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.

 

Still A Supporter Of ANY Political Party????? HOW??? WHY??? and OMG!!!!

page: 1
27
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+6 more 
posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 02:43 AM
link   
Dear person likely to open this rant, may I address you for a moment please?

Thank you.

I don't know what nationality you might be, or what country you may live in. Chances are that you're probably American as this is that season for us. But the message applies to, from what I can tell and have learned to this point in my life - every single political "body" in the world.

Why are you willingly engaging in your own downfall?

Is there an honest man left, in this world, worthy of the sort of blind, impassioned, dedication that we apply to our leaders and officials? I have yet to see one if one exists at all. They all seem to fall so very short of the mark.

As to partisan ideologies.


par·ti·san (pärt-zn)
n.
1. A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.
2. A member of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, especially within occupied territory; a guerrilla.

adj.
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of a partisan or partisans.
2. Devoted to or biased in support of a party, group, or cause:

par·ti·san 2 also par·ti·zan (pärt-zn)
n.
A weapon having a blade with lateral projections mounted on the end of a long shaft, used chiefly in the 16th and 17th centuries.

partisan1, partizan [ˌpɑːtɪˈzæn ˈpɑːtɪˌzæn]
n
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) an adherent or devotee of a cause, party, etc.
2. (Military)
a. a member of an armed resistance group within occupied territory, esp in Italy or the Balkans in World War II
b. (as modifier) partisan forces

adj
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) (Military) of, relating to, or characteristic of a partisan
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) relating to or excessively devoted to one party, faction, etc.; one-sided partisan control

[via French, from Old Italian partigiano, from parte faction, from Latin pars part]
partisanship , partizanship n


Source for definitions.

Cobble a bit of that together and you get this:

A fervent militant supporter or proponent of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, excessively devoted to one party, faction, etc.; one-sided partisan control.

The fact that it is also a synonym for a deadly lance or spear is not only ironic. It's fitting.

We are literally a world on fire. And rather than working together to assemble a "bucket brigade" or to chop down a fire line - we're standing in the flames arguing over who might have started the ruddy fire in the first place!

Amazing.

Got news kids. The guys who started the fire? They're all vacationing in the tropics, drinking in the sun and enjoying margaritas, without a care in the world, knowing that we're all busy kicking each other in the teeth as we burn.

Is there no way to stop this insanity? Truly? Are we really that vain that we're willing to let the world burn to ashes around us, simply for the chance we might get the opportunity say "told ya so"?

You do realize that you don't have to like me to pass me a bucket of water. Right? And that I need not like the net guy in line to, then, pass it to him. There must be some sort of Détente we can come to, just long enough to put out the flames, find the true perpetrators who began the blaze, subject them to prosecution and shame. And stick with it long enough to put the pieces of our civilization back together.

Once we've accomplished that? THEN we can get back to this business of wanting to kill one another over our semantic and philosophical differences.

Currently we all demand change - but we're going about it with all of the efficacy of the Three Stooges on a six day drunk.

At this point I'm not even preaching moderation or middle ground. I'm just saying, if we're going to engage in savage and impassioned hatred, lets use it on the obviously guilty folks first - and then get back to swinging our axes as those who we don't agree with.

I don't know if an NWO exists. If they do, I'm not one of them. But, if I was? I would sssooo be pointing and laughing at the rest of the population. This isn't just divide and conquer. It's divide, subdivide, subdivide again, then fragment and subdivide a few dozen more times, and watch it all.

Seriously..this is like cockfighting and I got news, friends and enemies alike - we aren't the ones watching and betting. We ARE the chickens.

~Heff
edit on 10/2/12 by Hefficide because: typos haunt me




posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 





Seriously..this is like cockfighting and I got news, friends and enemies alike - we aren't the ones watching and betting. We ARE the chickens.


Being as I know what happens to those roosters, that's not a very cheery image.....but you're correct.

Our country is so divided, not just the 2 political parties, but as a whole, we have become so dissected and distant from one another.

There are groups for this and groups for that, all bitching and moaning, never satisfied.

And I don't know if we can blame the internet or maybe the increase in these so-called reality shows that promote anger and hate simply for the ratings but it seems our society has turned extremely negative and mean spirited towards one another.

I hate to say this but seems like the last time our country came together and was unified as one, was on 9/11....



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
You sir are correct which is why I'm running for POTUS/Congress/Senate 2012. We have a system that can corrupt or overwhelm and one person.because it's one beast. If we can get one person into all seats up for reelection we could truly "clean house" . Why me? Check my posts more coming tonight.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Amazing. This: www.abovetopsecret.com... was listed right after yours in My ATS.

I truly am clueless how to fix this. I do not care for the parties but realize regardless of how we put people into office, the access to them is the issue. Their need/greed/whatever for money is a systemic weak point and I am not talking about a federal paycheck while they are in office.

We could right laws prohibiting that access and payoff but guess what? The schmucks who write those laws are the ones benefiting from the status quo. They ain't writing any laws like that anytime soon.

I guess beneficence does not pay well.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 

Exactly! They love for us to be divided and fighting over who spent what first and which party put us further in debt! And what party is better than the other and blahblah!

I hate when someone asks me if I'm a democrat or a republican!! I just look at them and say neither! I'm Natalie.

We can't be divided-if we want change then we need to be united!

Increase the peace!

Don't vote for the lesser of two evils!


edit on 2-10-2012 by natalia because: Wanted to



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Can you imagine what Congress would look like if we all just literally woke up one morning and said "Hey, we've agreed to set aside our differences just long enough to clean your house! After we've fixed your broken system, then we'll elect HONEST folks to come along and referee the disputes that we have between ourselves.

I wonder... can we make them so paranoid that they start showing up to work with bug-out bags?

~Heff



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Can you imagine what Congress would look like if we all just literally woke up one morning and said "Hey, we've agreed to set aside our differences just long enough to clean your house! After we've fixed your broken system, then we'll elect HONEST folks to come along and referee the disputes that we have between ourselves.

I wonder... can we make them so paranoid that they start showing up to work with bug-out bags?

~Heff


The above, is where it starts.

By refusing to vote for an incumbent, any incumbent of either party. No matter how much you like them, no matter what you think they have done for you, no matter that they have kept their promise in the one term (or more) they have been given, they need to go.

A message needs to be sent that the entire system is broken, and all parts need to be changed out for new. Sadly there will be a few people voted out that truly do not deserve to go, that have kept the public faith, but these are very few and far between. Besides, as Patriots, they will recognize the need for the public to send a strong message, and for the good of the country they will understand.

They need to go, along with the bad because we can be weak in our will, and unless we can agree to vote out all incumbents, regardless, we will begin to make concesssions based on who we like, "our guy" so to speak, and we will be right back in the mess we are in today. Once the House and Senate are cleared out, we put pressure on all the "freshman"to institute term limit laws. 2 full terms and they are out, just like the presidency.


I know this has been discussed many times, but in my mind, term limits is where the change happens.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
What's funny is half the laws that are used to polarize the constituents of both parties were never meant to be there in the first place.


The U.S. Constitution mentions three federal crimes by citizens: treason, piracy and counterfeiting. By the turn of the 20th century, the number of criminal statutes numbered in the dozens. Today, there are an estimated 4,500 crimes in federal statutes, according to a 2008 study by retired Louisiana State University law professor John Baker.

online.wsj.com...



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Can you imagine what Congress would look like if we all just literally woke up one morning and said "Hey, we've agreed to set aside our differences just long enough to clean your house! After we've fixed your broken system, then we'll elect HONEST folks to come along and referee the disputes that we have between ourselves.

I wonder... can we make them so paranoid that they start showing up to work with bug-out bags?

~Heff


That won't happen. The reason? Dems will threaten to take away the Cons guns. And the Cons will threaten to take away Dems abortion rights.

This is it. This is how it's done. It creates enemies and divides right across the country. If federal powers had no say it would be up to jurisdictions, which leads to, "one of those weirdos from the North/South/________/insert area." -People move depending on their beliefs and join like minded communities...

Okay so maybe not the best for understanding each other, but at least there can be a common respect. Let them control ever aspect of your lives through every state and now all of a suddenly people are drawing lines at their doorsteps.... Sometimes as close as the kitchen when relatives are over...
edit on 2-10-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


Heff, I hope you don't mind if I use some of our ideas to further educate some of my friend ad family. As nearly all of your posts, you're insightful and are a terrific writer.

I'm at work and on break so I have to keep this short, but I love reading your posts.

Take it easy.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


And, sometimes, once the presents have been opened, dinner has been served, and the coffee cups are growing cold - and those relatives begin to bicker... It's time to politely kick 'em out.

Hey House and Senate... how are those coffee cups feeling? Cold yet?


~Heff



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
No, there is not a single candidate or party I can fully endorse or agree with. This is why I will not be voting. I know that's unpopular and leads to claims of being derelict in my civic duty, or that I lose the right to complain. And yet, much to the chagrin - and with all due respect - of those who say these things, I feel I am exercising my civic duty, and I will continue to openly object to a system and governance with which I have deep ethical qualms.

Peace.
edit on 10/2/2012 by AceWombat04 because: Typos



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


In a democracy....where everyone that is a citizen has a right to vote...how can one person be chosen to represent the many differing masses fairly??? It can't...someone, somewhere, some group somewhere will be the minority and subject to the wills and desires of the masses. This is not independence...this is not liberty...this is mob rule...

The house, the senate, the this, the that...are merely symptoms of the overall problem...there are fundamental issues and contradictions of the governmental machine and its proclamations that are of a larger concern...

I'm not concerned with the house...the senate...the presidency...I'm concerned with the very nature of government...the nature of that beast implies the many over the few...or the few over the many...neither of which are capable of providing freedom, liberty, and justice for ALL...and to proclaim it is possible is an outright lie...

The peer pressure of being on the"right side" or the "majority" side is enough to get even the most principled man to forfeit his beliefs and adopt those that are fostered by peers...We sell ourselves and our ideals out on a daily basis just to feel "accepted"...The need for acceptance by human nature leaves everyone susceptible of brainwashing...not only by others also by themselves...

In the eyes of any government...freedom, liberty, and justice are very low on the priority list...in fact those principals are contradictory to the nature in which governments operate and gain power and maintain their relevance...governments are almost an extension of the human "ego" in the sense that they are always trying to prove their relevance and they often do this by creating a "save the day" illusions...these save the day illusions keep you indebted, dependent,, dis-empowered, and scared...and from that state of being...we make decisions to support and feed power into this "savior"....

I'm not worried about the intricacies of our government...I'm worried about the whole damn thing and why it exists in the first place...

People fear chaos and anarchy but I sometimes wonder if they would yield fewer crimes against humanity than governments...



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


This is an excellent rant on a subject that is at the heart of all of the worlds problems & here in Australia we have the same choices as you - idiot #1 or idiot #2 but the agenda moves forward regardless.

One thing that we as a global community can do, imo, is to genuinely start to "give" more than "take" and without the want for something in return. This is what I teach my kids and they are really good kids who understand they are much better off than many kids in the world - it starts with the kids. Only when we truly understand the value of this way of thinking will we pull back from from the brink and start to take back our God given right to live in peace and harmony - where governments exist for our betterment - and not the other way around

S&F mate


The following is sort of what I mean...........


reply to post by AceWombat04
 

Here you go mate.........try this on for size. Centred and 170 x 240 pixels so good to go (beautiful Avatar by the way - love it)



Peace back at ya

edit on 2-10-2012 by Sublimecraft because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Sublimecraft
 


Thank-you, my friend! Much appreciated. Apologies for the brevity of this post, but I couldn't not thank someone for assisting me. Peace.



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Not registered to any political affiliation and I have never voted in my life and never intend to.

*highfives heff*

alright where do i get my revolution uniform and firearm?
edit on 2-10-2012 by corvuscorrax because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide

Can you imagine what Congress would look like if we all just literally woke up one morning and said "Hey, we've agreed to set aside our differences just long enough to clean your house! After we've fixed your broken system, then we'll elect HONEST folks to come along and referee the disputes that we have between ourselves.

I wonder... can we make them so paranoid that they start showing up to work with bug-out bags?

~Heff


What we need to do is elect the "under dog" that is on the ballot, regardless of which party one is/isn't, and get some new people with fresh ideas.

Now that would get their attention if they all lost their seats to some unknown person.

But of course, we won't do that. We are too set in our ways, programmed to vote for a specific candidate.

Oh yeah, they need to set term limits too, IMO....



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I wanted to add this in my reply but I missed the edit window...



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AceWombat04
 


hey then give me a chance . write me in for POTUS/Congress/Senate . ask me anything . i am running for dictator so you should have the right to know it all.

Jeremiah for POTUS/Congress/Senate 2012 !



posted on Oct, 3 2012 @ 01:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


I watched a Youtube video Yesterday ( from my current point of view, currently day before yesterday, now, but I am an insomniac ) where a seemingly bright, and very well intentioned young man fell into a trap by trying to say that "government" was a world that, when broken down, meant "govern - to control, and ment (mental) thoughts."

Cute word play, and close to home. But the true birth of the word means "guidance or steerage ( in the nautical sense ).

What we have today, even in the west, is not a government in any sense of the world. We have moved from "guidance" to "control and forced reliance"

So, in that sense, I agree. But would happily support a return to something that had the spirit of the original concept of governance. A guiding hand - not a forceful one.

~Heff



new topics

top topics



 
27
<<   2 >>

log in

join