Revolutionaries are angry at the wrong people.

The United States is a country of the people, by the people, and for the people. Those that wish to subvert and usurp this government are angry for the right reasons at the wrong people.

Yes, our government is full of corruption, our politicians are carrier criminals that have only their personal interests in mind and deny the will of the people time and time again.

However. It is the people of the United States that continue to vote in these career criminals and so the blame lay squarely on the American Voter.

So the anger and the blame lies entirely on the people of the United States. If the people took responsibility for their own votes and actions we would not be in the mess we are in now.

Right wingers often belittle me for my leftist views, and then expound on the virtues of personal responsibility, often in a derogatory manner, assuming that for some strange reason that because I lean left, that I am an unemployed welfare recipient.

For the record, I am a 34 year old white male, I have a full time job, I do not take any sort of government handout, and I live near Detroit.

But instead of boosting for candidates that are not a part of the system and aren't re-elected by the people because of name recognition, the people continually elect the same criminals over and over again. Yet, at the same time bitch and complain that these people are doing this country harm?

It does not make sense. The only change that will happen in this country is when the people en masse denounce these career politicians and elect people that are for the people, that aren't bought by special interest groups, and aren't in the game for their own personal gain.

In 2010 it is your choice, is it going to be the same criminals? Or will the people speak with the most powerful voice they have, the vote, and elect the people to be the people's voice?

It is your choice. Don't let party politics destroy your objectivity. This election, research your candidates, if they have been bought out by special interests, deny them, if they have been in office for decades, deny them.

Take back our country, take it back with something more powerful than an army of angry militia members. Take it back with your vote. Vote for candidates that truly will be the voice of the people. Because that is what this country is about, it is a country of the people, by the people and for the people. Don't let them make you forget that. A vote for an independent candidate is not a wasted vote, it is a loud clear cry for the constitution. It is a demand for freedom.

I like to think its the public's fault, but here's the deal.

Career politicians are career politicians because they receive massive funding from fascist corporations and banks.

That money is funneled into brainwashing agitprop, removing rational thought from the process.

The people themselves have been subjected to 12 years of public school indoctrination, run by socialists that teach Keynesian economics, revisionist history, and barely cover the governments role under the constitution.

Then we get to the constitution itself. The government is acting illegally and those politicians that knowingly pass legislation outside of their constitutional authority are violating their sworn oath to uphold the constitution. That constitutes perjury under our system of common law - a felony.

So while its easy to blame the voter, the voters wouldn't be so incompetent and brainwashed if it were not for the total disregard of the constitution by our government.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by whatukno


Whoa buddy, I don’t think you can blame this all on the American Voter, here in Cincinnati we voted out the incumbent, guess what, the congressmen is just as stupid as the old. Also guess what, there were only two people running for office.... Now there lies the problem, I myself ran for office in 06, but did not have any financial backing from anyone the Unions were out an about for the Democrat and Business were out for the Repub. So that’s where the problem is, that’s why people are angry that’s why the two party system most die and a new one without parties put into place.

I fully agree. Also, we need a political system where money is not the deciding factor. Two rounds of votes, then a run-off, no lawyers in Public Office. Strict Term Limits on public service. This would clear out the "Old Boys School" that in now in public service. A series of debates on television would inform the people who was the best person for the job, based on merits, not back accounts. There should be at least 5 different political parties here in the States, and each party should be equal in air time and consideration.

Prime example.

How many people here think Roosevelt's "New Deal" saved America from the Great Depression?

My guess is, if you are a public school grad, you were taught that. I know I was.

That has been discredited for a long time now.

Just Google "FDR policies prolonged depression 7 years" and you'll see what I mean. Hell, even UCLA agrees, not exactly the bastion of capitalist economic theory.

What our government is engaged in right now puts the New Deal to shame.

Its this kind of revisionist history that programs the public into accepting massive bloated unconstitutional government. We are trained from birth to accept that we are slaves to government. That we live in a pure democracy where 51% of the people have the right to tell the other 49 how to live.



[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]

reply to post by whatukno


I totally agree with what you are saying. To speak of 'freedom,' as if that means being a particle disassociated from the government as much as possible is the antithesis of what our wise forefathers envisioned.

We are social creatures w/ a drive towards individuality with a need and desire to rely on others. There are the extremes of narcissism and over-dependence, but most people with somewhat integrated personalities will understand what I am saying. That is the GENIUS of:

A GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, OF THE PEOPLE

This country is not its president, not a flag, not a bunch of corporations, not a marketplace, it is you and me, it is us, the citizenry.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, we are not all fit to lead. As voters, we need to have a choice of real leaders, before we can really spend our vote effectively. I hear what the OP is saying, but are there really good choices to be had?

I agree that positive change is unlikely to come from a mass of ignorance and arrogance bearing flaming torches, pitchforks, and an almost complete illiteracy of history. The 'revolutionaries' of our day have little in common with the people of 1776.

However, something has to break the cycle. We might have to burn, before we can be rebuilt. Look at Nazi Germany. Can the US evolve without a 'revolution' of authoritarianism that will be the end result of installing a far right wing government that fits perfectly with multi-national corporatism? I sure hope so.

There may be other ways to 'fix' the system, other than basically becoming so stupid that we realize either we die as a nation, or move in a different direction (However, it is harder to build back up if the earth is poisoned by nuclear annihilation, lol).

So, I don't now. Personally, I am ready to move to Australia, or somewhere like that if need be. I am extremely lucky to have invested a moderate amount of money in Ford at the start of last year, which, at least for me, has become a very nice amount of money. I will be happy to bring my talents to somewhere else that doesn't feel like Germany in the 1930s.

Of course, The U.S. was in bad shape in the 1930s too, but we came together as a nation, and united with the rest of the world against an evil force. Unfortunately, it feels like the rest of the world is starting to unite against us. Obama's election had the possibility of stemming the tide, but I'm just not all that hopeful. A community organizer does not have the weight of the powers that be behind him, which gives him an extremely high ceiling, but also a very low floor. Who knows, we'll have a better picture of things in 2012 (of all dates, lol).

Best,
SN

reply to post by whatukno


Whatukno....most that dabble in the US Political Madness realm probably know you and I do not see eye to eye. Of course it is one of Man's greatest victories to be able to live in a place that provides that exchange of ideas, even in heated, neck and neck debate and occasional emotional outburst.

I am kind of in the middle on this. I see your point clearly. It frustrates me that many will abdicate* their responsibility. I came to this conclusion while I was serving in the military. *(I use the word abdicate because I truly believe, many Americans have formally given up their responsibilities to be the stalwarts of self-governance for about 70 years now.)

The one thing I took away from the military was something I learned regarding leadership and delegation.

Since then I have realized either we truly have it backwards or we need to start thinking different. I will present how I think we see it today and how as a whole we should be seeing it, in my opinion.

As of current politics we place leadership into the hands of the few that we send to our political seats. We have given up authority (which is okay, because we are giving them the authority to govern), but we have also relinquished responsibility. This is the pit-fall we have taken. We, as the People, have decided conscientiously to pass along that responsibility to them, while holding none for ourselves. In this, I believe from what you wrote we agree.

I believe, we the People should be considered the leaders who are delegating our authority to our representatives. In order to delegate properly, one must know that the people we are entrusting our authority to govern are the best at what they do. They are the most knowledgeable, the keenest, the sharpest and most of all, a citizen model. In this example of how I view it, there is one thing we cannot do, if we were to consider ourselves the leader that is delegating our authority and that is we cannot delegate our responsibility!

Ultimately, in either example above, responsibility has been passed on, to whomever. No one is accountable. Congress knows it. That is why they will call something they pass, such as Obamacare or Bush's tax cuts. You see....congress, you are the branch responsible for the enactment of laws. The very reason they will call it such is it has severed their responsibility as the lot that has passed such laws. Its a clever scheme that the MSM willfully plays and the American public is so undereducated on basic civics that it cannot put 2 and 2 together regarding this.

So how does a woeful voter base (right/left/center) that on a whole is anemic in its understanding in regards to self-governance turn this around? As it stands, the Government holds all the cards. They control education on the majority. They can produce the very types of people they wish to produce to maintain their career status and they have been. It sounds wacky I am sure, but spend a week in a 4th grade classroom. See what is taught compared to what was taught 25 years ago, 50 years ago and a 100 years ago.

It starts there and that is where they (career pols) have taken the fight to. I am not invoking Hitler or Nazism, just a famous quote regarding what I am saying. "He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future."

Rant and ramble is done I think. Not sure how linear my post is. Coffee hasn't kicked

Edit to add a quote, as I believe it pertains

"While all other sciences have advanced, that of government is at a standstill - little better understood, little better practiced now than three or four thousand years ago." - John Adams

[edit on 8-1-2010 by ownbestenemy]

reply to post by ownbestenemy


Hey obe. I bet our politics, per se, don't totally mesh; but I bet we share a lot of overlapping principles. Just my initial reaction to what you wrote.

Coffee needed here, as well....

Best,
SN

reply to post by whatukno


So does this mean its my fault for signing the contract and fighting for the corporations instead of people's freedom?

reply to post by mnemeth1


If the New Deal was socialism, then why was the National Recovery Administration filled with people from General Electric, Standard Oil, the Wartimes Industry Board (tied to GE, International Harvester and a host of other Wall Street corporations), Kuhn, Loeb & Co, and others, including the Federal Reserve. Now, before telling me that the Federal Reserve is socialism, please consider that the Fed is privately owned by a consortium of Wall Street banks...

If F.D.R. was a socialist, or even worst, a Marxist !, then how do we reconcile that with the fact that by virtue of his very last name, he was a member of the capitalist elite?

And finally, if the New Deal was socialism, then why did FDR not allow any socialist groups to have input when he was considering his options on economic recovery plans?

Comparisons between what FDR did and what is going on today is inevitable, so it should not be surprising at all that we find the same Wall Street cartel lurking in the shadows. They always find a way to survive, even if it means American citizens have to go poor and hungry.

It is a shame, though, that people are not allowed to learn the truth. Education is a cartel unto itself, self-serving to feed the machine. It's a postmodern world where concepts like left, right, fascist, socialist, liberal, capitalist, etc, are rendered completely obsolete. It's not solely an American problem; globalization sealed the deal and if resistance is needed then it must be fought on the soil of every nation. The only reason these concepts of yesteryear are still in wide circulation is due to corporate owned media dredging them up, finding ways to keep us in the dark and squabbling amongst our selves as we are robbed blind.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

If the New Deal was socialism, then why was the National Recovery Administration filled with people from General Electric, Standard Oil, the Wartimes Industry Board (tied to GE, International Harvester and a host of other Wall Street corporations), Kuhn, Loeb & Co, and others, including the Federal Reserve. Now, before telling me that the Federal Reserve is socialism, please consider that the Fed is privately owned by a consortium of Wall Street banks...

If F.D.R. was a socialist, or even worst, a Marxist

!, then how do we reconcile that with the fact that by virtue of his very last name, he was a member of the capitalist elite?

And finally, if the New Deal was socialism, then why did FDR not allow any socialist groups to have input when he was considering his options on economic recovery plans?

Comparisons between what FDR did and what is going on today is inevitable, so it should not be surprising at all that we find the same Wall Street cartel lurking in the shadows. They always find a way to survive, even if it means American citizens have to go poor and hungry.

It is a shame, though, that people are not allowed to learn the truth. Education is a cartel unto itself, self-serving to feed the machine. It's a postmodern world where concepts like left, right, fascist, socialist, liberal, capitalist, etc, are rendered completely obsolete. It's not solely an American problem; globalization sealed the deal and if resistance is needed then it must be fought on the soil of every nation. The only reason these concepts of yesteryear are still in wide circulation is due to corporate owned media dredging them up, finding ways to keep us in the dark and squabbling amongst our selves as we are robbed blind.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]

The New Deal was a mix of fascism and socialism. Socialism is state ownership of public works and industry. Fascism is more collusion of business with government.

Check out my blog for more info.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
Prime example.

How many people here think Roosevelt's "New Deal" saved America from the Great Depression?

That has been discredited for a long time now.

Just Google "FDR policies prolonged depression 7 years" and you'll see what I mean. Hell, even UCLA agrees, not exactly the bastion of capitalist economic theory.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]

Complete dribble. I have a thread for you to post on.

Google this "George Bush is a Nazi" you'll get results, does that mean he is one? Google "Jesus was Gay", "elvis and tupac live", "Obama is a Homosexual".

Finally Google "gullible" and you'll see yourself there.

Ziggy

reply to post by whatukno


Bravo! Whatukno,
Good thread.

I agree use the vote to boot out the bad guys, I said before, If we can't find good ones to vote for we deserve them.

Ziggy

Originally posted by Stop-loss!
reply to post by whatukno

 

So does this mean its my fault for signing the contract and fighting for the corporations instead of people's freedom?

You're a Soldier. We owe you. If you're a stand up person, you're only doing your job, and should be thanked for your service.

If you're not then, there is a problem. Same criteria for judging anyone.

Hope you get home soon.

Ziggy

Originally posted by ziggystrange

Complete dribble. I have a thread for you to post on.

Google this "George Bush is a Nazi" you'll get results, does that mean he is one? Google "Jesus was Gay", "elvis and tupac live", "Obama is a Homosexual".

Finally Google "gullible" and you'll see yourself there.

Ziggy

Sure, its dribble.

UCLA

Mises

CATO

WSJ

etc.. etc.. etc..

Originally posted by mnemeth1

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

If the New Deal was socialism, then why was the National Recovery Administration filled with people from General Electric, Standard Oil, the Wartimes Industry Board (tied to GE, International Harvester and a host of other Wall Street corporations), Kuhn, Loeb & Co, and others, including the Federal Reserve. Now, before telling me that the Federal Reserve is socialism, please consider that the Fed is privately owned by a consortium of Wall Street banks...

If F.D.R. was a socialist, or even worst, a Marxist

!, then how do we reconcile that with the fact that by virtue of his very last name, he was a member of the capitalist elite?

And finally, if the New Deal was socialism, then why did FDR not allow any socialist groups to have input when he was considering his options on economic recovery plans?

Comparisons between what FDR did and what is going on today is inevitable, so it should not be surprising at all that we find the same Wall Street cartel lurking in the shadows. They always find a way to survive, even if it means American citizens have to go poor and hungry.

It is a shame, though, that people are not allowed to learn the truth. Education is a cartel unto itself, self-serving to feed the machine. It's a postmodern world where concepts like left, right, fascist, socialist, liberal, capitalist, etc, are rendered completely obsolete. It's not solely an American problem; globalization sealed the deal and if resistance is needed then it must be fought on the soil of every nation. The only reason these concepts of yesteryear are still in wide circulation is due to corporate owned media dredging them up, finding ways to keep us in the dark and squabbling amongst our selves as we are robbed blind.

[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]

The New Deal was a mix of fascism and socialism. Socialism is state ownership of public works and industry. Fascism is more collusion of business with government.

Check out my blog for more info.

Logic is futile Someone336, submit.

New Deal = Socialism that is never going to change for these guys.

Besides he has Google.


Ziggy

reply to post by mnemeth1


Technically, socialism is the worker's ownership of the means of production. What you're calling "socialism" is only socialism in a Marxist sense or a degenerated worker's state. Socialism began with the singular concept, and has now somehow become a blanket term applied to communism, anarchism, and now even fascism.

I wouldn't call the modern world a blending of socialism and fascism. I'd call it corporatism, and it's a relatively new invention.

I'll check out the blog; looks interesting!


[edit on 8-1-2010 by Someone336]

reply to post by ziggystrange


Ah, Google. Nothing like doing some good ol' commie bashing searches on corporate owned search bars.

If the so-called "Power that Be" really wanted to convert the masses to socialism, they would have made cable free for everybody a long time ago.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I would also like to add to your statement that these people are liars through and through. They swear that they will do this and promise to do that and then back out.

So to the OP, I understand your point but you have left out MUCH in your equations.

Take for instance our current leader. He promised transparency. He promised that the healthcare debate would be CSPAN'd. He PROMISED. This kind of pre-election promising is what got him elected. How many promises has he not followed through on? Well, I can guarantee that he didn't follow through on the one I listed. There are MANY more that can be added to this list.

You see, people DO sometimes listen to these people and believe the BS promises that they make.

So, who's to blame when it comes to this? The people for believing the all out lies? Or the people who LIED their way into office?

Originally posted by Someone336
reply to post by mnemeth1

 

Technically, socialism is the worker's ownership of the means of production.

That would be Italian fascism.

Socialism is state ownership of industry.

The post office and schools for example are socialist.

Medicare is socialist.

Socialist Security is socialist.

The military industrial complex is fascist.

The auto industry is fascist.

The banking industry is fascist.

etc..





[edit on 8-1-2010 by mnemeth1]