Obama's Second Bill of Rights is coming, page 14


Pages: <<  11    12    13    14    15  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 38 times


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 05:22 AM by Kram09
reply to post by seabag



Yes my first post was petty. Sorry about that.



Are you satisfied with the status quo in America? You’re probably a Canadian who just jumped in to make a few smart remarks and grab a little attention. Move along!


Canadian? Even though my location says England...? Yes move along! Because you don't want to hear other opinions do you!?

Anyway I can't honestly believe you are implying that Obama is like Stalin. That is a shocking level of ignorance.

If that's what you believe then I'm afraid I can't take anything you say seriously.

So why is FDR the bad guy then?


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 05:29 AM by Kram09
reply to post by seabag





Are you satisfied with the status quo in America?


No I am not.

But I don't believe replacing Obama as President will effectively change anything. Your politicians are essentially all the same.

Ever since 9/11 the United States has effectively been turned into an authoritarian police state. It's still continuing, but very incrementally. In a way that people don't properly notice or in which they believe it is actually for their own security.



reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 05:32 AM by Kram09
reply to post by seabag



Also have you ever read The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists ?

Just out of curiosity.

I'm currently reading it.


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 07:27 AM by timetothink
reply to post by Honor93



I had the same thought about the housing bubble.

It was engineered to lead to forclosures that were then sold of at half price or less.

It was a big scam.

Someone close to me lost their home that they owed 85,000 on and the bank sold it for 30,000......how does that work?


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 12:33 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to
post by nenothtu


well said and completely agree !!

it makes me wonder if the whole housing 'bubble' was manipulated for just that purpose ... to 'give' shelter to everyone, even the IL illegals who are obtaining driver licenses ... sure, give them the 'authority' to use our roads, (that we paid for) to earn a living that they aren't even responsible for ... just peachy.

i'm beginning to think there is more benefit in becoming an 'illegal'
after all, if they are going to lawfully practice our sovereign status ... maybe it's time to jump ahead in line ?


At one time I considered moving to Mexico, just so I could sneak back across the border and load up on freebies!


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 01:11 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by seabag
reply to
post by tothetenthpower



Obama isn't a socialist. If he was, then the healthcare package would have included a public option, which mind you was popular among voters at the time.


So because of the exclusion of the “public option” this entire OP is somehow discredited and Obama and his buddy Cass Sunstein have no socialist agenda now?

I think their actions and words speak louder than your opinions.


I believe Tenth is right there. Obama is not a Socialist, but he IS a Collectivist, of which Socialism is but a pale subset. Other Collectivist types include Communists, Fascists, and Corporatists. Collectivism itself is not a problem. The problems arise when collectivists monopolize control, and force their decisions on some one else, who may NOT be of the collectivist mindset. The centralization of control in collectivism is the real enemy. I don't care if collectivists set up their own cute little communes and dictate away to one another, so long as they leave me out of that loop. When you apply the concept to an entire nation, and collect and centralize the power in a single place or entity with no escape hatches for the citizens who just want to be left alone to thrive, you end up with something like the Soviet Union, Cuba, China... or the modern-day U.S.

WE THE PEOPLE are rapidly descending into the very same sort of system I spent my entire mis-spent youth fighting against. Now I'm old, and it appears the fighting never ends. No rest for the weary.

I don't care what sort of cute little label people employ to try and separate one variety collectivist from another, and thereby keep the constant arguing going. "He's a commie!" - "No he's not, because commies do this or that or the other, and he's not doing that!" It's all a sham, a charade, the intention of which is to keep people unbalanced and at each other's throats while the collectivists have their wicked way with us, laughing all the way down the halls of power because they've pulled the little blankets over everyone's eyes, keeping us from seeing the bigger picture, the main expanse of wool.


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 01:18 PM by Kram09
reply to post by nenothtu



Answer the question.

Why is Barack Obama like Jospeh Stalin one of the most paranoid mass murdering tyrants in history?

It's you who is spewing ignorance.

There are none of the things I mentioned.

You need to educate yourself seriously. Instead of spouting such utter irresponsible drivel.



reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 01:39 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Kram09
reply to
post by nenothtu



Answer the question.

Why is Barack Obama like Jospeh Stalin one of the most paranoid mass murdering tyrants in history?


He kills and imprisons at will. Ever heard of Anwar al-Awlkai? Or his son? They escaped the physical confines of the US, but not the Wrath of Obama for having done so. Do you seriously believe those two are alone in that, or somehow "special"?

Ever heard of Jose Padilla?

Ever heard of Bradley Manning?

Don't even try to tell me that the Soviets were somehow worse in intent. As I said before, you're only bickering over a matter of scale.


It's you who is spewing ignorance.





There are none of the things I mentioned.





You need to educate yourself seriously. Instead of spouting such utter irresponsible drivel.


I live in it. There is no better education than that. If you can't see it from overseas, then it's probably just a matter of being blinded by the glare of your own gilded cage. Do you know why people in third-world countries have such a radically different view of life on the ground there than what the developed countries see?

It's because they LIVE in it.

You're on the outside looking in - and apparently trying to see through the glare.


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 01:46 PM by Kram09
reply to post by nenothtu



Yes I know about them.

I know about the NDAA, the imprisonment of Bradey Manning, the persecution of whistle blowers, the ongoing drone strikes which are killing indiscriminately, the fact that the only person going to jail for the CIA torture of detainees is the man who exposed it etc etc.

I feel strongly about all those things, yet I still think it's grotesque for you to compare all that to Stalin and oppression in the Soviet Union.


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 02:07 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to
post by neo96




No person in this country owns the land their homes or business sits on thank that genious idea to SOCIALISTS as in property taxes after all the needs of the many outweigh the need of the few.


Yes they do own the land. Property tax has not one thing to do with Socialism. Socialism is worker ownership of the means of production, how does property tax have anything to do with that?


No, they don't "own" the land. Not in an objective sense. The main economic difference between the earliest system in America ("quitrents") and the current system ("taxes") is who collects your rent for the land you "own". Then it was private capitalists, now it's the socialist government. That seems to fall into the very definition of "socialism". If you think you "own" any land, just stop paying your taxes, your "rent" to the government, and see how long that "ownership" persists. The same goes for all of the buildings on that land, whether those buildings are factories or domiciles.

Here's another neat trick for an "owner" - just ignore zoning laws, and do what you want with the property you "own". If you "own" it, you can do that, right?

RIGHT?


reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 02:14 PM by nenothtu
reply to post by Kram09



There is no doubt it is grotesque, but it's not inaccurate. Sometimes, when we look at a thing, it takes the ugly shock of grotesqueness to see it in all it's glory, and for what it is. Just because it can get "more grotesque" does not mean it's non-existent in the present. It just means that things can get worse if left unchecked. My goal in life is to put it in check.

To do that, I have to see what IS, in order to determine what can BE.

I don't know if you've ever been grouse hunting, but in order to successfully hunt grouse - or even catch a fly with your bare hands - you don't aim for where it IS, right now, you aim for where it WILL BE when you intercept it.

What we have here is just a matter of scale, and trajectory.




edit on 2013/2/2 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 02:39 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to
post by seabag



Hmm never knew 41% or 10% of anything was ownership.
Stupid maths!


A single share constitutes "ownership", just not "sole ownership". Then again, ownership by a collective is not "sole ownership" either, is it?




edit on 2013/2/2 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 2-2-2013 @ 02:45 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by XPLodER
Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to
post by XPLodER


There is a difference between EQUALITY of Opportunity and Equality of Station in Life by taking from those that have and giving to them that have not ("taking from each according to his means and giving to him according to his needs").


i wonder what Jesus Christ (pbuh) would think about the distinction,

if jesus would wash the feet of the poor and break bread with them,
would he consider the rich being so well off and the poor so impoverished as "justice"?

as a matter of station?
as a matter of social class?
as a matter of opportunity?

did he say feed the poor (except any whom you deam lazy)>?

to build the largest middle class on earth and the most wealthy nation on earth there was a top tax rate of 70%

is this not the best way to allow for each to have the fruits of the success of the society?

after all capitalism can only survive when there is an affluent middle class.

what would Jesus do (pbuh)

xploder



He would save their souls and allow them the freedom to look after their own asses. There appears to be a difference between breaking bread with someone and keeping them up for the rest of their natural and unnatural lives.
Pages: <<  11    12    13    14    15  >>    ^^TOP^^



A Really Sad Picture That I Saw Today, Left Me Speechless
  Posted 12 days ago with 148 member flags
Fact Check: First Lady\'s False Fairy Tale of Struggle
  Posted 6 days ago with 81 member flags
Coal miners say they were forced to attend Romney event and donate
  Posted 14 days ago with 71 member flags
Stephen King\'s Message
  Posted 10 days ago with 71 member flags
Paul Ryan Exposes Elite Agenda, "Shut Up" Says Banker
  Posted 10 days ago with 40 member flags