Liberalism and Political Correctness Heralds the Destruction of America

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JohnnyElohim

Let's see ...

1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th are all pretty much toilet paper.

We are additionally compelled to enter into commerce by our government which ought not happen in a free market economy.

The government has shown itself willing to negate contract at will lately too.

Can we steer this towards specific compromises? I mean, I know that you and I are on quite different pages politically, but I also feel that my rights have been eroded in terms of the 4th. I thank Bush Jr. and Obama both for the massive acceleration towards the obliteration of those rights. But what of the rest in terms of this turn in the conversation? Are you saying you don't wish to come to the table on any matter out of protest for the rights you feel have been stripped of you? In what way have your 1st amendment rights been compromised?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ketsuko

If a compromise does not satisfy both parties, it is not a compromise. Both sides must give something they are wiling to give, and receive something they want in return.

What you describe is not a compromise.

TheRedneck

What she is compromising is her rights for security and safety. That's how the government explains it atleast.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
You are ignoring the fact, that I include the republicans when I use the term 'leftist'.

Republicans and democrats, are leftist.

Ok. Do you understand that using terminology in ways that aren't familiar with anyone but yourself is confusing and makes it hard to understand what you're saying??

a reply to: Aazadan

I personally do not consider that a legitimate compromise. I have never asked for safety and security beyond that which the government already owes me by virtue of their Constitutional duty. That offer has no value to me, certainly not as much value as the Constitutional rights I already possess; therefore I would decline it.

For a compromise to be valid, it would have to provide me with something I feel is worth what I give up. This example does not do so.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You can have unity in diversity

I am curious what you mean by this. Is this similar to the 'unity' proposed by the Democrat Overlords?

The first is to establish three largely autonomous regions with a viable central government in Baghdad. The Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite regions would each be responsible for their own domestic laws, administration and internal security.

www.nytimes.com...

"Biden proposes partitioning Iraq into three region"
www.nbcnews.com...

Ahh, so is the Democrat version of Unity and Diversity, through segregation and apartheid?

How quaint. So Diversity is to amplify the differences so much, that America segregates itself into different regions? Oh this is rich, I suggest people look into this partitioning of Iraq - it will put into light Why the Obama administration has funded ISIS terrorism. Don't believe me?

Galbraith says that the Sunni Awakening still remains very hostile to the Iraqi government, and the government sees the Awakening as a bigger threat than al-Qaida. The incoming Obama administration will bring Vice President-elect Joe Biden into the fray, which Galbraith calls "very encouraging." Biden "has been the prime proponent of a decentralized Iraq, and although in the campaign Sen. McCain described [Biden's] plan as a 'cockamamie' idea," Galbraith says, "it is in fact what the Bush administration has done." In 2007, the Bush administration financed a Sunni army — the Awakening — and Galbraith says this is responsible for the success so far in Iraq. Biden would take this to the next step and encourage the Sunnis to form their own region, which would control that army, just as the Kurdistan region controls the Peshmerga, or the Kurdistan army, Galbraith says.

www.npr.org...

It should be noted, I've previously pointed out the Republican party are Leftist. Under the Obama admin, the next step is to form the Islamic caliphate. Funny how the left, says one thing but their actions are in direct conflict with their words. Why are these cultures not compatible with each other, why does the Left feel that these Muslim factions need to be segregated?

Please enlighten us, but what do I know, I'm just 'messed up in the head'

I don't know where you are getting your facts, but you are astonishingly creative in twisting them. I'm bailing out on this thread, the level of derp is too high.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Nice post. I agree. It is all about feelings. Reality and facts are not allowed to be in the equation when discussing issues anymore. The Gadsden flag is now being considered as hate speech. The National Anthem is going to be hit the exact same way. Tearing down national monuments because someone fought for the south. Gun owners being demonized. People believing in constitutional values are now considered extremists.

We actually have large groups of people fighting AGAINST freedom of speech. It disgusts me.

People are actually doing the establishments dirty work for them. They do not need martial law. They do not need violence. All they need is the useful idiots at the bottom unwittingly sealing their own fate.

Personal liberty should be the #1 priority for any free thinkers. I would expect that just about everyone on this website would agree with that, but alas, we have a ton of brainwashed people arguing for our destruction on a website that "denies ignorance."

a reply to: TheRedneck

The majority of the public likes it though, for example having law enforcement that makes people feel safe and in society any specific individuals feelings towards something don't matter. You may reject the idea of security over freedom, but there's far more who desire the opposite.

a reply to: Aazadan

And THAT is the whole problem.

TheRedneck

Alright, I should clear some things up, about my perspective.

We have a supposed two party system, yet the only distinction between these two parties is in trivial matters. Both parties support wars that serve no purpose except to line their pockets, using lies like spreading peace and democracy or 'humanitarian' intervention. These two parties have forced every American to purchase health insurance, or suffer penalties; and originally a penalty of a year in prison. These two parties both actively work together when it comes to violating the rights of Americans, this election year in light of the repeal of the Smith-Mundt act, it's only state sponsored lies.

What strikes me is that it seems the GOP did not want Donald Trump to be the nominee, I'm guessing it was supposed to be Jeb Bush. So now, this apparent party is actively rooting for the Globalist candidate Hillary Clinton. Under her leadership, and Obama's leadership, we have seen the emergence of an Islamic caliphate; and the actions the Obama admin has caused in Syria, is directly responsible for the refugee crisis, and the arguments are whether to let them in or keep them out instead of addressing the systemic cause.

The state-run media, that is what I call it because they are vehemently pro-establishment, has stoked the divisions of racial and class warfare. Now I use certain terms as they should be used, authoritarianism is leftism, if you are not authoritarian you are not a leftist. I consider liberalism, the thought process of shifting America away from the ideals of freedom and the Republic; we are already a free society, we are already a Republic, if people want to keep and maintain that system, that is conservatism. Neither party hold these conservative values, they want to destroy American culture, because without a sense of national identity we have no defense against Globalism.

Republicans say they are pro-freedom, but they are not. Republicans, like democrats, supported corporate bailouts/protectionism which is more akin to fascism(a leftist ideology). The republicans and democrats, have both pushed through the ACA, which is slowly crippling the economy and the healthcare industry. I cannot understand how the people voting for Hillary Clinton could do something so horrible, Hillary Clinton is pro-TPP this secret doctrine will destroy national sovereignty, and establish the framework for our subservience to a Global government.

Do we really want to allow the UN to decide US policy?

In wake of mass shooting, UN rights chief urges US to consider robust gun control
www.un.org...

This is abhorrent, gun violence has been on the decline for decades, yet the media propaganda along with many democrats incessantly push for more and more destruction of freedom (a pillar of American freedom).

Our economic system has become something other than capitalist. Capitalism, or free market, is cyclical and reflects nature; we have to accept the busts along with the booms. However, in light of the massive treasonous bailouts, we are something closer to a term of corporatism or fascism. We are delaying, and compounding a collapse, and now when it does occur it will be apocalyptic.

People really do not understand, what is coming.

Fed Admits Another $4 Trillion In QE Will Be Needed To Offset An "Economic Shock"

www.zerohedge.com...

Our nation will not survive this. Drastic measures will be needed, things that are necessary and terrible. Tell me, what rights will we have when massive domestic unrest occurs? This globalist society, rather than localized economies, cannot be maintained under these conditions. Our currency is no longer based on anything really tangible, we moved from a gold standard to the petrodollar. The US made an agreement with the oil rich nations, that those nations can only trade oil in US dollars, when a nation decides against that like Libya, Syria, Iraq, and now Iran; we destroy that nation.

Our schools are geared more towards indoctrination into globalist and leftist ideology. These schools have embraced 'political correctness', the very term is sickening, who in the political landscape decides what is right and wrong? The totalitarians that want to destroy American culture.

Americans cannot compromise freedom, but that is exactly what we are seeing, because our rulers have sold the lie of public opinion. The average Americans make decisions without any understanding of the implications, other than what the state-run media has sold them.

Many here are opposed to globalisation, yet when the term nationalism is thrown around, it is coined as racist and evil. Reactionary groups are forming in response to the unmitigated abuses the leftists have wreaked on America. The issues of who can use a bathroom, are touted by the state-run media as more pressing than the monstrous foreign policy both parties embrace. How can someone stand against this? We have no voice, except in the darkest corners of the internet, which will soon be gone as well.

I am serious about this. Think about all these hacks of late, there is an agenda at play, one that has been tried and failed on several occasions. I've spent time, and argued against the cyber security bills that were attempted in the past, I read them and found wording that basically said any website the government didn't like would be censored.

There are serious changes that I want, I know it won't happen, my opinion is the minority.

Our republic requires an informed populace, but we are not informed, we are misled and lied to. In light of this, we have two options to get back on the right track: to revamp the education system and reign in the lies by the media, or require anyone who wants to vote to be certified. It sounds terrible, and anti-freedom, but look at what has happened.

I believe immigration should be tightly controlled, no open-borders, and the ultimate penalties to criminals who would violate our laws. Marijuana should be legalized, in fact, all natural drugs should be legalized(sale/distribution restricted) but cultivation/use allowed; and all synthetic drugs tightly controlled, for example meth should be treated as a chemical weapon, and those making it or using it charged with terrorism.

I also believe we need extreme anti-corruption laws, politicians/police/public Servants should be held to a higher standard because we are placing a lot of trust in them, and when they break that trust it should be considered a High Crime. I would include 24 hour surveillance, with anyone who wishes to view their activities to be able to freely do so. Like JFK said, which I am paraphrasing, secrecy in a free and open society is abhorrent.

In terms of parties and party politics, I don't believe our elections should distinguish between parties, when you go to the polls there should be no identification other than a person's name on the ballot. If people have not taken the time to know which party a person belongs to, they should not be able to identify which one that person belongs to when they are about to make their choice.

We are on the precipice of destruction, our freedom is being stripped away, for the sole reason that when America collapses it will be easier to quell domestic unrest.

a reply to: GodEmperor

Nice and accurate overview. The only change I would suggest is about the ignorance of the American people. This election cycle has shown me one thing for sure...without question. It isn't that a segment of the voting public is ignorant. It is completely clear what Clinton is and what she has done. There is no denying this. So that segment is WILLINGLY going to CHOOSE lies, corruption and criminal activity. THAT is the cause of the corruption running rampant in Washington and THEY are the ones who caused it. They are the ones that put the roaches in the home. The roaches just did what roaches do.

Personally...I would say that purposely electing a criminal, corrupt, liar is treason. But lucky for them I don't make the laws.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Thanks Awake,

I'm not sure if people really understand about Hillary's true nature. The media has shaped the minds of many, and they have downplayed her criminality. You might be right, which would put us in a far worse position. I'm hoping this isn't the case.

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: GodEmperor

And of course the Left is to blame because they are basically one person that thinks the same...., ya, in your mind.

It is BS Divide and Conquer posts like this, that are giving way to the destruction.

What I think will help? Vote 3rd Party, we need an argument that is better than Left vs Right.

Vote Johnson or Stein, just to break this damn cesspool Political System.

Stein is an extreme liberal, and Johnson is a centrist republican. How would this help?

I happen to agree that liberalism is a mental disorder and is very anti-American which is why communist, socialists and satanists vote Democrat.

a reply to: JohnnyElohim

See what I mean? Your rights are clearly outlined right there in writing.

There is no compromise. They are yours, not anyone else's to take away or regulate. The cake was understood to be ours and the text made it plain that government had no business at all trying to force us to compromise by ceding it slices.

So, for example, if, as a teacher, I decide that my class is going to study the unabridged version of Huckleberry Finn for several reasons including it being an American classic and Twain's exemplary use of colloquial language and it being a window into the contemporary life of the time, especially where I would be a teacher in a former steamboat town in Missouri, I should be able to do that without being run out on a rail because of the existence of certain words in the text.

This is Amendment 1 after all. And all the reasons I listed are perfectly valid reasons for the book to be found in the classroom in this area.

But there are all too many people who feel that their right to not be offended by words is more important than anything academic or educational these days. So I would be asked to compromise my Amendment 1 for the sake of their refusal to be challenged by uncomfortable words and ideas, even if we are going to be learning about things that were true 100 years ago or so.

That's just to start.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: GodEmperor

Nice and accurate overview. The only change I would suggest is about the ignorance of the American people. This election cycle has shown me one thing for sure...without question. It isn't that a segment of the voting public is ignorant. It is completely clear what Clinton is and what she has done. There is no denying this. So that segment is WILLINGLY going to CHOOSE lies, corruption and criminal activity. THAT is the cause of the corruption running rampant in Washington and THEY are the ones who caused it. They are the ones that put the roaches in the home. The roaches just did what roaches do.

Personally...I would say that purposely electing a criminal, corrupt, liar is treason. But lucky for them I don't make the laws.

that sounds like a threat...so, if we vote for Clinton, all of us are treasonous, and the punishment for that is imprisonment or possibly the death sentence......

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: GodEmperor

And of course the Left is to blame because they are basically one person that thinks the same...., ya, in your mind.

It is BS Divide and Conquer posts like this, that are giving way to the destruction.

What I think will help? Vote 3rd Party, we need an argument that is better than Left vs Right.

Vote Johnson or Stein, just to break this damn cesspool Political System.

Stein is an extreme liberal, and Johnson is a centrist republican. How would this help?

I happen to agree that liberalism is a mental disorder and is very anti-American which is why communist, socialists and satanists vote Democrat.

I think that you're taking things a tad too far in the direction of zer madness place. I'd tone it down a tad.

a reply to: GodEmperor

IMO, a very informed post.

History has shown us the path we subconsciously take over and over. A free people prosper, become lazy, forget that which caused them to prosper, and are enslaved. An enslaved people endure oppression until they can no longer accept it, and then throw off their shackles violently, losing lives on a wholesale basis. Chaos reigns until the remaining population becomes tired of the violence and settle down to become a free people.

Over and over, trying new combinations, new permutations, each cycle an experiment in social stability that fails in the end.

The United States of America was such an experiment. It succeeded for nearly 200 years before the decline began. In the afterglow of prosperity, we became lazy and afraid, signalling the next phase of the current cycle. The enslavement has now begun in earnest.

This cycle can never be broken, because every government is run by people. People are inherently self-centered, typically desiring only pleasure for themselves and holding only disdain for others. Thus, government is the same. The will of the people under government will maintain freedom, but only as long as that will is strong. Time will erode that will.

Aazadan said it well. The people have no memory of enslavement, so they have no will to fight for freedom. They will make compromises with powers, never realizing the value of their concessions nor understanding the ramifications of their perceived accomplishments. They will, of course, realize their errors, but only after they have been rendered unable to effectively rebel against their new owners.

Of course, there will always be those who still fight for an end to the cycle, but they will fall one by one. Their fall will be cheered by the masses as some sort of proof that their way is enlightened. In 100 years, maybe more, maybe less, a few of their names will remain in legend and myth. The rest will be forgotten.

The way to break the cycle, if it is indeed breakable at this point, is to not try to move forward into chaos quickly, nor is it to allow the cycle to continue through apathy and ignorance. It is to return to what made us prosper... reason, clear thought, true compromise, and cooperation. To repeat myself, it is to embrace unity as a culture and to fight for that culture together. Those who wish to continue the cycle know they cannot do so against the unified will of those governed; they must break that unity and that will, by dividing us, by diversifying us, into smaller and less effective groups who are woefully unable to oppose them.

Skin color, sexual preference, gender, social class, nationality, political affiliation, religion, urban/rural, education level... these are the weapons. These are the tools used to divide, to diversify the will of the people. They are working quite well; our enemy is formidable. Will we fall like so many before us? Or will we be strong enough to break the cycle, even if only temporarily? Only time will tell.

Because only time will reveal the decision you each make.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: xstealth

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: GodEmperor

And of course the Left is to blame because they are basically one person that thinks the same...., ya, in your mind.

It is BS Divide and Conquer posts like this, that are giving way to the destruction.

What I think will help? Vote 3rd Party, we need an argument that is better than Left vs Right.

Vote Johnson or Stein, just to break this damn cesspool Political System.

Stein is an extreme liberal, and Johnson is a centrist republican. How would this help?

I happen to agree that liberalism is a mental disorder and is very anti-American which is why communist, socialists and satanists vote Democrat.

1...how many American people are in your "groups" of communists, socialists and Satanists?
2...how do you know they even vote?
3...how do you know that there are no republicans in those groups?
4...liberalism is a mental disorder, how do you know? are you a doctor?
5...do you know the difference between a democratic republic, and a parliamentary form of government?
6...do you know the political difference between the two, and how a 3rd party candidate would affect each one?

doing the research on #5 and #6 will give you your answer of why we continue to have a 2 party-political system.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: JohnnyElohim

See what I mean? Your rights are clearly outlined right there in writing.

There is no compromise. They are yours, not anyone else's to take away or regulate. The cake was understood to be ours and the text made it plain that government had no business at all trying to force us to compromise by ceding it slices.

So, for example, if, as a teacher, I decide that my class is going to study the unabridged version of Huckleberry Finn for several reasons including it being an American classic and Twain's exemplary use of colloquial language and it being a window into the contemporary life of the time, especially where I would be a teacher in a former steamboat town in Missouri, I should be able to do that without being run out on a rail because of the existence of certain words in the text.

This is Amendment 1 after all. And all the reasons I listed are perfectly valid reasons for the book to be found in the classroom in this area.

But there are all too many people who feel that their right to not be offended by words is more important than anything academic or educational these days. So I would be asked to compromise my Amendment 1 for the sake of their refusal to be challenged by uncomfortable words and ideas, even if we are going to be learning about things that were true 100 years ago or so.

That's just to start.

So the 1st amendment in the context of what you say here says that the Federal government can make no law abridging your right to speak. It says nothing about the government protecting you from the social consequences of your actions. For example, you can use racial epithets where and how you please, but if I employ you I am not obligated to continue doing so if I dislike you doing this. If you are a customer in my bar, I can refuse you further service because I don't want you there, or because I don't like how you make my other customers feel. That's not a 1st amendment issue. This swings both ways politically: I've seen people lose their jobs for openly protesting the Iraq war, voicing disapproval of George W. Bush Jr., or otherwise identifying with liberal politics.

Your 1st amendment rights have only been abused if you face penalty of law -- not if your views are so unpopular that no one wants to work with you, or for you to work with their children. Now, I might agree that you shouldn't be run out on a rail for wanting to teach unabridged Twain, but that's not about your rights being infringed. It's about you being outnumbered in the social discourse.

originally posted by: jimmyx


1...how many American people are in your "groups" of communists, socialists and Satanists?
2...how do you know they even vote?
3...how do you know that there are no republicans in those groups?
4...liberalism is a mental disorder, how do you know? are you a doctor?
5...do you know the difference between a democratic republic, and a parliamentary form of government?
6...do you know the political difference between the two, and how a 3rd party candidate would affect each one?

doing the research on #5 and #6 will give you your answer of why we continue to have a 2 party-political system.

1) Thousands if you do not include the millions who voted for a self proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders in the election
2) Get real
3) Because each of the groups mentioned are left wing.

Communist Party USA Endorses Hillary
www.newsbusters.org...

4) Studies have shown liberalism is a mental disorder.

Science says liberals, not conservatives, are psychotic
nypost.com...

The American Journal of Political Science published a correction this year saying that the 2012 paper has “an error” — and that liberal political beliefs, not conservative ones, are actually linked to psychoticism.

This doctor says so: “Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.”
Read more at www.wnd.com...

5,6) Yes

a reply to: xstealth

Firstly, please provide a verifiable link to the correction in the AJPS, because oddly enough I can't find one. And don't cite World Nut Daily, you'll get melted brains all over the carpet again.