to describe your conservative ideas - primitive. Society has advanced beyond your primitive ideas. You need to accept this and move on.

 

Oh Really !

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

Here is some -
Federal Hegemony on my guaranteed 4th Amendment rights.
How come they can scan my e-mails. My cell phone calls. Even involve the USPS.
How come this does not count as my right to be secure in my papers & effects.
Am I really that Conservative? <the horror, the horror>


Moi

 

depends on your interpretation of the term "unreasonable."

personally, i dont think its such a big deal. i have done nothing wrong. I have no secrets to hide. i care not if some secret nsa agent is reading my worthless emails. great--they can read about the details of my relatively boring life. how does that affect me? not at all.

 

The House Republicans who brought about this shutdown, should be arrested for extortion, and should all be in jail this minute.

 

You mean it should be illegal for them to represent their constituency. Heil!

 

Why only two? Why should we have a center left and a far left party only?

 

What I meant was: I think the way the founding fathers set it all up was a stroke of genius (not perfect) but pretty damn good.

I think the republicans have severely hurt themselves since Barak Obama became the 44th president.

I&#8217;m not going to get into all the reasons why because we&#8217;ll get off topic, and just go back & forth with each other forever.

But even though I&#8217;m a registered Democrat, I think it&#8217;s important to have a minimum of two parties&#8217; to have the balance and the contrast.

My fear is that Republicans will be in political wilderness for many, many years to come if they don&#8217;t stop driving the car so far to the extreme right.

And this latest debacle with this RIDUICULOUS government shutdown to defund a LAW (not a bill) that&#8217;s already been voted on &#8211; passed &#8211; and upheld by the Supreme Court is nothing short of sheer madness.

Especially when the damn thing rolled out the very next day anyway.

You can&#8217;t buy or find that kind of stupidity if you had a billion dollars and a thousand telescopes&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;but somehow the GOP managed to do it anyway.

 

OhSuptidCare NEEDED to be STOPPED....or AMERICA will go down the drain

PUSH has come to shove.

oh WELL!! them's the breaks

 

PUSH has come to shove. And republicans, if they keep this up, will find themselves completely shoved out of the discussion.

 

The American public is taking note of their antics, and is not amused.

 

Because everyone knows, free stuff is more important that freedom.