Saving America

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Violence was necessary to create it, Drake. But what purpose would it serve to shed blood? It would defile our image as a nation and project to the rest of the world that we are not interested in diplomacy or listening to our citizens, but bloodshed. Why must everything and everyone resort to violence to solve a problem?

Because violence may become the only answer to a broken system.

Nonsense.

The ‘system’ isn’t ‘broken,’ the fact that gay Americans are soon to realize their comprehensive civil liberties is proof of that.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How many of you out there believe that violence may be necessary to protect the Constitution? Or that the government is illegitimate for defiling the Constitution like it has. That war/revolt/armed civil disobedience may be required to salvage America?

I believe that you believe what you say. I also believe that we have a body bag with your name on it. Sleep tight.

Are you suggesting the US will kill me in my sleep? I am
A. a light sleeper.
B. living in a suburban area with somewhat densely packed houses, you can't drone me.
C. sleep with several large knives scattered around my room I could easily find in a hurry in the dark.
D. have thought of that before and have planned ways to fight off and kill several personnel should they try to kill me. Short of six guys plus, I think I could take them.

Seek mental health treatment.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Violence was necessary to create it, Drake. But what purpose would it serve to shed blood? It would defile our image as a nation and project to the rest of the world that we are not interested in diplomacy or listening to our citizens, but bloodshed. Why must everything and everyone resort to violence to solve a problem?

Because violence may become the only answer to a broken system.

Nonsense.

The ‘system’ isn’t ‘broken,’ the fact that gay Americans are soon to realize their comprehensive civil liberties is proof of that.

That's why he thinks it's broken. People he doesn't like keep getting rights like his.

 

[Nutz]

Because violence may become the only answer to a broken system.

Nonsense.

The ‘system’ isn’t ‘broken,’ the fact that gay Americans are soon to realize their comprehensive civil liberties is proof of that.

That's why he thinks it's broken. People he doesn't like keep getting rights like his.

What rights does he have that you don't?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nonsense.

The ‘system’ isn’t ‘broken,’ the fact that gay Americans are soon to realize their comprehensive civil liberties is proof of that.

That's why he thinks it's broken. People he doesn't like keep getting rights like his.

What rights does he have that you don't?

We have the same rights. It's granting equal rights to gays we are discussing. Got it?

 

[Nutz]

That's why he thinks it's broken. People he doesn't like keep getting rights like his.

What rights does he have that you don't?

We have the same rights. It's granting equal rights to gays we are discussing. Got it?

I thought this thread was about having no crackheads in IN and bringing a knife to a gunfight. Sheesh, everything is about gay with you people?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

What rights does he have that you don't?

We have the same rights. It's granting equal rights to gays we are discussing. Got it?

I thought this thread was about having no crackheads in IN and bringing a knife to a gunfight. Sheesh, everything is about gay with you people?

You people? By that you mean Americans willing to give other Americans equal rights? That's who you are chatting with.

 

[Nutz]

We have the same rights. It's granting equal rights to gays we are discussing. Got it?

I thought this thread was about having no crackheads in IN and bringing a knife to a gunfight. Sheesh, everything is about gay with you people?

You people? By that you mean Americans willing to give other Americans equal rights? That's who you are chatting with.

LOL, again, you are making sure you are not confused as being gay. LOL...you people meaning God hating, junk science loving justifiers of poor life choices and the gay lifestyle.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I thought this thread was about having no crackheads in IN and bringing a knife to a gunfight. Sheesh, everything is about gay with you people?

You people? By that you mean Americans willing to give other Americans equal rights? That's who you are chatting with.

LOL, again, you are making sure you are not confused as being gay. LOL...you people meaning God hating, junk science loving justifiers of poor life choices and the gay lifestyle.

The junk science is your side. The junk thinking as well.

And people call me gay all day long here. I couldn't care less.

 

[racewright]

You people? By that you mean Americans willing to give other Americans equal rights? That's who you are chatting with.

LOL, again, you are making sure you are not confused as being gay. LOL...you people meaning God hating, junk science loving justifiers of poor life choices and the gay lifestyle.

The junk science is your side. The junk thinking as well.

And people call me gay all day long here. I couldn't care less.

People the gay issue is a small issue in the grand scheme of what is being done to this country . Using this foolishness as a distraction for addressing the important things is and always will be another extreme leftist mantra.

The following is of more importance as it is the goal of all Leftist--they hate America and even if they get all they want they will still hate America, some hate just to hate.

Barak Obama followed the philosophies of these 'role models' throughout his days as a Community Organizer for ACORN, using tactics that appeared to some as 'shaking down' businesses in exchange for not branding them 'hate groups.'

And apparently Obama is still following those radical rules today.

How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky:

There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state.

The first is the most important.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people

2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Now, think ...

Does any of this sound like what is happening to the United States?



Origins: Saul Alinsky was the Chicago-born archaeology major who, in the midst of the Great Depression, dropped out of graduate school and became involved first with the labor movement and then with community organizing. It was in the latter field that he made his mark, working from the late 1930s through the early 1970s as a community organizer — first in poor areas of Chicago, and later in various cities across the U.S. — seeking (often through unconventional means) to "turn scattered, voiceless discontent into a united protest." Along the way he authored the books Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals to provide "counsel to young radicals on how to effect constructive social change," the latter of which opened with the following explanation of its purpose:
What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.
Critics of President Barack Obama (who also worked as a community organizer in Chicago prior to embarking on his political career) have often linked his name with that of Saul Alinsky, sometimes in ways that suggest the two men knew each other and/or worked together. However, they never met: Alinsky died of a heart attack in 1972, when Barack









Obama was but a ten-year-old child living in Hawaii. (Another prominent Democrat, former senator and secretary of state Hillary Clinton, did write her senior thesis on the topic of "An Analysis of the Alinsky Model" while she was a student at Wellesley College in 1969.)

The above-quoted list of steps for "How to create a social state," circulated in January 2014, is another example of a political linking of the names of Saul Alinsky and Barack Obama. It's not something taken from the actual writings of Saul Alinsky, though, and to those familiar with his background it doesn't even sound like something he would have written (e.g., the line about "controlling health care" is anachronistic for his era, and the idea of "increasing the poverty level as high as possible" is the very antithesis of what Alinsky worked to achieve). This piece is simply a modern variant of the decades-old, apocryphal Communist Rules for Revolution piece which was originally passed along without attribution until Alinsky's name became attached to it (presumably because someone out there thought it sounded like something Alinsky might have written).

The closest analog (in form, if not in content) to the above-reproduced list of "How to create a social state" to be found in the writings of Saul Alinsky is the following list of "power tactics" Alinsky outlined in his 1971 book Rules for Radicals:


Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people. When an action is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

The fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You

Read more at snopes.com: Saul Alinsky: How to Create a Social State

 

[Nutz]

The first is the most important.

1) Healthcare — Control healthcare and you control the people

2) Poverty — Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

3) Debt — Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

4) Gun Control — Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

5) Welfare — Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income).

6) Education — Take control of what people read and listen to — take control of what children learn in school.

7) Religion — Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools.

8) Class Warfare — Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Now, think ...

Does any of this sound like what is happening to the United States?

You know, I am conservative but these arguments are nonsense and don't reflect reality and are devoid of truth.

1. Healthcare...Mitt Romney and MA. The Republican health care plan (yes there is one). DOes that mean Romney and the GOP are trying to create a social state?

2. Poverty...how is Obama purposely increasingly the poverty level...how has he increased poverty any more than any other President. Do we blame Obama for the recession?

3. Debt, I guess Bill Clinton was our savior. How much debt did Iraq and Afghanistan cause?

4. What gun law has been passed under Obama
National Firearms Act (1934)
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (1968)
Gun Control Act of 1968 (1968)
Firearm Owners Protection Act (1986)
Undetectable Firearms Act (1988)
Gun-Free School Zones Act (1990) (ruled unconstitutional as originally written; has been upheld repeatedly after minor edits were made by Congress)
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993)
Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994–2004) (expired)
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (2005)

5. Yeah...Ill give you this one.

6. Need examples...the most far reaching education act I know of was under Bush and No child left behind.

7. Im not aware of any actions by Obama to do this, but your right about the left.

8. Agreed.

2 out of 8. try again

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Read more at snopes.com: Saul Alinsky: How to Create a Social State

Interesting that you would include this link? You believe in telling the truth right? This is from that link:

Claim: List reproduces Saul Alinsky's rules for "How to Create a Social State."

FALSE

"The above-quoted list of steps for "How to create a social state," circulated in January 2014, is another example of a political linking of the names of Saul Alinsky and Barack Obama. It's not something taken from the actual writings of Saul Alinsky, though, and to those familiar with his background it doesn't even sound like something he would have written (e.g., the line about "controlling health care" is anachronistic for his era, and the idea of "increasing the poverty level as high as possible" is the very antithesis of what Alinsky worked to achieve). This piece is simply a modern variant of the decades-old, apocryphal Communist Rules for Revolution piece which was originally passed along without attribution until Alinsky's name became attached to it (presumably because someone out there thought it sounded like something Alinsky might have written)."
Read more at snopes.com: Saul Alinsky: How to Create a Social State

 

[Geaux4it]

How many of you out there believe that violence may be necessary to protect the Constitution? Or that the government is illegitimate for defiling the Constitution like it has. That war/revolt/armed civil disobedience may be required to salvage America?

You know the FBI and NSA read these forums, right?

And don't you know that using violence to change the political situation, when many peaceful options exist, is known as terrorism?

No its not. Its only terrorism when the left looks for a scary word to paint their opposition

-Geaux

 

[Mac1958]

.

This violence talk is the predictable result of the wild ravings a few on the hard right -- especially a handful on radio. I see more and more of it every day, people are getting angrier and angrier, saying stuff that borders on scary.

Regardless of the various ravings, this country has passed the tipping point and, within maybe 20 to 25 years will reside two or three steps to the left of modern day France. Anyone who opposes this is too late, the time for this debate passed a few years ago. The Left has been patient and incremental in its approach, and it's paying off.

Should be interesting to watch more dynamic global economies pass us by, as they experience and enjoy the rapidly improving standards of living that are already manifesting. And we'll settle in to the comfy mediocrity, living under a far more authoritarian central government, so attractive to many here.

.

 

[LoneLaugher]

How many of you out there believe that violence may be necessary to protect the Constitution? Or that the government is illegitimate for defiling the Constitution like it has. That war/revolt/armed civil disobedience may be required to salvage America?

I believe that you believe what you say. I also believe that we have a body bag with your name on it. Sleep tight.

Are you suggesting the US will kill me in my sleep? I am
A. a light sleeper.
B. living in a suburban area with somewhat densely packed houses, you can't drone me.
C. sleep with several large knives scattered around my room I could easily find in a hurry in the dark.
D. have thought of that before and have planned ways to fight off and kill several personnel should they try to kill me. Short of six guys plus, I think I could take them.

It is an Internet badass, folks. Proceed with caution.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Are you suggesting the US will kill me in my sleep? I am
A. a light sleeper.
B. living in a suburban area with somewhat densely packed houses, you can't drone me.
C. sleep with several large knives scattered around my room I could easily find in a hurry in the dark.
D. have thought of that before and have planned ways to fight off and kill several personnel should they try to kill me. Short of six guys plus, I think I could take them.

I'm not suggesting anything my little paranoid friend. The people who invented locking up the key and throwing away the room don't announce themselves. Should they need to advance your departure, you will never know that they arrived. Rest easy, you won't feel a thing.

Killing me in my sleep? Won't work. I also post under a pseudonym made of three people's pseudonyms who jointly use this account. If I were to disappear, my two comrades would know within a day or two. And because we have never communicated electronically, the government can't trace them (good luck tracing slips of paper written in code which were subsequently burnt). And after killing me or taking me or whatever, my fiancée would know too. Besides, my two comrades would recruit a new person into the inner circle to replace me as Roberts and would gladly make public the fact the gov't took me without a trial.

You have comrades? COOL!

 

[LoneLaugher]

This kind of physical threat should not be taken lightly.

Reported.

Maybe I should have said that the government has a body bag with his name on it? Feel better now?

And his plan is to take up arms against the U.S. government. To say that they are aware is not a threat, it's an understatement.

Original post edited to comfort Mojo2.

I'm sure you appreciate my desire to avoid the appearance of hypocrisy.

No. But I appreciated your lameness. Were you a hall monitor in middle school....or a crossing guard? Dooooooooooosh!

 

[FlourPower]

I refuse to put on an idiot's hat ...




ACH. Too late Ron.
(so you're here also, eh?)

 

[LoneLaugher]

America cannot be saved it is done. The only viable solution is to salvage part of it. Keep the flame of liberty alive long enough for better people to pick up the torch.

Sure thing. I believe you will be safe in the Aleutian Islands, where you can swim to true freedom in Russia if necessary.

I would much rather Russia restored liberty here.

Say what?

 

[Kosh]

As the far left continues to show the only way to save America is oust them out of power and never let them get this much power ever again.