It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Iowa Republican defends ending run for state Senate, joining shadow government - there was one?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer

"I am one of many people so disgusted with the options out there," she said. "But the government we have has to go."


From OP's source

Really don't see what's wrong with that.






This is exactly why I think the government has some sort of involvement with these fringe extremist groups.

The idea of getting rid of the DOE may seem extreme to some, but when you really look into the issue the DOE isn't doing anything. They have not accomplished any great goal. All they have done is suck billions of dollars down a hole with nothing to show for it.

So the idea of getting rid of the department has merit. I bet a lot of people would be supportive of the idea. The government doesn't want to get rid of the DOE, because it would take away some of their power. So what do they do to crush ideas they don't like?

They set up, or otherwise support extremist groups such as the one being discussed here. Then they have them rally for a cause, such as dismantling the DOE. This has the effect of making anyone calling for the destruction of the DOE look crazy. They become associate with these fringe groups calling for the same thing, even if they have zero connection to each other.

It kills the credibility of anyone who is rallying against the DOE because they are seen as nutjobs just like this shadow government organization.

Anyone else see what I'm getting at,and think this is plausible?




posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 02:42 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 
You can carry your example to Occupy and even the Tea Party.

But

The danger lies when an idea, even a fringe idea, is planted in the minds of regular folks. The danger exists that someone else might pick up the banner.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by lives
 


If that is the platform that this woman and others are running on, then they won't get many if any votes in this country.

They can take their imaginary president and imaginary government and shove it all up their tawdry asses.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 




The idea of getting rid of the DOE may seem extreme to some, but when you really look into the issue the DOE isn't doing anything. They have not accomplished any great goal. All they have done is suck billions of dollars down a hole with nothing to show for it.


Our defense budget sucks billions each year and what's the end result? Are we really safer from these so-called threats?

Perhaps these "shadow government" folks could concentrate on the defense budget first before attacking social programs/services.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by James1982
 




The idea of getting rid of the DOE may seem extreme to some, but when you really look into the issue the DOE isn't doing anything. They have not accomplished any great goal. All they have done is suck billions of dollars down a hole with nothing to show for it.


Our defense budget sucks billions each year and what's the end result? Are we really safer from these so-called threats?

Perhaps these "shadow government" folks could concentrate on the defense budget first before attacking social programs/services.



What "social service" does the DOE provide???



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword

Our defense budget sucks billions each year and what's the end result? Are we really safer from these so-called threats?

Perhaps these "shadow government" folks could concentrate on the defense budget first before attacking social programs/services.



Well I can't speak for these shadow government folks as I'm not a member or a supporter. I simply like the idea of getting rid of the DOE, and most governmental agencies with acronyms as names, for that matter.

As far as the amount of money allocated to the defense budget, I'd be happy cutting that down to about 100 billion a year at most. Close every single overseas base, bring every single military person from around the world back home, and cut all foreign aid while I'm at it.

Although I'm guessing it would be a lot easier to get rid of the DOE than all of that.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Yeah, good question.

Maybe he/she is under the impression that getting rid of the DOE means getting rid of government funded schools? I don't know... but there were schools pre-1979. Nothing really changed the much after the DOE took over, except a huge increase in spending with zero return for that investment. And increased government control into every single aspect of our, and our children's lives.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Re DOE Some form of Federal level oversight of education has been around since mid 1800s. In 1953 Pres Eisenhower changed the name of the Federal Security Agency to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and made it cabinet-level. Jimmy Carter broke off the Education part into a separate dept. A read here under history offers IMO, if one reads between the lines, as to why some would view the DOE in the same light as Civil Rights movement, or, for ex, Social Security as a Communist plot.

Yes, for all the decades I've been on this earth, I've seen the same far right fringe ideology pop up in groups with different names. After the 1950s era of McCarthy...


The terms Radical Right, ultra-conservative, super-patriots and the like were used to make a distinction with the more numerous mainstream conservatives. But there were obviously a lot of people holding the philosophy, and certain events were in the air, prompting Pres. Kennedy to make a direct attack on his critics at the Hollywood Palladium, in a speech delivered to the party faithful and fat cats but covered nationally.

Notable among the "wild-eyed promoters" were the California right-wingers. Pres. Kennedy's Palladium speech came hard on the heels of a unique event: a coast-to-coast television program titled "Hollywood's Answer to Communism" and put on by the Christian Anti-Communism Crusade. The Crusade had many prominent Hollywood figures in its ranks, such as one-time General Electric pitchman Ronald Reagan, who had said in 1960:

Shouldn't someone tag Mr. Kennedy's bold new imaginative program with its proper age? Under the tousled boyish haircut is still old Karl Marx -- first launched a century ago.

source

The far right fringe groups revolved around items such as the United Nations, "socialist/communist Big Govt", then in recent decades religion, taxation, govt regulations, and Constitution. Some extremists formed militias, adding a show of power and super-patriotism. Paranoia was paramount to all this ideology

While ideas such as these garnered 1% of the national vote in 1980 for presidential Libertarian candidate David Koch (of Koch Brothers recent fame, and son of Fred Koch, who helped found the hot bed of paranoia John Birch Society), these ideas became Republican mainstream ideas by 2012. Hefty donations by wealthy far right individuals helped set up groups to add a larger and larger voice to views that were once considered far out there.

People with these views can seem "just like you" when you interact socially with them, until they tell me that the govt is tracking me via my new sofa, or they suddenly lean over and whisper to me, "Hey, I'm a KKK member, and I can get you in." Heck, some with these views can even be picked to run as a VP.


reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


If this new government needs a religious outreach, to align itself with a block of voters ala GOP, they should look no further than Pope Michael of Kansas.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 


What an uninformed partisan you are.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shoonra
This group has been playing make-believe govt for about ten years now. It's like one of those lodge-type clubs you would see in old-time comedies -- everybody going around with a flashy title, addressing each other in this ceremonial way, making bombastic speeches about the immense things they were going to do and how the tiniest thing they had accomplished was somehow the first step to something world-changing.


How is this different from our actual government? It all sounds strangely familiar.









edit on 17-7-2012 by bphi1908 because: (no reason given)


edit on 17-7-2012 by bphi1908 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


The fact that she wants to eliminate the DOE is suspect. What a brilliant idea! Then we can send all of our kids back to work on the farms at a tender young age!

Yes, let's go 235 years back in time.

Crazy libertarians.



They want to eliminate the FEDERAL DoE and put it back in the hands of the states.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join