Lawmakers in 20 States move for Sovereignty

[The Black Knight]

Got this one from Taurusarmed.net forums:
http://www.taurusarmed.net/forums/index.php?topic=16025.0
then wandered around and found some more links.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88218
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=67229
http://brendabowers.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/states-in-revolt-new-hampshire-and-8-more-states-declare-their-constitutional-rights/

Now to start off, this is not a political thread. This isn't a bashing of either sides thread. But merely a thread on a subject that apparently is gaining steam with all of the other states. I tried doing some searches on this and have really come up with mainly smaller news sites and blogs. So it seems fairly recent and doesn't surprise me that mainstream media hasn't jumped on it with all that is already going on in the country.

Apparently we've got 8(Arizona, Hawaii, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, New Hamsphire, Oklahoma and Washington) states introducing resolutions declaring their own "State Sovereignty" under the ninth and tenth Amendments. Mainly to reign in the spending deficits and shortfalls that are out of control, from what I gather. Analysts suggest that in addition another 20 states(Colorado being one of them) will introduce similar measures this year.

What's everyone's thoughts on this?? Should the states exercise their rights as they are entitled to in the Constitution. In order to break away from Federal control. From junior high all the way til today, I've always understood that the States while we are all United in one country are still their own smaller territories(if you will) that are governed by their own governments(which mimic the Federal level). We have governors for every state and house and senates in every state.

Lastly, is this new development with the states inching us(the nation) every closer to 1860 all over again?? Only this time it's for completely different reasons and some closely similar. With states like Montana, Alaska and a few others from what I've read wanting to declare peaceful Secession(s), push us closer to the brink of something that happened almost 150 years ago??? This nation was founded on rebellion and our two wars that have transpired on our homeland are epic testimonies to that spirit.

With the Feds exerting more and more dominance over "the people" and "the states" by regulating and legislating everything from Motorcycle helmet laws, to the lead in parts for kids motocross bikes, to our Second Amendment rights, to everything else we hold dear. Is this finally coming to a boil?? It seems to me that good people from all walks of life are becoming increasingly angry with the way their government(both parties included and everyone else involved) are treating them day after day.

Interesting times we surely are living in....

[rforsythe]

I think it's just a matter of time before things violently reset, but what do I know.

[The Black Knight]

I think it's just a matter of time before things violently reset, but what do I know.
Is that what we need or are we past the point of peaceful resolution?? Sadly I'm inclined to lean much in the direction as yourself and feel it's almost inevitable.

[rforsythe]

Is that what we need or are we past the point of peaceful resolution?? Sadly I'm inclined to lean much in the direction as yourself and feel it's almost inevitable.

Whether it's what we need or not, I think it's the only logical outcome of the path we're on. As I don't see anything reversing that path, it is, as you say, inevitable.

[The Black Knight]

Whether it's what we need or not, I think it's the only logical outcome of the path we're on. As I don't see anything reversing that path, it is, as you say, inevitable.
I guess the next question that begs to be asked is, if it is inevitable how would it affect our country as we know it today?? Would in fact this time we get two separate sections of the country?? What would it do to our overall stance as once unified country?? When you think about it, one must guard themself from the rather dark outcome that this country could face and not be pulled down by that prospect.

[dirkterrell]

IWould in fact this time we get two separate sections of the country??

The big difference today is that it isn't one section of the country (statewise) against the other. It seems like it's more of an urban vs. not difference. I'm not sure how that would shake out.

Dirk

[The Black Knight]

The big difference today is that it isn't one section of the country (statewise) against the other. It seems like it's more of an urban vs. not difference. I'm not sure how that would shake out.

Dirk
So you think it might be more then just two major players in this?? Like several sides going at it at once?? Basically just alot of infighting....

[mtnairlover]

Nice little discussion...er I think...but then again, I just thought I'd ask you guys if you were serious, considering the author of the news story...

Jerome Robert Corsi (born August 31, 1946) is an American author.[1] He is best-known for his two New York Times bestselling books: The Obama Nation and Unfit for Command (with co-author John O'Neill). Both books, the former written in 2008 and the latter in 2004, attacked Democratic presidential candidates and were strongly criticized, including for what critics said were factual errors.[2]

In other books and columns for conservative websites such as WorldNetDaily and Human Events, Corsi has discussed conspiracy theory topics such as the alleged plans for a North American Government, criticism of the United States government for allegedly covering up information about the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, promoting an abiotic theory of petroleum (arguing that oil is produced from chemical reactions in the Earth, in contrast to the scientific community's consensus that oil is produced from the bodies of animals and/or plants), and alleged United States support of Iran in its attempts to develop nuclear weapons.[3][4][5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Corsi

anyhoo...carry on

[dirkterrell]

So you think it might be more then just two major players in this?? Like several sides going at it at once?? Basically just alot of infighting....

No, I still think it's two basic sides. Urban voters tend to like big government and dependence on it. Non-urban voters tend to like smaller government and self-reliance. See the Heinlein quote in my sig.

Dirk

[The Black Knight]

Cathy very good points, and I caught them as soon as I clicked on the sites with all of the conservative stuff in the ads on the sides. But I dismissed it in an effort to actually discuss something that has been talked about before and not just by us but by our people in charge.

I know Montana had a thing going awhile back that if the Heller Decision(Supreme courts ruling on the Second Amendment) was in favor of an anti Second Amendment stance that they were going to move forward with peaceful secession because they felt that the SOTUS violated a compact between Montana and the U.S.

Also from I can remember I'll have to look it up. Texas has something in their State Constitution that basically in so many words says "they reserve the right to leave the Union for whatever reason they deem fit" without giving notice to any of the Feds. So while it might be a minor topic, I think it's still a plausible one.

EDIT:
hey Cathy check out this soundbite from Glenn Beck on Secession. It's only 28 seconds long and worth a listen:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/25/beck-secession/

[The Black Knight]

No, I still think it's two basic sides. Urban voters tend to like big government and dependence on it. Non-urban voters tend to like smaller government and self-reliance. See the Heinlein quote in my sig.

Dirk
I agree Dirk, I think when it all comes down to it sides divide in those who seek Freedom vs. those who seek Dominance. It's probably the oldest fight in history...

[RajunCajun]

I agree Dirk, I think when it all comes down to it sides divide in those who seek Freedom vs. those who seek Dominance. It's probably the oldest fight in history...

Is it just me or does this fundamental struggle resemble core arguments between Republicans and Democrats? It seems pretty obvious to me which is on which side......

[Filo]

I don't think it will come to violence any time soon. I do think that the Democrats are going to over reach and get turfed out in mid term elections. I also expect states to try to get some control back from the federal government as budgets get tighter. Civil war? Not in this country in our lifetime. Riots, uprisings, general violence? Sure.
Reasons against: The states don't have strong enough independent forces to go against the federal government; the politicians who would have to promote such a movement don't have the will to endanger their careers when they can just wait for 2 years and vilify their opponents in the campaign; there is not such an obvious division between geographically distinct regions of vastly different ideologies (what are we going to have - The United States of Colorado Springs and Topeka?) as there was in the 1850s; and the American people do not have the will right now. I see it more as an attempt to fan the flames of discontent and to mobilize marginalized voting bases.

Other problems - the articles are missing any credible references, Brenda Bowers mentions New Hampshire revolting against the Democrats even though it is a heavily Democrat state and it has had symbolic secessions from the Union since at least 1985. I would say the writers are trying to whip people into a frenzy and get them to react emotionally in a very, very difficult time economically. It would be more useful if these people spent their energies proposing workable, useful alternatives if they don't like the current ones.

[t_jolt]

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

Here you guys go. This link has been floating around the base a lot lately...

Tyrel

[GregsGSXR]

I say more State and Local Government and less Federal Government. The machine has become to big to run efficiently.

[Flip]

I really dont see any other "workable" propositions even being considered right now if they go against the thinking of majority in congress.

[CYCLE_MONKEY]

Nice little discussion...er I think...but then again, I just thought I'd ask you guys if you were serious, considering the author of the news story...

Jerome Robert Corsi (born August 31, 1946) is an American author.[1] He is best-known for his two New York Times bestselling books: The Obama Nation and Unfit for Command (with co-author John O'Neill). Both books, the former written in 2008 and the latter in 2004, attacked Democratic presidential candidates and were strongly criticized, including for what critics said were factual errors.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Corsi

anyhoo...carry on
Of course, anyone who actually criticized Oh-Bama with facts deserves to be ridiculed, right?:) While everyone that wrote a book criticizing Bush just HAS to be correct, right? Why, it says so right there in that bastion of all true information, the user-defined wicki!

Funny, "they" claimed there were "factual errors", but I didn't see any real evidence to back that up, if you dig a couple layers down in the wiki.

S'ok Cathy, I still love ya!:)

[DARK ANGEL]

our country is not immune to revolution. when the government starts to get too much stake in the peoples business than the system rebalances itself. both sides want the power so non peaceful actions take place. It has happened before it will happen again.

"People shouldnt be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of its people"

[The Black Knight]

Is it just me or does this fundamental struggle resemble core arguments between Republicans and Democrats? It seems pretty obvious to me which is on which side......
Well I don't personally believe the fundamental struggle between good and evil lies within party lines. I believe there are good people in both Republican and Democrat parties. People of all parties who want liberty over restraint and who want freedom over dominance. These kind of people want it so badly they are willing to fight for it and I don't necessarily think it matters what side of the aisle they reside on or what kind of beliefs they have. It's the fact that they are Americans and want what America was founded on is all that matters.


our country is not immune to revolution. when the government starts to get too much stake in the peoples business than the system rebalances itself. both sides want the power so non peaceful actions take place. It has happened before it will happen again.

"People shouldnt be afraid of their government, the government should be afraid of its people"
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

a quote from my most favorite founding father :)

[mtnairlover]

Of course, anyone who actually criticized Oh-Bama with facts deserves to be ridiculed, right?:) While everyone that wrote a book criticizing Bush just HAS to be correct, right? Why, it says so right there in that bastion of all true information, the user-defined wicki!

Funny, "they" claimed there were "factual errors", but I didn't see any real evidence to back that up, if you dig a couple layers down in the wiki.

S'ok Cathy, I still love ya!:)

http://waridaad.blogspot.com/2009/01/jerome-robert-corsi-racist-liar-and.html

http://mediamatters.org/items/200408060010

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/08/20/failed_venture_follows_anti_obama_author/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yCfI3VmL88

Anyone can say anything these days and people will follow if what is being said even remotely touches on any of their beliefs. People won't investigate on their own to double check on facts...they'll just follow...if it meshes with their own beliefs.

All I hear is people wanting things to fail...but no one saying anything about any positives and what can be done to make things work...so much negativity will bring us down, you can count on it. This is a democracy is it not? Then make it work!

Secession? Why? Cuz some nut-job likes to stir the pot and see what will happen?

On a more serious note...people are forgetting why this idea of more government came about...what happened to bring us here? Talk about short-term memories...damn! If people weren't so freakin greedy, then all the regulations, etc. wouldn't be mounting on us...duh! I don't like the idea of possibly there being too much government right now...but, I am for damn sure not gonna get all freakin Negative Nelly based on some idiot pot-stirrer who thinks there was a 9-11 conspiracy.

Anyhoo, I guess if the discussion weren't based on that idiot, I'd be more into this conversation, but I can't seem to bring myself to it.

[JustSomeDude]

Sovereignty? Violence? Arms? Reset?

What happened to the peace, and hope, and love, and change?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOxEvtChhkU&fmt=18

:yumyum:

[The Black Knight]

Sovereignty? Violence? Arms? Reset?

What happened to the peace, and hope, and love, and change?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOxEvtChhkU&fmt=18

:yumyum:
That guy has been all over the news today. That was the first time I got to hear the full rant. See this is the kind of thing I'm talking about. And whether our not he's truly genuine(we have to at least take him for face value) the fact still remains alot of Americans are starting to feel the way this guy is feeling.

He's not the first to talk of another "Boston Tea Party", I've heard that very same line from people I work with, who aren't very political or keep up with the things going on in Washington. But for sure they aren't blind either.

[RajunCajun]

Well I don't personally believe the fundamental struggle between good and evil lies within party lines. I believe there are good people in both Republican and Democrat parties. People of all parties who want liberty over restraint and who want freedom over dominance. These kind of people want it so badly they are willing to fight for it and I don't necessarily think it matters what side of the aisle they reside on or what kind of beliefs they have. It's the fact that they are Americans and want what America was founded on is all that matters.


"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

a quote from my most favorite founding father :)

I didn't say anything of good and evil, now that is a whole nother topic(and I know that nother isn't a word!! LOL!!!) but if you want to call someone evil, I won't say Democrats are evil, I would just say they are wrong!! Hahaha! Kidding, well,,,,, kinda.... And I do think it matters what side of the isle you reside on, people don't just fight to fight, they fight to preserve the values they are passonite about! Our fathers and brothers and sisters didn't and don't just go to war to die,,,, but to die(if necessary) to preserve a way of live that they think is worth living,,,, and worth dying to protect!!! I believe you have to take a side, because there is always a side to be taken. There is always an ideal that you believe in and one that you think is bullshit!! And I think that today, there is a clear defonition for many people of which is which. Stand for what you believe in, fight for it, and die for it if you have no other choice!! That is AMERICA, and that is what sooo many of our forefathers have bled for!!!
I'm sorry if I got off on a tangent, but I just think that there is right and wrong and often a VERY vissable differnece between the two.

[dirkterrell]

All I hear is people wanting things to fail...but no one saying anything about any positives and what can be done to make things work...so much negativity will bring us down, you can count on it. This is a democracy is it not? Then make it work!


Well, I certainly don't want things to fail but my reading of history leads me to believe that the direction we are headed in is not good. I am still hoping that the people of this country will wake up to the bullshit being propagated by the politicians on both sides.



Secession? Why? Cuz some nut-job likes to stir the pot and see what will happen?


No, I think most of the people talking about secession do so because they feel that the system is broken, the system being one where big business interests and power-hungry politicians do what they want and us common folk pick up the tab. Big business is represented. Special interest groups are represented. But a huge fraction of everyday middle-class Americans voice their opinions loudly to no avail, and they are tired of it. They are responsible people tired of working their asses off only to have the fruits of their labor taken away and given to others who chose not to be responsible. When times are good, most of them are willing to take it in moderate amounts. When times are like they are now, and the politicians are asking for more, the responsible, hard working people are going to rise up and fight the bullshit social engineering fiascoes created by the government.

Dirk

[mtnairlover]

Well, I certainly don't want things to fail but my reading of history leads me to believe that the direction we are headed in is not good. I am still hoping that the people of this country will wake up to the bullshit being propagated by the politicians on both sides.



No, I think most of the people talking about secession do so because they feel that the system is broken, the system being one where big business interests and power-hungry politicians do what they want and us common folk pick up the tab. Big business is represented. Special interest groups are represented. But a huge fraction of everyday middle-class Americans voice their opinions loudly to no avail, and they are tired of it. They are responsible people tired of working their asses off only to have the fruits of their labor taken away and given to others who chose not to be responsible. When times are good, most of them are willing to take it in moderate amounts. When times are like they are now, and the politicians are asking for more, the responsible, hard working people are going to rise up and fight the bullshit social engineering fiascoes created by the government.

Dirk

I understand your concern, but I don't see it as the government's fault...they did not create this fiasco...we did. Even hard working people...like me, like yourself, maybe our neighbors went the "easy route" at some point in our lives by accepting something that was thrown at us as being good for us by say maybe a mortgage lender, or what have you. Because people like us saw what they thought was something good and maybe something they could handle, they bought into it. But...then a job loss, which really is completely uncontrollable, comes along and wham, they're stuck with something they can no longer handle. Even if they get a new job, is that job still at the same rate of pay? Are they still covered with the same kind of health insurance for their ailing family members (if they have any).

What I'm trying to get at is the myriad of problems/things that ordinary people face on a daily basis. And it's not just a couple, but a whole bunch. Granted, a full 90+% of people with home mortgages are not failing and are in good standing with their payments...but there's still this problem of people wanting more, thinking they can get more and pushing their luck to get that bigger slice. As for paying for other people's problems...well, if I owned a home, I think it would be in my best interest to not have a bunch of homes in my neighborhood foreclose, which would drive down the value of my home...it's kind of an investment, I guess. But, there's good and bad on both sides of that whole scenario, isn't there?

I just don't agree with putting blame on others when I can find plenty to blame right here in my own home. I guess that's my problem then. I don't see things the same as others and I do my damnedest to police myself (especially since my divorce) to be sure I don't fail again. But as hard as I work on improving my life, I refuse to allow the proliferating negativity get to me. So far, despite the fact that I still don't make a whole lot of money, I am doing ok and I'm not out on my ass (yet)...wishing I didn't have to withdraw my retirement, but even with that, I plan on being more diligent than ever to make sure I can retire comfortably.

We did this, ya know...over the past decade and more...it's the whole country's problem and now that its gonna be as tough as shit to dig out, now that reality has finally hit us, people are lashing out and I just don't agree with it.

[dirkterrell]

I understand your concern, but I don't see it as the government's fault...they did not create this fiasco


The Community Reinvestment Act is one example of the government's meddling in the markets that backfired when they forced banks to make loans they otherwise wouldn't have. The chickens have come home to roost.



...we did. Even hard working people...like me, like yourself, maybe our neighbors went the "easy route" at some point in our lives by accepting something that was thrown at us as being good for us by say maybe a mortgage lender, or what have you. Because people like us saw what they thought was something good and maybe something they could handle, they bought into it. But...then a job loss, which really is completely uncontrollable, comes along and wham, they're stuck with something they can no longer handle. Even if they get a new job, is that job still at the same rate of pay? Are they still covered with the same kind of health insurance for their ailing family members (if they have any).


Do you happen to have any numbers on the situations where (a) people lost jobs and couldn't pay their mortgages and (b) people who bought way more house than they could afford with interest only ARMs and then when the "A" part kicked in, they could no longer afford them. (a) I have some sympathy for. (b) get to learn a lesson.



What I'm trying to get at is the myriad of problems/things that ordinary people face on a daily basis. And it's not just a couple, but a whole bunch. Granted, a full 90+% of people with home mortgages are not failing and are in good standing with their payments...but there's still this problem of people wanting more, thinking they can get more and pushing their luck to get that bigger slice.


And I say when you push your luck and lose, you pay the price not me. When you push your luck and win, I don't expect anything from you. It's that whole greed thing you have bemoaned. I don't have any problem with people pushing their luck or even being greedy. But when you get bit, don't expect me or anyone else to bail you out. (And I'm using "you" here in the generic sense, not you specifically.)



As for paying for other people's problems...well, if I owned a home, I think it would be in my best interest to not have a bunch of homes in my neighborhood foreclose, which would drive down the value of my home...it's kind of an investment, I guess.


Yes, and sometimes investments pay off and sometimes they don't. I'll take my chances with the free market.



I just don't agree with putting blame on others when I can find plenty to blame right here in my own home. I guess that's my problem then. I don't see things the same as others and I do my damnedest to police myself (especially since my divorce) to be sure I don't fail again. But as hard as I work on improving my life, I refuse to allow the proliferating negativity get to me. So far, despite the fact that I still don't make a whole lot of money, I am doing ok and I'm not out on my ass (yet)...wishing I didn't have to withdraw my retirement, but even with that, I plan on being more diligent than ever to make sure I can retire comfortably.


And that's exactly how it ought to be. You have learned important lessons and you are responsible. Others need to learn those lessons too, from GM and Lehman Bothers, all the way down to people who got that big ass house they knew they couldn't afford.



We did this, ya know...over the past decade and more...it's the whole country's problem and now that its gonna be as tough as shit to dig out, now that reality has finally hit us, people are lashing out and I just don't agree with it.

Reality hit some of us a long time ago. But when we point out the basic problem we're derided as "uncaring" or "greedy" or whatever. Once again, government's job is not to give everyone a home, or pay their medical bills, or reward people for having babies when they can't afford them. Government's job is to provide for the military protection of the country, ensure that people's freedom and basic rights are protected, etc. When people understand that, we'll get back to having a less intrusive government that allows the market to work, rewarding those who work hard and contribute something positive to society and penalizing those who do not. That's my take on it. Not negative, realistic.

Dirk

[mtnairlover]

The government's job is to do the people's bidding. If the people say "We want help!" And no, I'm not talking about the welfare recipients...I'm talking about all of "We the People". Then that is exactly what the government will attempt to do.

[dirkterrell]

The government's job is to do the people's bidding. If the people say "We want help!" And no, I'm not talking about the welfare recipients...I'm talking about all of "We the People". Then that is exactly what the government will attempt to do.



"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:


From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage

Attributed to Scottish historian Alexander Fraser Tytler... in 1787


Interesting reading here (http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/quinn/2008/1216.html).

Dirk

[Filo]

The Community Reinvestment Act is one example of the government's meddling in the markets that backfired when they forced banks to make loans they otherwise wouldn't have. The chickens have come home to roost.


When people understand that, we'll get back to having a less intrusive government that allows the market to work, rewarding those who work hard and contribute something positive to society and penalizing those who do not. That's my take on it. Not negative, realistic.

Dirk

Interesting you should mention the CRA (enacted in 1977), since many people blame the 1999 revision to it that removed the 1933 Glass Steagall act for a lot of the problems. That was a deregulation of the market, not a regulation. Also, the CRA did require that banks serve their local market and keep a record of it so that they could get credit for it. This was to remove the redlining and "different race, different loan" practices. The act failed to regulate certain lending procedures considered predatory, which was found to increase predatory lending in certain areas.

The fact is without proper regulation, banks and financial services companies will behave as badly as possible. See, for example, Madoff and Standford for two recent examples. The people who run these institutions are driven to maximize the short term profits with (and sometimes outside of) the law. They do not care about the long term financial health of their customers unless it has a direct, short term positive impact on the bottom line. If we were to let the market take its course right now we would have wholesale bank failures. Perhaps that seems like a good idea in a moment of bluster, but we as a country as so leveraged that large amounts of bank failures would be extremely bad, and not just for those who made bad decisions. A better question to pose might be "How many failures are OK?" I think we are at this point partly because we avoided earlier recessions by artificially propping up markets. It is a bubble to bubble mentality driven ultimately by "We the people" wanting it all and wanting it now. Until you (general, not just Dirk) stop wanting the 60" tv and the Land Cruiser and the Audi and the 5 bedroom 4 bath McMansion and the newest motorcycle, we will continue to be over leveraged and prone to bubble bursting.


Oh, and I still haven't seen any evidence of the sovereignty movement. Show me proposed bills in state legislatures, not some nitwit selling TV advertising by appealing to populist frustrations in Chicago. That guy could just be the next Timothy McVeigh.

[The Black Knight]

I didn't say anything of good and evil, now that is a whole nother topic(and I know that nother isn't a word!! LOL!!!) but if you want to call someone evil, I won't say Democrats are evil, I would just say they are wrong!! Hahaha! Kidding, well,,,,, kinda.... And I do think it matters what side of the isle you reside on, people don't just fight to fight, they fight to preserve the values they are passonite about! Our fathers and brothers and sisters didn't and don't just go to war to die,,,, but to die(if necessary) to preserve a way of live that they think is worth living,,,, and worth dying to protect!!! I believe you have to take a side, because there is always a side to be taken. There is always an ideal that you believe in and one that you think is bullshit!! And I think that today, there is a clear defonition for many people of which is which. Stand for what you believe in, fight for it, and die for it if you have no other choice!! That is AMERICA, and that is what sooo many of our forefathers have bled for!!!
I'm sorry if I got off on a tangent, but I just think that there is right and wrong and often a VERY vissable differnece between the two.
I wasn't referring to a Good v. Evil battle in the cosmic sense either. However, I suppose you could draw a parallel to it. What I meant was that I view people who love Liberty and Freedom as Good people. Those who want to restrain, control and otherwise dominant your life are Evil. Pure and simple, no honest good person would ever want to control another persons life. However, most evil people would love the idea. It's a power trip and nothing more.

And while I do understand where you are coming from on picking a side. I still disagree that there are not both good and bad people on both sides of the isle. To me anyone who wants the Freedom and Liberty that our found fathers sought after are genuine Americans and they can be either Republican or Democrat. As long as they are after what America stands for, I don't really see a problem with their party affiliation. But don't get me wrong I understand the line you draw and for some it's different then others.

As far as picking a side and drawing a line. For me it's about choosing the side of the Constitution and what America stands for.

[Kim-n-Dean]

I think it's just a matter of time before things violently reset...


...the government should be afraid of its people"Too bad the government's F-117 will NEVER be afraid of my .308.


"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

a quote from my most favorite founding father :)

A lot of people talk about an uprising. How could that ever happen, now? Thomas Jefferson's quote held up a few hundred years ago, but how can the people ever stand up to the technology of the modern U.S. military?

[rforsythe]

The government's job is to do the people's bidding. If the people say "We want help!" And no, I'm not talking about the welfare recipients...I'm talking about all of "We the People". Then that is exactly what the government will attempt to do.

Any government's job is to continue to be a government. In most cases that works by serving the people, since without them, it becomes a government of nothing. However corruption is also a fairly effective (albeit usually finite) method of continued longevity, and typically wins out in the end.

When those with power realize it's simply theirs for the taking, what is going to stop them from doing it? I think it's naieve to expect them to give up status, power, wealth, etc just because "the people want it". They will only give it up when it's taken from them. This has been the stance of humanity since the beginning of recorded history, and I don't see any traits that set us apart from that like we've suddenly figured out the formula.


Interesting reading here (http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/quinn/2008/1216.html).

Dirk

Very good reading.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[dirkterrell]

A lot of people talk about an uprising. How could that ever happen, now? Thomas Jefferson's quote held up a few hundred years ago, but how can the people ever stand up to the technology of the modern U.S. military?

Technology and weaponry are only one aspect of a conflict. Raw numbers can also weigh heavily on the outcome. Yes, against 100 people with rifles and pistols, superior military technology and training would win out. Against 100 million, things would be different.

Dirk

[Kim-n-Dean]

Technology and weaponry are only one aspect of a conflict. Raw numbers can also weigh heavily on the outcome. Yes, against 100 people with rifles and pistols, superior military technology and training would win out. Against 100 million, things would be different.

DirkAgreed. However, I don't think you could ever get that many (U.S.) people together. Way too many TV choices for us to band together on anything.

I don't think the gov't would ever let the numbers build to that point anyway. They'd probably just weed us out in small batches. Hope we never find out!!!

[dirkterrell]

Agreed. However, I don't think you could ever get that many (U.S.) people together. Way too many TV choices for us to band together on anything.


Depends on how bad things get.



I don't think the gov't would ever let the numbers build to that point anyway. They'd probably just weed us out in small batches. Hope we never find out!!!

I sincerely hope so too.

Dirk

[The Black Knight]

A lot of people talk about an uprising. How could that ever happen, now? Thomas Jefferson's quote held up a few hundred years ago, but how can the people ever stand up to the technology of the modern U.S. military?

I think one thing alot of people either dismiss or don't account for, is if we have another Civil War and I mean full blown Civil War. The Feds are going to have many men and women in the military and I would go as far as to say that a good 50%(and I think that's conservative) would defect and take their stuff(planes, tanks, technology and intelligence) with them when they choose a side to fight on. You'd have the diehards that would stand with the Feds no matter what. Then you'd have the men and women who couldn't live with it on their conscience to fight against their own people.

You say Jefferson's quote only holds water in his time. Man what other time could be more relevant(other than the Revolutionary War) than now?? It's the reason we are in this dilemma because we didn't heed Jefferson's and other founding fathers advice. Jefferson was a big believer in little government and government that should be run by it's people and also afraid of it's people. He was also big believer in not having a standing Military during times of peace. But that was Jefferson a brilliant visionary and a man way before his time.

One reason why our Federal government has been allowed to grow unchecked over the past(since 1776 basically) is the fact that our Federal government doesn't like Militias. Yeah I said it, Militias are what is talked about and were the chosen force to handle things during our nations infancy. Only reason we formed the Continental Army was to fight the British. However, Militias are frowned upon by the Feds and even society. When just over 200 years ago, it was something to be proud of if you joined.

Obviously as our nation has grown to fruition and flourished it must also grow in government and military. However, while I firmly agree that we would be just as prosperous of a nation as we are now with the utmost smallest amount of government possible. We could run this country with limited government. Unfortunately in this day and age of Terrorism, we must have a standing Military. I think that's one aspect Jefferson couldn't have the forsight to see in the coming centuries.

While they had terrorism even during Jefferson's time and before. It's never been on such a organized and widespread level(i.e. Radical Islam). Yeah one can go as far as to say that the Inqusition and Crusades were acts and forms of Terrorism. But then again so were the battle of Thermopolye and the Trojan War.

I think warfare was just carried out differently even way before our nation's birth and founding fathers. Battle usually took place between soldiers who were dedicated to the battlefield. With todays radical extremist, they don't care who they fight or kill. As long as they can run up a body count. Which is why in the 21st century we need a standing Military if only to protect our borders and nothing more.

[Kim-n-Dean]

...But that was Jefferson a brilliant visionary and a man way before his time...All men are created equal. Unless your black or female!!

I'm glad a group of people felt the need to jot down some basic rights. While their slaves worked the fields. Well, I guess otherwise they wouldn't have had the time to draft such an important piece of history.

[The Black Knight]

All men are created equal. Unless your black or female!!

I'm glad a group of people felt the need to jot down some basic rights. While their slaves worked the fields. Well, I guess otherwise they wouldn't have had the time to draft such an important piece of history.
Well I never said Jefferson was perfect and infact was far from it. However, from doing some reading on Jefferson. He was never a fan of slavery(and yes he had slaves, over 200) but unfortunately it was a problem that him and many other founding fathers didn't fix or were unable to accomplish. But that's a whole other thread.