It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Damn The Country, Obama Must Fail"

page: 22
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by 27jd

What an excellent example of the mentality prevalent in politics today. All of that divisive rhetoric, culminating in a request for money.

And for what? Because of affiliation and not objective reasoning.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:15 PM
reply to post by MemoryShock

Exactly, the begging for handouts was striking to me too. As if they (politicians) haven't bled us dry already. That and the "help fight back!" crap, like we're in civil war or something.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:15 PM
Skeptic Overlord. I address you in your first post.

However, I came back with several additional observations, the most important being that our government is absolutely gridlocked in a pointless turf-war and that we (the people) have long-since lost any voice we may have thought we had.

If we have no voice is it possible to change things from with in?

Those people you met with, they were obligated to listen to you but not to pay attention to what you said and by the merits of your own words they DID NOT pay attention to you because their was nothing in it for them.

What does that make this nation then but a true despotic tyranny?

AND YOU HAD THE MONEY AND MEANS TO SEE THEM FACE TO FACE! What chance do I, an intellectual pauper have to get their attention? My emails have gone ignored, my snail mail was disregarded when it was even acknowledged at all. Congress constantly passes law that they do not read before signing on it and while it may not affect them in their glass towers of power I am bound by a tazer happy police state to obey. What justice is their for me?

My voice means nothing to the legislative branch.

My voice is suppressed in the judicial branch.

My voice is not even acknowledged in the executive branch.

Worst of all, my voice is silenced by the Law Enforcement Branch.

To whom do I cry for justice in this luxurious electric tyranny?

My fellow man seems quite happy with his yoke. My fellow rebel seems to fearful to take any kind of significant action and I do not speak of arms but of ACTION! Taking a stand with all your manly worth and saying "NO, I WILL NOT SUBMIT TO TYRANTS!"...

I don't know what else to say. I am glad you can finally accept that their may be no real way to change this debacle but if you wanted to try anyways what would you be willing to do? How far would you commit?

The absolute biggest problem I see with the USA is our constitutional ignorance and our lack of application of its laws.

When the police break up a protest because no permit is granted..I do not remember the right of assembly requiring permission. When local state and city offices pass laws in detriment to protest they are in violation of the constitution. The right to peaceful assembly is our first amendment right and it has been trampled upon literally, for two centuries now because of nobody standing up to local officials saying " THIS LAW REQUIRING A PROTEST PERMIT IS VOID UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND WE WILL NOT MOVE"

When you take away the first amendment all other amendments mean little. The second , the fifth, the seventh all mean nothing if we do not have the first.

The lobbyist problem in Washington is not the cause of our disease but merely a symptom of a larger ailment and that is our constitutional ignorance and our unwillingness to evenly apply it to all citizens of the republic.

Is their hope?

Not while we remain ignorant.

[edit on 12-8-2009 by titorite]

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:35 PM
IMHO you don't need to know exactly what is happening to act and make it happen the way you would like it to happen.

I see people discussing every single detail and I'd like to know what is that going to do? Knowing details will take you nowhere. The details IMO are just another form of distraction to keep us on stand-by, to make us complacent.

It doesn't matter who is doing what. What matters is that we are not doing what we could do!

Enough with the chitchat, enough with indulging about being hopeless or not responsible. Enough pointing fingers.

I gave the solution already. GENERAL STRIKE.
I have said this a couple of times here on ATS, but most people just seem to look over it. Why is that? Seems to me that a lot of people are still comfortable and consequently lazy. Seems like most people that complain are just trend followers trying to fit in.

I feel like creating a thread for this. But I also feel that I lack knowledge about the American people and history as to create a speech in which every single person would understand and finally act. Everyday I hope someone more knowledgeable and charismatic is going to start the fire and put out clearly the solution for everyone. I don't know how long I can wait anymore. Better start writing soon.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 05:38 PM
Find a compromise with the government. When a wolf eats shepherd, both parties are satisfied- wolf Fed, and sheeple alive.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 06:07 PM

Originally posted by Geladinhu
We make the system run, we take it on our shoulders because we think there is no option. We need to stop doing what we always thought was unavoidable (go to work, go shopping, go to the movies, restaurants, ... stop all of that and just stay at home). We are the ones that support the system, we are the columns of the house-hold. If we withdraw ourselves it will collapse. We stop, the world stops.

I don't mean to be a smart ass, but we are already doing that.

It's called "a recession".

The problem is that people are divided, so you will not get cooperation from everyone to organize a tactic like that, and at the same time the drop in business would lead to more job loss. I don't think that is the way to go.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 06:29 PM
It's bad a average citizen can't find a decent Judge/Lawyer or two and file a motion questioning the Recess/Convening of Congress all those years ago...

A motion to cease and desist all current actions until said matter was put to rest one way or the other...

We would probably lose to their superior "legalise", but, anything to slow the Train down and put a spotlight on their corruption and lies over the past 148 yrs would be worth a shot...IF... :shk:

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by Hal9000

I think I don't understand.
Was that a joke?
I'm guessing it was.

Okay, so if people are divided we have to reunite them by reminding them of who they really are. We have to show clearly what we have come to believe we are. Why are people divided? That is all we need to know to reunite them. We have to show people that we all have the same goal.

We will have as many jobs as we like if we show that the jobs only exist because of us! What is the way to go for you? All I see is the attempt to keep holding to the past because of fear of the future. Let us live in the now!

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 06:48 PM

Originally posted by Geladinhu We have to show people that we all have the same goal.

What if we don't?

What if the nation is truly divided, one group believing in The Greater Good and the other believing in the Individual?

That's generally a sign of a revolution, Civil War, or seceding.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 06:59 PM
reply to post by Credge

The Greater Good and the Individual are the same.
Nothing is truly divided. Division is an illusion.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:07 PM

Originally posted by Hx3_1963
It's bad a average citizen can't find a decent Judge/Lawyer or two and file a motion questioning the Recess/Convening of Congress all those years ago...

A motion to cease and desist all current actions until said matter was put to rest one way or the other...

We would probably lose to their superior "legalise", but, anything to slow the Train down and put a spotlight on their corruption and lies over the past 148 yrs would be worth a shot...IF... :shk:

I believe a well informed citizen without a lawyer to contractually bind him to the Court could seek an audience in chambers with a Judge that would likely cause a serious panic depending on why the audience was sought.

I believe the people have an excellent class-action non-disclorure, breach of contract and false advertising suit too, if they pressed it in such a way.

All it would really take is a non-Lawyer showing up in Court declaring themselves a natural human being and insisting on their constiutional right to convey respective powers and definitions to all language between the Judge and the natural soveriegn human being to open a tightly shut door that might be tightly shut but not locked, especially if one had produced their own writ of Certiorari as a soveriegn to the court that if rejected a writ of Habeus corpus to the Court of Madrid, their High Mightiness of the Netherlands, or even Versailles would then kick the true contract into play by evoking Article IV, of the Treaty of Paris. Declaring yourself an injured party being denied liberty as a result of the Revolutionary War.

Believe me, if you stuck to your guns and reminded them you understand...they understand!

Now if we could just get everyone else to understand my friend...

Or are they all destined to be assmimilated because of their futile inefectual resistance?

They will be assimilated resistence is futile! All Hail Caesar!

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:08 PM

Originally posted by groingrinder
It is clear to me that lobbyists need to go. They have taken the lawmakers away from their constituents. If somebody wants my lawmaker to vote a certain way, then they should have to come to the constituency and make their case. Then the constituency would approach the lawmaker and give him their opinions. My lawmakers are supposed to be working for me. They do not work for the lobbyists. At least they are not supposed to. Lobbying is one of the things that is messing the country up badly.

Lobbying should be made a capitol crime. The only influence that Congressmen and Senators should be experiencing needs to come from the constituency.

Lobbying should DEFINITELY be legal, but contributions need to be under control. It's the right of EVERYONE to be heard, even corporations. The second you say that certain people's voices shouldn't be heard, you become a part of the problem.

My opinion is that bribery and corruption of a government representative at the local or federal level should be dealt with as harshly as possible. I can see capital punishment being a deterrent in extreme cases, but you could start with public Corporal punishment. Some people can handle pain, but pain coupled with the humiliation of EVERYONE knowing what you did is a very good deterrent.

ALL political donations should be capped at a level that is reasonable for an individual and then adhered to by individuals AND businesses. $50 would be an ideal amount for a cap from a business or individual. No business or individual would be able to contribute more than $50. Then you make the penalty for bribery or corruption so harsh that people wouldn't dream of doing it for such a small amount. This would curb career politicians who really weren't meant to exist, and would foster the ideal that this is a temporary service position for the betterment of society and not something to make a buck off of.

It's not infallible, but it's simple and MUCH better than the system in place right now.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:09 PM
Is it possible to frame the main points and philosophy of a public manifesto right here on this forum?

I think so.

It seems clear, there are at least a couple of "inalienable" points.....

1: Return to a "by the people, for the people" vision.
2: Get the capitalists out of the process.

Are there other talking points to add, and can a consensus be achieved concerning their validity?

Can an "American Manifesto" be drafted and distributed via the Internet? Can that be done in such a way that it is elevated above the stupid bull# that permeates the Web; and raises it above the "lowest common denominator? I think it may be more possible than many would think. Written in a style and semantics that intentionally avoids the "trigger" words and memes, it may be possible to influence a great many people. I think it may be possible to do this in a manner that avoids any hint of partisanship and reinforces the concepts of a free, self-determinate people.

That's my .02 cents.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:09 PM
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

All I can say is this information, that the republicans and democrats are BOTH bought and paid for by the lobbyists/special interests, needs to be broadcast loud and clear: and far and wide.

Can I suggest those of us here on ATS write articles and hit as many sites on the internet as we can about this?

Second It is time to abandon the Democratic and Republican parties. That is the message to get out The money groups have them all sewn up so we need to bring in fresh meat - third parties. This next election is the time to do so. People are fed up with Bush and Obama and the business as usual in Washington DC The PTB have kept everyone voting for their tame elephant and donkey show. We are told that voting third party is "throwing away your vote". If people figure out that voting Democratic and Republican is really the move that throws away their votes then they will not be afraid of voting third party.

I have just started working with a guy who wants to run third party ticket for the senate. The rest of us should do the same. Even if the third parties do not win this time around if they pull a substancial number of votes away from the major parties it will serve as awake up call.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:15 PM

Originally posted by grahag
Lobbying should DEFINITELY be legal,

No. Never.

Lobbying is not voting. Lobbying is not the will of the majority. Lobbying is a pestilence that infects the system. It invites corruption and malfeasance.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:15 PM
Mmmm...let me take a different tack. First of all, gridlock is a good thing. The people in Congress are elected to make laws - all day long - all year long (with the exception of their frequent recesses). I don't want people making laws for me all day long, all year long...I like gridlock; I like opposing points of view (the more points of view, the better).

And everyone seems to think lobbyists are evil...they're not...they are there to get their point of view across...sure someone pays for them to get "their" point of view across but if I'm the CEO of a company employing 10,000 people, I want to know if there's some idiot in Congress trying to pass a law that might put me out of business, hamper my business, or tax me more. One stupid law could not only affect me, the CEO, it could affect the 10,000 people I employ. If a CEO doesn't have one or more lobbyists, he's a dolt.

But remember, there are multiple lobbyists on Capitol Hill - they have their own opposing views. AARP has their lobbyists who are fighting for old people (quite possibly to the detriment of younger folks). The Trial lawyers have lobbyists opposing tort reform; the chemical companies have lobbyists opposing environmental laws; the 'greenies' have lobbyists proposing that we all live in caves.

So for people to get all hot-and-bothered that "we the people" aren't heard is foolish...believe me, there's a lobbyist somewhere in D.C. that shares your point of view (on a specific topic of course).

But in all seriousness, never, ever think that gridlock is a bad thing. Group-think, which is the same as “getting along” almost always produces very bad results. I want people in Congress to argue, to think, to re-argue, to think again, and to seriously consider the consequences of their proposed laws -- it limits the damage that they'll do to the rest of us.

Frankly I think the best thing we could do is to ensure that everyone in Congress has a second job - a real job - somewhere - so that they can put themselves in our shoes at least some of the time.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:22 PM
Is this a conspiracy board or not? Why not create our own conspiracy?
using as a baseline

Tough races
Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio

Easy for Dems
Arkansas, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland,
New York, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont,
Washington, Wisconsin

Easy for Reps
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma,
South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah

I think a businessman/woman with an engineering degree would make a great president or Senator. They could do process charts and with a business background know where to cut. Just control the Senate and you have leverage. With people being angry it could work. Not another party - just elect non-polititions for two terms.
Who could we push (new) and how to get them to accept.
Anyone want to start a conspiracy instead of talking about others?
It would not be that hard to win 20 races and have 1/5 of the Senate. Then people would see some Dems & Reps start walking in lock-step and might wake up more.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:32 PM
reply to post by Geladinhu

No, I don't think so.

The Greater Good always implies that the individual is less important. That is to say that if you have to be sacrificed for the greater good, such will be the case.

It is an important distinction.

You have what is best for the individual and what is best for the collective. The two aren't always the same.

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:42 PM

Originally posted by bowlbyville
it could affect the 10,000 people I employ.

Fine....that 10,000 people can stand up on their own two legs and make their voices and opinions heard. In case you haven't heard, the CEO that genuinely gives two #s about their employees is an extremely rare dog. If those CEO's discovered that "downsizing" by 10,000 people would line their pockets with a few more greenbacks, or increase their bonus by a couple of mil.....They'd do it in a "New York Minute"....and not even look back at the broken lives and ruined dreams.

They care about the majority shareholders....Very few of which fall into the demographic of "employees".

The capitalists must be removed from the process.

[edit on 12-8-2009 by MrPenny]

posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:49 PM
For the record allow me to state. I am very against term limits.

They impede the peoples liberty to choose whom they would choose and assume that those who hold office are smart enough to manipulate the system to maintain office.

For those of you old enough to remember JFK would you of voted for him again and again assuming he never did anything so wrong that he needed to be removed.

I am very much against career politicians but, what I am saying is if you have a champion of the people in office and you want to keep him in office why would you want a liberty restricting term limit to force him out of office?

I am for taxes.

Taxes pay for roads and I like paved roads over dirt roads. Taxes pay for wars of aggression. I am against wars of aggression. How do we deal with this?

Maybe a 20% flat tax (Income) with the option to choose how half (10%) is spent leaving the other 10% up to the government to spend as they deem fit. They maintain a level of control while at the same time we gain a level of control. Maybe you would opt to have all 10% of your personal taxes to go into the war fund...or maybe you would choose for 2% to go to transportation and 2% to education and 2% to goto healthcare and 2% to go to law enforcement, and 2% to goto national security. This kind of thing could be fleshed out and solidified into a working system but only if we talk about it.

I am not a republican Meaning, I do not approve of the republican form of government. That doesn't matter as much to me because the majority of you DO approve of the republican form of government so I must abide by your choice. That said the reason why I oppose the republican form of government is because it will always lead back to tyranny on a long enough time line for as long as it excludes YOU from the legislative process.

Their needs to be a check and balance for YOU to approve or disapprove of a constitutional amendment. These are the laws that affect us all correct? Is it right that you have no say over the law you will be accounted to? Like term limits for example. If we are to accept something so impacting as presidential term limits do we not have a right to say yeah or nay? The decision was made without our consent and yet we must abide by it with out debate or consideration. If the House of Representatives are under no obligation to pay attention to us then maybe a house of the people should be established for if no one else will listen to us then at least we will listen to ourselves.

The people that will be ruled by law need a voice in what laws will be passed.
Both on a federal level aswell as a state and local level. We can all understand what a law for the common good is.. Punish murder, Punish theft, but then we get into quasi laws, like no gay marriage. If a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage were to be considered do you not have the right to vote for your consent to it. Who you marry is not my business nor is it the governments business but if a law is to be passed about it I feel YOU MUST HAVE THE YES OR NO SAY OF IT. Let the congress people submit it after debate, let the executive approve or veto it, Let the supreme court think about it... BUT LET ME AND YOU HAVE A CHECK AND BALANCE ON THE ISSUE TOO. Let those counted amongst the US census have our own yes we approve or "no kick it back to congress" voice. I use this one issue as an example to illustrate the need for me and you to have some kind of voice that is more real than a letter to Ted Kennedy. What ever you decide to say with your voice I trust your voice more than Ted Kennedys voice. We are no more guilty than he is but we have none of the power?

HOW? How could we have a voice? I say Hardlines. A separate and dedicated system of hardlines used for one thing and one thing only to tally our voice.
Something separate from this net and not accessible on this system. NEW Independant hardlines. I know I would ask that 5% of my taxes goto maintaining that system. I would also vote for very STIFF penalties for those that attempt to tamper with such a system. I'm talking something DIEBOLD proof. To manipulate it is to get a 50 year sentence.

IN FACT anyone that manipulates our votes should serve 50 years.

I Support stiffer election penalties. These days people get caught manipulating the system all the time and they get wrist slaps if anything at all. I say if you vote is not counted because your name matchs some convicts name and the election committee said discount both votes then the whole election committee needs to do serious time. If votes are falsified then someones head needs to roll. If dead peoples votes are counted then someone needs to be held accountable and do serious time!

ALSO I oppose redistricting. That needs to stop. YESTERDAY!

AND NO MORE LOBBYISTS AT ALL! No more buying votes. The whole lobbyist phenomena is what inspires my opinion of a house of the people. They can be bought and sold but you and I are the ones affected.. so we need to have a voice about how we will be affected but they need to lose their ability to be bought and to do that we should out law lobbyists AKA BRIBERY!

These are just a few of my thoughts... I have more but I shall leave the remainder of my time to you.

[edit on 12-8-2009 by titorite]

new topics

top topics

<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in