posted March 25, 2009 01:04 PM              

ok acoustic, am i to undestand what you are saying is jwhop is pulling these articles and excerpt out of his overavctive imagination, or are you saying they were indeed posted but he should have printed the time, date and author of the article?

the chanting thing WAS odd.

i mean i dont understand your arguement, is he lying, or does he simply have a compilation that is too vague to make a point to you?

or are you just talking in your special bro-mance language?

posted March 25, 2009 04:05 PM            

the USA has no MANDATORY military service. it does, however, currently have mandatory registration (selective service registration), a hangover from the days when we DID have a draft. of course anyone under a certain age does not personally remember that though it may have been in your history books.

like i said, we used to have a military draft system and for years no one questioned it! hard to believe now but true; then came the vietnam war and a bunch of vociferous peaceniks and otherwise stroppy young people protested till there was no ignoring them. people fled the country, went to jail, whatever it took not to be drafted to vietnam.

eventually the draft was revoked. jwhop probably has the date closer to his fingertips than i do?? and now our military is voluntary.

posted March 25, 2009 04:15 PM            

Despite occasional errors, the MSM (mainstream media) reports primarily truthful facts. Jwhop would have you believe otherwise. Jwhop would have you believe that AP is just lying journalism, though he's tried to legitimize NewsMax in the past by saying that it prints AP material.

posted March 25, 2009 04:22 PM            

quote:

---

my question is, given that as a people we have refused military conscription, why would we go along with civilian conscription? it just doesn't seem likely to happen in my opinion...

---

posted March 25, 2009 07:44 PM            

Bush Admits He Approved Use Of Torture
Interview With President Revealing
Helen Thomas, Hearst White House columnist

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/helenthomas/16089816/detail.html

I didn't know you're Irish katatonic.

We have not, as a people refused military service. There were few who did compared to the numbers of those who reported on time, went through training and served their country.

posted March 25, 2009 08:04 PM            

i don't see the difference between being FORCED to serve your country and being FORCED to pay taxes you don't want to. oh except the little matter of probability of death in the former!! conscription is conscription. we HAVE been talking about forced volunteering, mandatory service in the security force, etc! canvassers are not BROWNSHIRTS.

MANY members of the armed forces were enticed there by the promise of college educations, training for trades, etc. they joined the reserves. and got called up. the number of OBJECTORS was significant enough to make a difference in policy. and the number who went along because they didn't see any choice was probably larger. that doesn't mean they wanted to go.

there were a lot of people who went along with hitler - for awhile. but when they got wind of where things were going, or they reached a line they couldn't stomach crossing, they got out. some were punished or killed for their efforts, but still they went.

i personally think it is insulting to our intelligence to think we will be duped into something that outrageous. though i would have to agree that in daily life a high percentage of people act like sheep, that only goes so far. i have more faith in human nature. and given the number of biassed, doctored videos on youtube i find it hard to put credence in any of them unless i am watching admitted "entertainment" or "instructional" pieces.

posted March 26, 2009 01:50 PM            

Paying taxes and defending the United States are both necessary and those responsibilities of citizenship should be borne by all. Why should any member of our society get a free ride at the expense of others?

Those who will not pay legitimate constitutional taxes to fund the legitimate functions of government nor defend the United States should also not be permitted to vote.

The question about taxes in not whether or not taxes should be paid to fund the legitimate functions of government. The real question is who should pay those taxes and that's everyone. What form those taxes should take..not taxes on "supposed income" for certain..is the major question. Another question is "what are the legitimate functions of government" and it's not redistribution of wealth..for certain.

**edit**

No, I was never in Vietnam. I was a member of the California Army National Guard, took basic training, advanced infantry training..(AIT) and basic unit training (BUT) at Fort Ord in California.

posted March 26, 2009 03:17 PM            

Another disingenuous argument from you.

I don't know how one just went to Nam, do you? I joined a National Guard Unit when the general belief was that we would be called up...infantry unit. I also was in no danger of being drafted when I joined that Guard Unit...nor would I have been...drafted.

Of course I didn't vote for President Teleprompter's tax agenda. It's clear you don't understand the legitimate purpose of taxation. Government is not America's nanny...or, it sure shouldn't be.

posted March 27, 2009 11:52 AM            

sorry to hear you had to hang in watts instead of going to the jungle. i hear it wasn't all that great either. no i did not go to vietnam. there was no female draft and i could never see how attacking someone else's country was defense of ours. except that in those days we were all up in arms about anyone who chose communism. they had to be stupid or evil...plus i was only 10 when it started...

as to how i voted i'm sure you can guess that too. so was your question disingenuous? it seems to me that given your stated purpose and assumed persona "on this forum" YOU are the disingenuous one, so don't judge me by yourself.

if i was wrong we will see. but your equating some extra taxes and attempts to regulate the food industry in the hope that food will be safer to hitler's germany is beyond ridiculous. it just ain't so, sir. the only clip i have seen of obama talking about this "security force" looks doctored to me. i don't trust videos especially on youtube unless they are for instruction or entertainment.

i can't argue with people's intuition. my own told me a vote for mccain was a vote for palin and that i couldn't stomach. it also told me that whatever obama turns out to be, his election will be good for this country. for the first time in years i see people actually thinking about and speaking out about the way things are run. i think this is a good thing.

i didn't agree with bush but i didn't ridicule his intelligence or call him "emperor". what's that saying? "sarcasm is the last resort of the incompetent." name-calling comes very close behind. the fact that obama is better at giving speeches than speaking off the cuff means nothing N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

i repeat that during the "golden years" everyone wants to preserve or return to (since they are long gone) taxes were higher than they are today or than obama wants to raise them. the chanting kids are sccary but there is no evidence that obama coached them, only that they are inspired by his being elected and his words. it is completely without context.

like i also said, there are things to ponder and worry about in these bills. but as a democratic republic it is up to us to do something about that, no?

posted March 27, 2009 02:28 PM            

I didn't have to "hang out" in Watts. We were there..rotated in and out over a period of several weeks. Then we were back to regular Guard meetings...one weekend a month and of course the annual field trip to Paradise, otherwise known as Camp Roberts.

People do not choose Communism. Communism is imposed and maintained by threats, intimidation and murder. What nonsense. Do you suppose Lenin told Russians...install me as head of the Socialist government and I promise to kill most of the professors, kill most of the shopkeepers and in fact, before we're through, we'll kill about 70 million of you. Only the truly brain dead would "choose" Communism or it's umbrella fraud Socialism. Communism is Socialism.

I don't know what "assumed persona" you refer to katatonic. Care to elaborate on that?

I am in no way whatsoever disingenuous here or anywhere. I stated my purpose here over and over and I wouldn't even be on this forum had other members not decided to ridicule and lie about Bush, dress him up in a Hitler Nazi uniform, depict him as Satan and all the rest of the bullshiit which transpired before you arrived on the scene. Let's just say they tripped and outraged my Leo Moon, supported by my Leo Sun, strengthened by my Aries Mars, enunciated by my Virgo Mercury and all that filtered through my Scorp Rising. I've stated my purpose here and it's an inflammatory purpose, deliberate, intentional and focused on the little Socialist icons...leftists. I have not the slightest intention of letting up a nanometer.

"but your equating some extra taxes and attempts to regulate the food industry in the hope that food will be safer to hitler's germany is beyond ridiculous."

Some "extra taxes" katatonic? You must be daft. President Teleprompter has already proposed more added debt to the tax load than was accumulated in more than 230 years under all previous presidents. In fact, under Teleprompter's guidance the debt service will climb to about 80% of the total US budget by about 2020...leaving about 20% for all other items in the budget....or, in the alternative, crushing taxation to pay that accumulated debt down. Yet another lie Teleprompter told is that he's not going to raise taxes on 95% of Americans. He's proposed "cap and trade". Now just whom do you suppose is going to get tagged with those carbon taxes energy producers, oil companies and manufacturing companies are going to have to pay? Give yourself a gold star on your forehead if you understand that businesses must pass along all costs of doing business, including taxes, to consumers in the form of higher prices. We're talking about Trillions of dollars to fund Teleprompter's insane "cap and trade" scheme, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I can't imagine how your reference to "Hitler's Germany" fits into this conversation...unless you realize Hitler was also a Socialist...a brother under the skin to President Teleprompter and all other Socialists. As for your comment about regulating the food industry, perhaps you don't know that Teleprompter has proposed a far reaching scheme to regulate what farmers can and cannot grow, how they must grow it and that filters all the way down to the family farm and even to our back yards.

There's nothing doctored about the video of President Teleprompter's call for a civilian security force equaling the size, power and funding of the entire combined US military. If the video looks doctored to you, let me suggest you get your prescription adjusted.

President Teleprompter is a Marxist Socialist and a mad, power hungry one at that. Nothing good for America is going to come out of Teleprompter's regime.

Liberals are not Socialists...of any stripe and leftists are one or another of the collectivist nuts. I like Liberals.

posted March 27, 2009 05:25 PM            

disingenuous= insincere, calculating, cynical...by your own words just above you define yourself as coming here to show people up by taking a stance which to me sounds disingenuous. forgive me if i slander you.

i have a lot of problems with the way things are being done right now too. i don't think you are qualified to diagnose obama's mental condition and your petty sarcastic jibes at anyone who objects to the way you put your case are beneath you, and really just mimicking the people you say you object to.

while i have problems with the bills and the regulations sought through them, etc, i see people waking up and speaking up for the first time in years. this is a good thing. that is why i say no matter what you think of obama, people voted for what he said he stood for and that is a good thing.

when i mention hitler it is because you have compared obama to him. WHAT AFTER ALL IS THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD???

though we are in a similar situation to 30's germany we are not germany and hitler was a dictator. socialism is not about dictators, it is about sharing and does include more regulations than we are used to, but i think that is somewhat naive in itself, since if you dig beneath the surface we already have more regulations than we need!

as for the proposed regulations of my back yard, they are already capable of spying on us in pretty much any way they want, and hauling us off to jail using the word "terrorist". but in reality, do you think they have the manpower or time to come check everyone's backyard? i'm not saying this is right and i think instead of arguing we should be thinking of ways to put a stop to the things we consider unconstitutional.

the fact that hitler called himself a socialist does not make him one. people DO choose socialism, the fact that it is distorted is not inherent in the system. the swedes have no dictator, nor the norwegians, english, french or germans to my knowledge. to name but a few.

but in any case i have lost interest in arguing. i would rather spend my time doing something about my world than listening to you browbeating everyone whose opinion differs from your own.

although i have heard you say you like liberals i have not heard what separates liberals from conservatives or leftists for you. i don't care for the side-taking name-calling MO that seems more and more prevalent these days. it only plays into the hands of those who are ripping us off, and they aren't all socialists by a long shot!

posted March 27, 2009 11:09 PM            

quote:

---

socialism is not about dictators, it is about sharing and does include more regulations than we are used to

---

No. That is patently untrue. Socialism is not about sharing. Sharing involves free will, ie you choose to share with me and I choose to share with you. Socialism involves giving up your freedom to choose what to give and to whom you wish to give it. Whatever the government wants to take, they will take. Whatever the government wants to do with the things it takes, it will do. In no way under the sun is that sharing. That's stealing and rationing.

I think most people are very naive when it comes to socialism and its extension, communism. They think that it is this happy rainbow colored world where people have all the choice about where their funds go and what projects are developed, that the people will be truly and fully supported by a government body they can trust. What they don't see is that all the power is then in the hands of the government, all the money is then in the hands of the government ... and that trickles down into "minority issues" not getting any help at all. (By minority issues I do not mean racial minority, btw.) The whole reason our Republic works is because minority voices are heard and have power; ie our Republic > a pure democracy.

Furthermore, the only way socialism or communism can be truly effective is if you have a wealthy class to tax to death. Unfortunately, once you've actually taxed them to death, there is no one left to tax. Public sector jobs, those created by socialism, are not productive. That is, there is little to no profit and nothing left to tax. Who is going to pay all the taxes when there is no money left to be taken? Look at China. They are huge exporters ... and yet are all their people thriving and well off with all their needs met?

Socialism/Communism fails from the start with the assumption that you can trust your government. That is, simply put, absurd. You don't put your faith and trust in the government. You keep your government accountable to you. They are meant to be public servants and yet, seemingly inevitably, with power comes corruption. And I don't just mean Obama, btw. I've gone from being far liberal in my younger years to being much more conservative now ... and nowhere in between did I once trust my government.

That said, I cannot give Obama any credit for "waking us up". People have been angry for a long time and people have been complaining for a long time. Now they've gone beyond angry into frightened and panicked. Never, in the entire range of my imagination, did I ever wish to see us resort to anything "revolutionary" with a population like ours in its current state of fear and ill health.

posted March 28, 2009 11:31 AM            

as to socialism being about sharing, the countries i named above are socialist REPUBLICS, i.e., they VOTE on policies and politicians to represent them. the norwegians i know who give up half their income are happy to do so because it means they live in a society where no one need go without the basics. THEY call it sharing. and they have one of the top economies in the world. some of those countries are parliamentary republics, or democratic republics, but whatever you name them they VOTE just like we do. whether they are happy with the results, well someone will always complain about the way things are being run!

i am not pushing for socialism. not in its pure form. but we already take for granted a fair measure in this country. public schooling, government-made standards for food, any regulations for the public safety, health or welfare are really socialist provisions. in a pure capitalist society these don't really exist. nor does conscription for the military, for that matter.

personally i think usury laws should be top of the list. not to cap people's incomes but to prevent the fleecing of those who don't have the outright price for the more expensive things in life. credit is a scam at the moment. the only people i know not caught in it are those who a)can pay their balances every month and b) are too poor to qualify!(a little silver lining in that cloud)and c) those who opted out like myself...

i haven't been in england lately but i lived there for 21 years and i still have peeps there. the top tax rate last i heard was about the same as here. the property taxes are steep unless you're a foreigner...i could better afford a nice piece of land there than someone english on an income comparable to mine (not that i could buy anything right now. i have jettisoned my income to help raise my grandson. but that is a choice which is ending now...) but the aristocracy is intact albeit on a much less runaway scale. their economy was doing well till gordon brown came in. and he will be routed and someone else take his place, as always.

i don't credit most politicians with anything. like us they are caught in a web too complicated for one man to do much, unless he knows how to play the system. but it is up to us to lobby our representatives at least and not sit around complaining and putting each other down.

posted March 29, 2009 03:12 AM            

quote:

---

i am not pushing for socialism. not in its pure form. but we already take for granted a fair measure in this country. public schooling, government-made standards for food, any regulations for the public safety, health or welfare are really socialist provisions. in a pure capitalist society these don't really exist. nor does conscription for the military, for that matter.

personally i think usury laws should be top of the list. not to cap people's incomes but to prevent the fleecing of those who don't have the outright price for the more expensive things in life. credit is a scam at the moment. the only people i know not caught in it are those who a)can pay their balances every month and b) are too poor to qualify!(a little silver lining in that cloud)and c) those who opted out like myself...

---

I don't have a lot of time right now but I did want to address a few things here. All my opinion of course ...

I think the socialized nature of those programs you outlined is the very reason why they are such failures. From public schooling and the corrupt FDA straight through failed welfare programs that don't do enough to help anyone. I also don't think conscription laws are currently fair. Either they apply to all or none (barring legitimate medical conditions); that is, feminists made a big hullabaloo about equality and yet our government still doesn't see fit to make them sign up, too. And yet I don't think it should be mandatory at all. I do think there should be a way to ascertain how many people are available for service but the actual signing up process should be voluntary as it is now. The census would work if not for a failed beauracracy and so many illegal immigrants.

I also agree that credit is a scam ... and so is health insurance. But my solution would never be to give the government all the power over those things. After all, the government is an abysmal failure overall and making it bigger won't make it better. However, I do agree with measures/laws being passed that disallow such scamming to take place. Ie, laws against lending to those who can't afford to pay should be stricter and what you pay for should be more or less on the level of the services you receive. Not, let's encourage college students to get high interest credit cards without any source of income or have people pay stupidly high premiums only to not be covered for what they need ... meanwhile, the companies turn huge profits. Let me clarify that I have no problem with huge profits so long as the services provided are transparent and not exploitative.

posted March 29, 2009 12:36 PM            

my main reason for getting into these debates is not to defend obama or the democrats or socialists, but to balance the outrageous attack attitude one party seems to feel justified in mounting against the other. as i said somewhere else as a child i engaged in these sort of mudslinging contests but i outgrew it decades ago.

a president is just a man, he can be right AND wrong, but he is one man trapped, by virtue of taking the job, in a system worse than any kafka could dream up! no one gets in without the collusion of MANY, with their own agenda, and anyone who comes in brandishing the sword of justice and ignoring the expectation of favours repaid ends up like kennedy(s) in short order. as in any company, the best new manager fits into the existing scenery before making any changes, and gradually reshapes the organization. that is why i usually don't vote for president - i think anyone willing to run for the job is more than likely a)crazy or b)ignorant and c)if neither, needs to be a master machiavellian to find his way through the maze that is politics. it has ever been so...even absolute monarchs have to deal with those who would use or displace them.

in a society where money has become god i don't think some regulations are a bad trade off for sanity and the chance for the little man to actually live. i doubt they would be permanent in any case. usury laws are one thing no one seems to consider, yet pretty much every Master Teacher in history has warned against moneylending, from jesus to shakespeare and beyond. however we do need to watch how things transpire and some positive discussion of what can be done rather than the childish arguments i mentioned already a million times don't do much to help the situation.

i do not believe this is a country that will ever sit docilely on the far left or right of the political spectrum...

posted July 04, 2009 12:15 PM            

O'Bomber video http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92109
We cannot continue to rely only on our military to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."

Warning: American Gestapo ahead
Posted: July 04, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

Every July 4, we retreat to fireworks, feast and festival in celebration of an independence that is rapidly becoming little more than a memory. Our ancestors declared their independence in 1776 from a tyrannical, overbearing government. The independence claimed by the authors of the U.S. Constitution helped them create a government expressly prohibited from becoming tyrannical and overbearing, by limiting its power to certain enumerated responsibilities. Those limitations have long been ignored, and the current government makes no apology for its overbearing tyranny.

Just as American independence was foreshadowed by a tea party in Boston, America's new independence is foreshadowed by tea parties across the nation. There is more evidence that a new declaration is being drafted. Currently, 36 states have approved or are considering some form of state sovereignty resolution. Several states are following Montana's example, enacting laws that defy federal intervention. More than a dozen states have enacted or are considering legislation that prohibits the federal government from imposing a mandatory National Animal Identification System. These are symptoms of a society that is dissatisfied with the long train of abuses government continues to inflict upon it.

As the modern-day freedom fighters begin to organize and strategize, the government chooses not to reform, but to entrench and expand its control over the people.

The similarity is remarkable, between the rise of the Democratic Socialist Party now in control of Washington and the rise of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany in the 1930s.

Are we headed for a Nazi-style totalitarian abyss? Find out in "Defeating the Totalitarian Lie: A Former Hitler Youth Warns America" http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80644

Led by an articulate orator, the German government set out to nationalize health care, transportation, manufacturing and law enforcement. The Obama government has set out to nationalize manufacturing of autos and the finance industry. The Obama-backed "cap and trade" legislation will effectively nationalize the energy and transportation industries. And Obama's nationalized health care program is on the front burner.

Now here's another similarity: nationalization of law enforcement. H.R. 675, sponsored by Democrat Rep. Bob Filner, was introduced to:

Provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. (Emphasis added.)

Why do employees of the Department of Defense need the authority to execute warrants, make arrests and carry firearms? When the bill was introduced, Filner said: "We need to ensure that federal, state and local law enforcement are able to work together to apprehend criminals and to prevent and solve crimes."

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act explicitly prohibits the Department of Defense from involvement in state and local law enforcement activities. The feds have the FBI to investigate federal crimes and the Justice Department to prosecute federal crimes. Waco and Ruby Ridge are good examples of federal law enforcement. And the land management agencies have gun-totin' enforcement officers to prevent tourists from picking up arrowheads on federal property. Why do we need to authorize the secretary of defense to arm another domestic police force?

Take a clue from the authorities granted by the bill:

To execute and serve warrants;
To make arrests without warrants;
To carry firearms;
To enforce federal laws enacted to protect persons or property;
To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies.

There are other authorities, but let's focus on this last one: "To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies." What is an unlawful assembly? Any assembly that is not authorized by government is unlawful. Should an irate society decide to hold a tea party even if government refused to authorize it, then there must be a reliable federal law enforcement army to "suppress" the unlawful assembly. Local police cannot be trusted to "suppress" an assembly of their neighbors.

In Germany, this police force was called the Gestapo. In Germany, the people who resisted the nationalization of anything were immediately branded as "right-wing extremist" and denounced and ridiculed by government officials and by the press. Watch the government and press response to the April tea parties.

These people who assemble peacefully to protest government policies are described as "Astroturf" pawns of corporate interests by Speaker Pelosi, and as "ignorant rednecks" by Janeane Garofalo. Assemblies such as these were outlawed in 1930s Germany. They can be outlawed, and are being outlawed or otherwise prevented, in this country today.

The July 4 Atlanta tea party scheduled since March was abruptly canceled June 18 when a major donor to the Democratic Socialist Party now in control of Washington exerted sufficient influence to have permission to use the property withdrawn.

Americans can't comprehend the possibility that the federal government could ever become as oppressive as Germany in the 1930s. Think again. How many bills are now floating around that seek to either register guns or outlaw them completely? This was one of the first objectives of the 1930s German government. Once the guns were registered, the Gestapo knew exactly where to go to confiscate them.

Is this why the Democrats in Washington now want to create a federal domestic police force?

posted July 04, 2009 04:06 PM            

the former hitler youth author makes the point that america has forsaken its "historical christian" basis...when in fact no particular religion was ever associated with this government, in fact the separation of church and state is one of the pillars of our society. race, religion or creed...although it wasn't until jack kennedy that we veered from the WASP UNofficial requirement for presidents, that tradition was distinctly ANTI-constitution.

as to "unlawful assemblies" - peaceful assembly is a constitutional right, therefore not unlawful. were the tea parties planning on shooting up the place? if not what are they worried about?

the bill in itself...has not been passed. is bob filner one of obama's shapeshift alternates?

its a good thing the states are declaring their authority. we are due for reformation of the way government does business for sure. and the way business does business for that matter....but this sort of "creative analysis" just alienates people who like to make decisions based on facts...

seems to me, jwhop, you are just perpetrating the very same sensationalism you objected to when the target was bush...

"I wouldn't even be on this forum had other members not decided to ridicule and lie about Bush, dress him up in a Hitler Nazi uniform, depict him as Satan and all the rest of the bullshiit which transpired before you arrived on the scene." jwhop, GU 2009.

like you said i missed all that. by the time i got here it was YOU doing the same to obama. perhaps he is just a better puppet. or perhaps you only see the faults on what you consider to be the "other" side of the fence. at least david icke is impartial!