Thread: The Coming Revolution

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28564

A voter revolution would usher in politicians who make sweeping and radical changes, including disposing of the unconstitutional Internal Revenue Service and replacing it with a "fair tax." These are leaders who genuinely commit to the America established by our Founders, drastically cut government waste, immediately stop pork-barrel spending, reject political perks and lobbyists, quit borrowing from other nations (such as China), cease imperialism and nation building, lessen the flow of so much government aid overseas, and bring back production and pride in American commerce, etc.

The way I see it, there are three major common-sense steps toward a voter revolution:

First, examine your representatives from the top down, and ask yourself: Do they represent the people? Do they stand by the Constitution? Do they reduce big government, taxes and our deficit? Are they working to protect our borders and sovereignty? Will they stand up to governmental status quo and gridlock? Do they have the type of character that can resist the temptations of political power and special interest groups?

Ophiolite's Second Law
Before you change the politicians you have to change the voters.

or just be changeable like 25% of us -like me

i voted for Kerry in 04 and dems in 06 for senate

now im totally sick of democrats, and yet i feel i consider my self a democrat

these damn politicians think they own us

Ophiolite's Third Law Before you change the voters you have to change yourself.

I'm confused... is this a Ron Paul post?

haha, anyways, they still promess and do whatever they like after. What ever they told you. Who ever they are.


What I find frustrating in North America is that contrary to Europe people do complain but don't do much. To busy?
Governements do screew you in the back and all you do is enjoy.



I'm not for such amount of demonstrations like there can be in Europe. But at least their governements are scared of the people. It's the other way around here.

they complain but wont run for congress and worship a few like ron paul and cythnia McKinney

usa is all into sports and techno crap and blogging

Originally Posted by timel

I'm not for such amount of demonstrations like there can be in Europe. But at least their governements are scared of the people. It's the other way around here.

In Europe many of us are aware that the government works for us. Why would you be scared of one of your employees? Far to much respect is accorded to senior politicians in America.

the gov is pretty helpful in usa at times and the people give a lot to food banks and shelters

do you hear of people starving in usa?

well Katrina was a disaster

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by timel

I'm not for such amount of demonstrations like there can be in Europe. But at least their governements are scared of the people. It's the other way around here.

In Europe many of us are aware that the government works for us. Why would you be scared of one of your employees? Far to much respect is accorded to senior politicians in America.

You have just as much discontent with government, desire for more socialism (nanny state) and fear the governments you do NOT prefer than we do and you know this...

Socialism is progressive, no matter how far you take it, others will want more. Those that tire of being restricted, at least today still have other places to go and are welcomed. Do you know how many people from Europe live in Florida today, simply because they have NO State income tax or from Canada or one of our States. Live in North Carolina, because doctors move there daily to avoid high insurance cost where tort reform is a reality or the many reason each individual considers important. I have heard some from Europe, even prefer working for American Company's...

Holmes; In appreciation for you respect, patriotism and loyalty to country, why on earth does any politician go through the process to serve. Look at Ms. Palin, a seemingly mild mannered, mother of five and having served years in lower level service...Now you would think she escaped from some mental institution just in time to run for VP, according to the loyal opposition.

Those that starved in N.O or died, did so because of flooding, failure to heed instruction and a then really messed up bunch of politicians. Katrina devastated Alabama and Mississippi where very, if any died and no one starved.

One more point Ophie;

Think you will find our system actually does permit several ways to fire an elected office holder, or certainly limit their influence while waiting an election. Might add we don't need to revolt...

Originally Posted by jackson33

Might add we don't need to revolt...

But you are missing out on all the fun. The warmth of group activity as you burn down some great public building. The sense of achievement as you bring an econony to its knees. (And you don't even have to be a banker.) The swish of the guillotine as it decpaitates another aristocrat.
You know it makes sense.

Ophiolite ***applauses!!*** Bravo Bravo !!

The "educated voter" is BS. Do not vote. It's a waste.

Originally Posted by Jorge1907

The "educated voter" is BS. Do not vote. It's a waste.

what do you mean by 'educated voter'?

lol Ophiolite.... lol indeed.

you guys do realise democracy only has a limited life-span though, right?

social change is required to avoid stagnation (read:corruption).

Originally Posted by jackson33

One more point Ophie;

Think you will find our system actually does permit several ways to fire an elected office holder, or certainly limit their influence while waiting an election. Might add we don't need to revolt...

So how come the Americans didn't use the several ways to fire an elected office holder and eliminate Bush and his wolf-pack when it was discovered they used devious and un-democratic voting methods in the 2nd election?

Why???

Is it because Americans have no scruples and they saw Bush and his administration as 'one of them'?
Because they are greedy and Bush and his administration made their eyes light up with dollar signs?
Or was it because Bush & his cronies was so successful in scaring the shit out of them with his successful terrorism propaganda that they felt they needed big bad Bush and his military might to hide behind?

Originally Posted by Absum!

Originally Posted by jackson33

One more point Ophie;

Think you will find our system actually does permit several ways to fire an elected office holder, or certainly limit their influence while waiting an election. Might add we don't need to revolt...

So how come the Americans didn't use the several ways to fire an elected office holder and eliminate Bush and his wolf-pack when it was discovered they used devious and un-democratic voting methods in the 2nd election?

Why???

Is it because Americans have no scruples and they saw Bush and his administration as 'one of them'?
Because they are greedy and Bush and his administration made their eyes light up with dollar signs?
Or was it because Bush & his cronies was so successful in scaring the shit out of them with his successful terrorism propaganda that they felt they needed big bad Bush and his military might to hide behind?

Your personal opinions of Bush, MAY be influence for reason other than his operation of the Executive Branch. You voted for or would have for Gore, or that you don't like the idea of freeing two societies or a benefit has been cut or you may simply not understand just what the Presidents duties are under the Constitution. I know longer make an effort to explain what his decision have been and as with any President, do not personally agree with all decision. It's going to be up to the historian's, some not yet born, to determine his value or lack of for the country.

An attack on the US mainland, by any self professed group of individuals however perceived is not a minor issue, or is the threat of additional attacks. We are told of about 20 such foiled attempts and as a society have no idea what has been prevented. In the protection of an economy, which every citizen is indulged in, is basically National Security and the duty of the Executive Branch to protect.

If your truly interested in 'Islamic Fundamentalism' or the movements that have led to OBL and the like of him...Please check out 'The Islamic Brotherhood', a formed and practicing organization (early 20th Century) to check Western Civilizations Culture, which was thought to be influencing Islamic Culture, such things as womens role in society, law based on human rights (not religious) and government free from any religious dictate.

Brackets on Bush world politics

You know Jackson33, I spent 4 years in Lebanon (no lebanese genes by the way)
G8 country spent huge amounts of money down there to reconstruct the country.

Most of this money went into corrupted politicians pockets. It remains for the whole a big mess down there.
Arabic country have there own way of doing things and they don't want to be bothered doing so. Why don't we leave them alone. First place, that's what we should have done long time ago, we wouldn't have arabic terrorist.


The thing is that they have oil and it comes with a slight package of resentfulness.
I don't know what history will say on Bush, probably that he allowed Americains to have oil at a cheaper price and allowed weaponery market to make good deals.

If you want to make Ideological changes; Work thru economy and trading and impose regulation in countrys that wish to get in, they will addapt.

But don't send an army and pretend it's for the sake of the people. What's the first thing US army did in Irak?
Secure oil facilities

I would be the last to argue, foreign aid in cash rarely gets to the intended or even where medical/food aid ends up (Troops/Supporting factions of the society). Even in the US, most grants issued by the Federal are spent on items never intended in the grant.

Islamic Governments for the most part are structured along with their laws on religious text and the power over people comes from the clergy, in any form of government (Dictatorship/Monarchy/Democratic). To the extend that their society agrees with this, I agree...leave them alone. However, under the pretense of their religion they are bound to influence the rest of the world and have done so through out history. Acceptance of other religions intolerable and for the most part human rights ignored. Women have no rights and only the males can become educated or voice opinions, then restricted to agreement of the State. There is no consistency, as that cleric determines right/wrong, not only in different States but many times in the same State.

As for Iraq, with no desire to go over this for the 1000th time; The US, Britain and other coalition were basically peace keepers, for the general area guarding no fly zones, under UN mandate and the UN had other mandates for Iraq and Saddam himself. Yes, oil was involved for the world's economy more so than the US and our obligations toward world nations a consideration. I'll disregard the mass killings in Iraq for opposition to the government, the laws under 'International law' that were broken or the human right factors, but I won't disregard history and what things can happen, when a very few people in one government left alone can cause on the rest of the world society. We did this once in RECENT history, when probably fewer than 100 individuals caused the death of up to 40 million people, disrupted every nation on the planet, destroyed the social structure of the world, which still suffers...

What historian's say of Bush, in the years to come is going to be as controversial in 100/200 years as it is today, no doubt in schools/books and society as that society changes itself. If we come through this, terrorism under any name is reduced to disgruntles with in some society and people no longer try to push religious beliefs on all humanity then he may get due credit.