reply to post by ownbestenemy
So now that you have embarrassed yourselves incessantly on this thread, the conclusion is that the questions was loaded, and the posting somehow
I posed my question as I did because I wanted to learn what exactly the specific groups calling for revolts/insurrections/revolutions/overthrow of the
GOV have in mind by way of specific policies, amendments etc.
You think I should have invited who to post? Liberals? Obama loving Democrats? Notice what I excluded was the Democrats, and the Republicans.
Why is it nothing can be just what it is? I have been a member here since June 08, I have posted around 100 responses, and I have started exactly 1
thread. So what was I doing Research for Obama since before he got elected? because ATS is so vital to the administration, that they knew enough to
infiltrate you, and have me and other be sleepers in case Obama got elected and you guys started bashing him, he would be on top of it and embarrass
less than 50 of you for a few days? Because he knew that there would be Birthers, and Teabaggers, and the master plan is to make you guys sound
extreme to rational Americans by inviting you to articulate how you would change the USA if he was to be overthrown by violent insurrection?
Your personal theory is that I planned this because I'm so devious, that I figured out how to bait only the most rabid of all the "Conservatives"
by typing the names of their respective self assigned affiliations, and asking them to layout the plan of action should their wish for a "whatever
you want to call it" comes true and they had a chance to reset everything?
1. If he's that freaking cunning you guys are toast already.
2. If he's that freaking cunning, then he's the Man for the job.
3. That's a bunch of crap. I don't know any of these posters, I have seen a couple of names in some threads but that's it.
I just wanted to hear the ideas outside of Obama firefights, and Racism centric threads. Not to hose you, the opposite, to try to understand you
better. I knew you could screw up and do what you did, but I have no control over that. I was hoping maybe you would.
Not that I think you care what I think, but for the record, all you guys did was convince me that most of you are completely insane.
I tried to stay out of direct debates, but your buddy that's rewriting the Constitution on the other thread with the deceptive title felt he had to
confront me with his half baked 16 points and the wise ass remark numbered 17, and dare me to rebut his half baked dribble. When I take him up on his
asinine dare, he runs and starts another thread so he can get help from others, and not have to deal with the mess some of you made here.
By the way, talk about shady, if you go to that thread, it states that the the OP on the new thread was his response to my OP, his response on the new
thread has numerous points added that are not on his original response but are presented as being part of the original draft. That is not the case.
They should be labeled as added after the fact, or colored yellow as edits.
You claim "some" posters only debated the worst of the "Conservatives", care to name them?
Which of your comrades was it that according to your revisionism were spouting extremes, and racism on this thread? Care to name them?
To that point, who is it "you" debate? Isn't it the people you most strongly disagree with? or the ones that affront you? or attack you?
Those are the ones I usually argue with. You are not suggesting that to have a fair debate you must only argue the mildest differences for fear of
making your opponent look, or sound bad?
The point of debates, and elections, is to beat the other guy, not make him look good.
You can't have it both ways, you can't say things that make you sound bad, or stupid, or racist, or ignorant, and blame it on a third party who
asked a question you are debating with another person. That is absurd.
Some, or most of you, came off as unfocused, disorganized, and devoid of any sort of insight into your own ideologies, save for the individuals pet
peeve as a demand, and the repetition of tired and ridiculous tirades about the Constitution where on one breath you tout it when it's convenient,
and then bash it on the next breath when someone points out some inconvenient hole, auto-abrogation, or contradiction in your interpretation.
You say you (collectively) are for freedom. but you sure do like to throw the words mandatory, and by force around for freedom lovers.
Obama is a Socialist because, he wants Nationalized Banks, and Health Care right?
Tell me. The Banking and Health Care components of your "new", "restarted", "rewritten", whatever you wind up calling it, bogus Constitution,
are they Nationalized? Because that is Socialism right? and the New America you guys are building is not Socialist Country right?
Another thing, when the "New" GOV takes over, what happens to the national debt. I mean under the new policies you guys propose, any idiot can see
there is math problem.
You would have to basically renege on, or wipe the slate clean to abolish Property Taxes, or fund massive Military and National Guard expansion.
Additionally, there is another problem. Isolation, if we were to say, just by the awesome imaginary might of our overextended military, decide to flip
the bird at China and the IMF by saying for instance, we're not paying you, and we are taking anything you own in the US and Nationalizing it. What
do you think they could, or would do under these circumstances?
You do realize that the relative size of the States Militia Force has to increase commensurately with the diminution of the size of the Central GOV in
order to assure "domestic tranquility" right? That could become rather complicated if we were to for instance, Militarize the borders?
Cause you're not so deluded that you actually think our Vets are like the Spartans, so well trained that we don't need the Military to be huge
because every American Veteran is a Soldier ready for deployment right?
You do realize that the reason the US keeps certain strategic bases around the world is in the event that there should be a need for fast
Also having many serves as a deceptive tactic cause if we only had a couple of big ones, THE ENEMY would know where we are coming from?
Anyway, you're wrong, Period