Well Obama got the nobel peace prize.

[24valvenotak]

zbrown;291595 wrote:
Does anyone actually filter through an entire copy/paste chuck post??

more often then not they are more satisfying then the ever present, "obama is black so he must be terrible" posts....

[thrash]

holy crap. this turned into tl;dr WAY more than usual

PSiedTSi;291521 wrote:
I heard this question posed while listening to Vince Flynn on the radio today: What is the best way for an American to be heard and help to make a change? I think a lot of us realize something needs to be done, but we just sit and spin our wheels not really knowing how to actually initiate/help the change that is necessary. Our **one **vote every 2 years isn't really enough to make a change. How does one actually start that revolution? We can sit here and debate all day long about whos right and whos wrong, but really it doesn't matter if none of us do anything about it...

I don't know. I can tell you what I've been doing:

• trying to engage with people to talk about what our government used to be and what it is, and about the proper role and function of governance.

• emailing & calling dorgan, conrad, and pomeroy about federal issues that they can impact [I see now that Dorgan is a co-sponsor of SB 604. He wasn't when I emailed him about it a while back asking him to do such.]

• emailing my state reps (district 21) about stuff relevant to ND. Only senator Nelson has ever gotten back to me. Jasper Schneider has never answered any question from me or my neighbor. Zaiser lives 1 block from me and has enver answered an email.

• learning that my state reps aren't very responsive, and may be politically vulnerable.
  i've done a trivial amount of finance research. The ND state legislature is divided up into districts of about 14,000 people, and in D21 where i live [downtown fargo], the two winning reps raised about $5k and $20k, respectivley, of campaign funds. That's plausible money right there. I tried to talk a friend into running but his wife talked him out of it

As an aside, D21 votes democrat across the board at a 2:1 ratio. Jasper just got a federal job so I am not sure what's actually happening to his seat.

Changing gears a bit, i've also been:

• buying guns, and trying to learn how to use them
• convincing my friends to buy guns [3 new gun-owners in the last year!]

Apart from trying to engage with people about ideology or issues, i think there are a few more passive things that may count for something. Sometimes just being a "one" in a big bag of things that get counted is useful. I went to the Fargo tea party thing a while back and it was pretty... not worthwhile. But I think that for the benefit of those attending, and for those who were driving by, be they for, against, or just curious about what was going on... having a larger turnout was better than having a small turn out. So i went to that event not figuring there'd be any goal, point, or real value in doing so, but in retrospect, not going would have guaranteed a lack of value, and not going would have said "i'm not serious enough about this to even walk a few blocks and stand for an hour".

So i think being counted is important at other times and in other situations.. not just on voting day.

Another "be counted" thing has to do with certain types of firearms paperwork that citizens can undertake. Your 4447s are allegedly destroyed after the check comes back, but i figure uncle sam will "forget to forget" sometimes. I chatted with the local ATF office last week and got some paperwork from them for a type 3 FFL. And of course there are some nice ID cards you can get from a variety of states that have a reasonably thorough documentation requirement and restore some of your basic self-defense rights [and responsibilities]. There are a lot of government entities that see that paperwork and hold on to it.

The bad side of this kind of thing is of course: suppose somebody somewhere decides to start going after gun owners. They're going to know my name, address, etc. They've got all that on file.

But suppose enough people get "on file". Then when some dopey politician says "Ok, i want you to round up all of the wierdos with carry permits", imagine that the local sherriff says "that's over 30,000 people, there's no way we can do it". -- That's a good thing. I have no fantasies about me coming out alive in any scenario where any government entity decides it has a beef with me. They'll win. So the strategy here is to make the initiation of force or action against me seem... expensive to the entity seeking to undertake it. Not because I'm so awesome or antying like that.. but because there would be so many people like me that they'd have to go after.

Alot of our most insidious violations of the constituion start with drumming up popular support for something. Almost everyone can agree that it's ok to stick it to 1% of the population - on just about anything. Taxes and CEO pay arguments tend to bear this out. So the goal is to make sure that people who are armed and have a "there may be circumstances where i shoot back" mentality are too numerous for the government to feel comfortable starting anything with.

So the short version is: I haven't really done shit.

The best hope we have is to get a new breed of candidate in peoples faces at all levels of public office. You're correct that voting every few years for the same old bozos isn't going to fix anything. "We", the freedom oriented, first need to decide what we mostly agree on and what we can mostly look past where we disagree, and then "we" need to develop a deep pipeline of people that we'd be willing to vote for for things like mayor, or city council person, or state legislator, on up the hierarchy. And then those people need to start figuring out how to campaign and win elections. We need to find them, promote them, support them financially, and help them get elected. And then we need to hold them accountable with twice the ferocity we subject the current guys to.

The paradox of this is that its hard to go from being "some dude" into the running for "president", and so the normal path is that people start in local politics, figure some things out, and work their way up. But the paradox is that most people don't know or care about local politics as compared to higher level politics. The problems they want to fix are problems at a high level, but to get their start, they need to enter at the bottom. It wouldn't make any sense for me to run for mayor because I think Fargo is run pretty well. What would my platform be? And could I be honest with myself and voters if i were to say "Not really interested in you or this job, but i need to do my residency before I get a real job"? That's shortchanging everyone.

I guess developing good people and getting them elected is really the only thing we can "do". That's the "within the system" approach, and that's what groups like CampaignForLiberty are trying to focus on.

The outside-the-system approach... the one where nobody thinks we can just vote the crooks out of office.. isn't one where any of us really have a say in how it happens or what it looks like. It's awful to contemplate, and easy to be naive about. I can buy a bunch of instruments of death, and hopefully some day understand how to use them proficiently, but that's less than 1% of the problem. For a revolution to be effective, you actually need to have won the mindshare of the majority of the people. Everytime you get some compound of extremists that are really upset at the feds and want to be left alone, the feds swoop in, murder the shit out of all of them, and then own the public opinion afterwards about how they were religious nutcases, or child abusers, or whatever. They are *always *marginalized and so it doesn't matter in the public eye that they were killed in cold blood by a government who's only job is supposed to be protecting their life and liberty.

The point is that you need to build the mindshare and support of most people whether you solve this problem with the ballot box or the ammo box.

Robert Heinlein [the author that wrote "Starship Troopers"] wrote a sci-fi book called "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress", which goes into great detail about how the residents of the Moon plot, conspire, and ultimately overthrow the autocratic government on the moon (which is beholden to planet Earth) and fight Earth for their independence. The first half of the book talks about some of the social engineering and propaganda they do, how to build networks of conspirators that can survive spies and leaks, how they shaped public opinion of their insurgency, and how they ultimately win their independence. It's a fun and accessible book that gets you thinking.

Interesting link, for guys that served or know someone who does:
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/about/

[Trafik Jamz]

zbrown;291595 wrote:
Does anyone actually filter through an entire copy/paste chuck post??

Find a single copy/paste in that last post, $5 says you can't.

[zbrown]

24valvenotak;291598 wrote:
more often then not they are more satisfying then the ever present, "obama is black so he must be terrible" posts....

The obama threads have gotten old.... I obviously don't agree with his policy, and his mixed race is irrelevant.

These threads are pointless because anyone who likes politics and is active in the thread is never going to persuade someone of a contrasting view...... and the ones who could care less about politics are not even reading the thread so...

Trafik Jamz;291610 wrote:
Find a single copy/paste in that last post, $5 says you can't.

Did i say anything about the last post??

[DaveH]

zbrown;291613 wrote:
These threads are pointless because

I usually find these threads interesting. I like to try to figure out the thought process of the left leaning folks. I haven't figured it out yet, but maybe someday....

:icon_geek:

[Grr]

thrash;291607 wrote:
So the short version is: I haven't really done shit.

I can tell you a couple things i did just this week

called and/or sent out emails to senators/congressman and district reps. A total of 33 in all

Had 2 approx 20 min discussions with a group of 5 people discussing fundamental points of the constitution and explaining to them how it is being usurped.

Myself donated an undisclosed amount to Michelle Bachmann, and garnered another $260 from other people as well. If you do not know Pelosi has her as her #1 enemy to defeat in the next elections and are raising a large amount of money. Im not particularly worried about her losing as she is, in my opinion the closest thing to a perfect politician i have ever encountered. I had a discussion with her one day in St Cloud when i ran into her for almost 20 min, and i have to say i will do anything i can to make sure she remains in office, either the current one or one much higher.

It isnt that difficult to get this stuff done but i put in a couple 14hr days this week and didnt even realize i had done anything till you posted that

[Trafik Jamz]

zbrown;291613 wrote:
These threads are pointless because anyone who likes politics and is active in the thread is never going to persuade someone of a contrasting view...... and the ones who could care less about politics are not even reading the thread so...

Did i say anything about the last post??

Actually I've probably moved more to the right because of thrash and I engage in these because (like Dave said) I like to see what the other side is thinking and why. Sometimes I present the leftist side of an argument, even though my gut tells me I'm more center/right on it, just to get another perspective.

Unfortunately, for every post of thrash's pushing me further right, I get redneck racists claiming they are conservatives calling for harm/death to the president...if not calling for it outright, saying they would be extremely happy if it did happen, and that pushes me back to the left because I really don't want to be associated with people of that mindset.

You guys seem to be all bent about Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize because of his ideas, saying he hasn't done enough to warrant it, but I say that if that is the case, you have no right to call him a Nazi Socialist because he really hasn't done a whole lot to take away your civil liberties (the only socialist program that I've really seen PASS in congress was the takeover of GM via a very large loan...a bailout that began under Bush for those keeping track at home...along with TARP, also a Bush era plan).

Yes, the healthcare reform may end up with a socialist tinge to it (again, not in favor of a public option) and yes, there will be taxpayer money going into it, but its not like it is something new/unique to Obama. The fed has poured in BILLIONS of dollars every year for healthcare for many years...in fact our gov't pays more per capita for healthcare than any other "socialized" medicine country. So to pin that squarely on Obama is a LOOOOOOOONG stretch, and if I'm not mistaken, the bill that is currently in the Senate would decrease the amount of spending by the Fed instead of increase it.

**Short version of what I wrote: Obama was neither deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize nor the label as a Nazi...because both are based on possible ideas/goals, and not necessarily in reality.

**As for the copy/paste, I've said it before and I'll say it again, if/when I copy paste, I try and give credit where it is due. Do I forget on occasion? Yes. Sorry for not being perfect.

[MisterCMK]

Trafik Jamz;291610 wrote:
Find a single copy/paste in that last post, $5 says you can't.

That's a first...

[zbrown]

DaveH;291622 wrote:
I usually find these threads interesting. I like to try to figure out the thought process of the left leaning folks. I haven't figured it out yet, but maybe someday....

:icon_geek:

Good luck, the way i figure it will take more than just one lifetime

[thrash]

Trafik Jamz;291629 wrote:
Unfortunately, for every post of thrash's pushing me further right, I get redneck racists claiming they are conservatives calling for harm/death to the president...if not calling for it outright, saying they would be extremely happy if it did happen, and that pushes me back to the left because I really don't want to be associated with people of that mindset.

Rather than being pushed "right", think of me trying to push you up! Maximum economic freedom, maximum social freedom. Yeah baby!
http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html

I think it's weird to let an argument against a guy's policies or ideology made by one person be diminished by an argument against a guy staying alive [because of his skin color!] made by a different person.

Something that people tried to make a big deal out of during the 08 primaries was how Stormfront and all these other white power groups loooooved Ron Paul, and some people were adamant that Ron Paul should return their money, refuse to talk with Stormfront, etc. And my take on all that stuff was always that groups who are marginalized by society are ALWAYS going to be drawn to the candidate that says "I will leave you alone".

But the more relevant point is that Paul was always clear that his ideology and voting record weren't going to actually help these guys acheive any of their goals, and that nobody else has ever bought him off politically, so what's the harm in taking money from a hate group and then spending it on non-hateful ends?

There are people who don't want to frustrate people the way I do by writing e-novels in every single post, but are still pissed off and frustrated but either not dedicated enough or not articulate enough to say anything other than what they're saying. And certainly there is the troll-bonus-modifier for some of these people. I'm not automatically a friend of anyone who is anti-Obama, and the rude awakening that most of these fair-weather-freedom-lover republicans are in for is that none of the RP supporters are going to give them the time of day because they fucked it up for everyone last time they had power.

So there may be people that nod their head about libertarian or pro-freedom talking points because they like anything that is anti-Obama, but that's obviously not what I'm about or what I'm suggesting you [or anyone else] should be about.

And i spend at least 10x the effort [and words] away from FS.com convicing conservatives that they got it wrong and that they need to join the libertarian badnwagon. And it's really hard to crack those nuts because generally, I agree with their social preferences and they get economics mostly right, but I need them to understand that the problem is the system, and not who happens to be in power at the time.

You guys seem to be all bent about Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize because of his ideas, saying he hasn't done enough to warrant it, but I say that if

Well, Alfred Nobel's description of who is qualified to win the prize specifically says "has done", as in actions, past tense. So Obama doesn't really meet that bar, does he?

that is the case, you have no right to call him a Nazi Socialist because he really

as far as not calling Obama "names".. Hitler was a Nazi when he was sitting in jail. His ideology was the same before and after he had power.

I've tried to make clear on many occasions that Obama's ideology is the problem, and a man with that agenda -- even if he doesn't get 1% of it -- has no business having a job who's responsibilities include "uphold and defend the constitution". He hates that thing.

So Obama the ideologue is absolutely a socialist democrat, in the european sense, and it's fair game to bandy about words like "facist", "nazi", etc, because he doesn't really seem to grasp limited government power [but he's following a lineage of great teachers in that regard, right?]. He's done things that GWB never tried [like up-ending contract law and bankruptcy law to pay back political supporters [the UAW]].

Obama *the politician *is turning out to be no better than GWB in terms of giving us back lost liberties. And his agenda hasn't changed, although he's [thankfully] hitting some road blocks on making it happen.

[Trafik Jamz]

thrash;291671 wrote:
I think it's weird to let an argument against a guy's policies or ideology made by one person be diminished by an argument against a guy staying alive [because of his skin color!] made by a different person.

The thing is, I hear that Obama should be shot from 95% of the "conservatives/republicans" (their definition, not mine) that I speak with (and trust me, I knock on a lot of doors in a given week and talk insurance)...and they say it has nothing to do with skin color, and I believe them on that, but I also feel that given the chance they would applaud the assassination of Obama. That is a group that I have a hard time ever associating myself with. Libertarians are a completely different group (in my mind) than what most are considering conservative, even though they meet that definition better than (current) republicans do.

Something that people tried to make a big deal out of during the 08 primaries was how Stormfront and all these other white power groups loooooved Ron Paul, and some people were adamant that Ron Paul should return their money, refuse to talk with Stormfront, etc. And my take on all that stuff was always that groups who are marginalized by society are ALWAYS going to be drawn to the candidate that says "I will leave you alone".

But the more relevant point is that Paul was always clear that his ideology and voting record weren't going to actually help these guys acheive any of their goals, and that nobody else has ever bought him off politically, so what's the harm in taking money from a hate group and then spending it on non-hateful ends?

I understand your point, but what if it were Taliban/Al-Qaeda money (coming from a source in the US) that were going to him? Would you still suggest that he just spend it, or would you suggest he return it? I just want to know where the line in the sand is that you don't cross.

There are people who don't want to frustrate people the way I do by writing e-novels in every single post, but are still pissed off and frustrated but either not dedicated enough or not articulate enough to say anything other than what they're saying. And certainly there is the troll-bonus-modifier for some of these people. I'm not automatically a friend of anyone who is anti-Obama, and the rude awakening that most of these fair-weather-freedom-lover republicans are in for is that none of the RP supporters are going to give them the time of day because they fucked it up for everyone last time they had power.

I've always thought that your posts were well thought out and clearly spoken. I understand and respect your views, even if I don't agree with all of them. FWIW, I agree with most everything you just wrote. Just like I am not automatically a friend of a Democrat or hate all Conservatives.

So there may be people that nod their head about libertarian or pro-freedom talking points because they like anything that is anti-Obama, but that's obviously not what I'm about or what I'm suggesting you [or anyone else] should be about.

Agreed

And i spend at least 10x the effort [and words] away from FS.com convicing conservatives that they got it wrong and that they need to join the libertarian badnwagon. And it's really hard to crack those nuts because generally, I agree with their social preferences and they get economics mostly right, but I need them to understand that the problem is the system, and not who happens to be in power at the time.

Something we can both agree upon again. I'm fairly close to center on every "political compass" type test I take, usually just a little to the left and up toward libertarian (usually more up than left).

Well, Alfred Nobel's description of who is qualified to win the prize specifically says "has done", as in actions, past tense. So Obama doesn't really meet that bar, does he?

Excellent point, I did not/have not read the rules for the Nobel Prize, because I've never really put any credibility into it.

as far as not calling Obama "names".. Hitler was a Nazi when he was sitting in jail. His ideology was the same before and after he had power.

Another good point. I still don't think he is a Nazi, he is definitely a social democrat, but I really don't see him as a full blown nazi/communist....even with the advent of the healthcare reform being proposed.

I've tried to make clear on many occasions that Obama's ideology is the problem, and a man with that agenda -- even if he doesn't get 1% of it -- has no business having a job who's responsibilities include "uphold and defend the constitution". He hates that thing.

I disagree. I don't think he hates it, I think he sees it as a document that needs to be flexible enough to change with the times. Or he sees it as a document that is subject to interpretation.

So Obama the ideologue is absolutely a socialist democrat, in the european sense, and it's fair game to bandy about words like "facist", "nazi", etc, because he doesn't really seem to grasp limited government power [but he's following a lineage of great teachers in that regard, right?]. He's done things that GWB never tried [like up-ending contract law and bankruptcy law to pay back political supporters [the UAW]].

I'll admit, I listen to a LOT of talk radio and most of it left-wing.... Most of the UAW callers that called in or were guests of the hosts were bitching that he catered to the car manufacturers (big business) and left the little guy (UAW worker) hanging. I tend to agree with you however that it did seem like a political payback. This is something that took me some time to fully realize.

Obama *the politician *is turning out to be no better than GWB in terms of giving us back lost liberties. And his agenda hasn't changed, although he's [thankfully] hitting some road blocks on making it happen.

I agree with you here. While I don't think he has taken many of our liberties, he certainly hasn't restored any either (patriot act for example).

[Trafik Jamz]

thrash;291671 wrote:
Rather than being pushed "right", think of me trying to push you up! Maximum economic freedom, maximum social freedom. Yeah baby!
http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html

Not bad for being a pinko-commie-liberal-bastard

[DaveH]

[funky_monkey58]

[integra_gsr98]

[Grr]

responses in bold

Trafik Jamz;291696 wrote:
The thing is, I hear that Obama should be shot from 95% of the "conservatives/republicans" (their definition, not mine) that I speak with (and trust me, I knock on a lot of doors in a given week and talk insurance)...and they say it has nothing to do with skin color, and I believe them on that, but I also feel that given the chance they would applaud the assassination of Obama. That is a group that I have a hard time ever associating myself with. Libertarians are a completely different group (in my mind) than what most are considering conservative, even though they meet that definition better than (current) republicans do.

people like that are pathetic, even if i would say most of them are just saying it for effect and honestly dont think that

I understand your point, but what if it were Taliban/Al-Qaeda money (coming from a source in the US) that were going to him? Would you still suggest that he just spend it, or would you suggest he return it? I just want to know where the line in the sand is that you don't cross.

All the better! The more money you can get from any source, good or evil that is used solely for good cannot theoretically described as a bad thing in my opinion.

I've always thought that your posts were well thought out and clearly spoken. I understand and respect your views, even if I don't agree with all of them. FWIW, I agree with most everything you just wrote. Just like I am not automatically a friend of a Democrat or hate all Conservatives.

Agreed

Something we can both agree upon again. I'm fairly close to center on every "political compass" type test I take, usually just a little to the left and up toward libertarian (usually more up than left).

Excellent point, I did not/have not read the rules for the Nobel Prize, because I've never really put any credibility into it.

Cause once the PLO and carter got it, any shred of credibility was gone. Also it was outed today that only one judge actually wanted obama to get it and basically bribed the rest on how great it would be, what a disgrace

Another good point. I still don't think he is a Nazi, he is definitely a social democrat, but I really don't see him as a full blown nazi/communist....even with the advent of the healthcare reform being proposed.

Nazi=national socialist. Obama is a socialist at heart, and is a big fan of nationalization policies. Thus-national socialist or Nazi. Just cause your a nazi doesnt mean you are a genocide loving raving maniac, just that your the definition of Nazi

I disagree. I don't think he hates it, I think he sees it as a document that needs to be flexible enough to change with the times. Or he sees it as a document that is subject to interpretation.

Obama has CLEARLY stated that he sees it as a charter of NEGATIVE rights, and thus nothing more than a burden to the creation of big, socialistic government. If that isnt the definition then i dont know what is

I'll admit, I listen to a LOT of talk radio and most of it left-wing.... Most of the UAW callers that called in or were guests of the hosts were bitching that he catered to the car manufacturers (big business) and left the little guy (UAW worker) hanging. I tend to agree with you however that it did seem like a political payback. This is something that took me some time to fully realize.

HA, this made me LOL. The UAW is anti-little guy, not GM. You do realize why the UAW is backing this national healthcare so hard right? They just got billions of dollars to cover current and legacy health programs for its members. if socialized medicine is enacted you know damn well they will kick the workers on to that and pocket all of that money right? GM would like its original contracts honored, bankruptcy law honored and to get rid of the UAW as fast as it could, they are just so overpowered by them they no longer have a choice.
summary of that is GM= good, UAW=the devil

I agree with you here. While I don't think he has taken many of our liberties, he certainly hasn't restored any either (patriot act for example).

Agreed, and its gonna be hell or high water before they are restored. As reagan said "The closest thing to immortality is the creation of a government program"

[Grr]

no response in 4 days?

[Trafik Jamz]

Didn't know I needed to respond or that you were looking for a response.

I don't disagree that the UAW is out of control, but I don't blame them for people not buying GM vehicles like they used to. GM is priced lower than Toyota on many areas, but Toyota still outsold them.

Obama has CLEARLY stated that he sees it as a charter of NEGATIVE rights, and thus nothing more than a burden to the creation of big, socialistic government. If that isnt the definition then i dont know what is

When/where has that been stated? I know he is fairly anti-gun...especially on a state level, on a federal level I haven't seen that. I guess I'm just asking for a source....maybe this will be the thing that tips me away from him entirely (I'll admit I'm teetering...) but in doing the google search that CMK/Parker seem to think that I am the grand master of I really couldn't find anything that points to it. Maybe I need to search youtube, but I'm hoping you can help me out and post a link?

[Grr]

easy as hell to find, welcome to the right side chuck
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFf7DU9ywQ4[/ame]

[Grr]

since im going to bed now and i saw nick in here, ill just post this for your enjoyment
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCHtw6WbbnM[/ame]