What The Left Would Have Us Surrender?

[ZackB]

If I may, I would l would like to summarize PoliticalChic's post for the marxists that are unable to read and comprehend:
The leftists would like us to give up our freedom, liberty, property rights, and immediately surrender to an increasing authoritarian government.

Thank you.
Succinct is not one of my characteristics.

Uh, yeah it is. You are always succinct, or should I say "incomplete", in your assessments.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

You are another one who should take note.....if you ever want to be educated.


“Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Cross-posting from theNew Zeal blog

Why Did U.S. PresidentBarack Obamaorder a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress – as he is constitutionally obliged to do?

Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as “R2P,” shorthand for the world’s “Responsibility to Protect” civilians.

But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?

The United Nationsreported in July 2009;

The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing theResponsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries,including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first.If they don’t work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.

In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attacked militarily.

“Responsibility to Protect” means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state’s legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed “rogue” nation – does Israel spring to mind?

“Responsibility to Protect” – three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world."

http://keywiki.org/blog/?p=1928

 

[PoliticalChic]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

lIbya, syria, egypt, .........arab spring......where have you been?

The UN forced the US to go to war in those places?

Peruse post #42.

 

[ZackB]

Our independence.


1. That applies both to our individual independence to the mandates of a government that orders collectivism....
....and our national independence, known as sovereignty.



2. Progressives, Liberals, statists have always opposed the freedom and individualism, principles on which this nation was founded. It was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label, and applying it to the Socialist Party, giving us the folks who claim 'Liberalism' today.

Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism.

a. “Once [WWI] is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties

"....to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” And that is the very best definition of 'collectivization.'





3. On a national level, independence is called sovereignty.

" Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation,.... The Founding Fathers understood that if America does not have sovereignty, it does not have independence. If a foreign power can tell America “what we shall do, and what we shall not do,” George Washington once wrote to Alexander Hamilton, “we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.”

The Declaration of Independence tells us why sovereignty mattered to America’s Founders.

When America declared its independence in 1776, the Declaration described Americans as “one people” who had the right “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America?



4. Which of the 'shameful six' is based on personal independence, or on the sovereignty of our nation?
Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism?

That's right....none of them.

You are such a well informed and articulate writer, PoliticalChic. It is always a pleasure to read your threads!

It's the best cut-n-paste you've ever seen?

'cut-n-paste' refers to the manner facts are presented.

This post indicates that you have no dispute with the facts themselves.

You have served a valuable purpose.

Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit.

See....now I'm gonna have to put you in your place again!

"Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit."

I hear that a lot from those who don't have the background and education that I have, and, hence, are unable to draw on the vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources, that I have.

That's your real gripe.....isn't it.


Each day I provide undeniable facts that lead to an irrefutable conclusion. Hence, an education that government school and the media hide.

You should take notes.

Hilarious! By "...vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources" you really mean Google. Or, is it Bing?

Fuck you, Chink Chong Chung! You are embarrassing yourself. Maybe I will put YOU in YOUR place: the state mental asylum.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If I may, I would l would like to summarize PoliticalChic's post for the marxists that are unable to read and comprehend:
The leftists would like us to give up our freedom, liberty, property rights, and immediately surrender to an increasing authoritarian government.

Thank you.
Succinct is not one of my characteristics.

Your welcome. Arguing with these marxist traitors is like blowing your nose without a kleenex - it relieves some pressure, but makes a helluva mess.

" It's better to light a candle than curse the darkness"


But....one must admit....the Leftists seem to love careening around in the dark.

 

[SmokeALib]

You are such a well informed and articulate writer, PoliticalChic. It is always a pleasure to read your threads!

It's the best cut-n-paste you've ever seen?

'cut-n-paste' refers to the manner facts are presented.

This post indicates that you have no dispute with the facts themselves.

You have served a valuable purpose.

Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit.

See....now I'm gonna have to put you in your place again!

"Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit."

I hear that a lot from those who don't have the background and education that I have, and, hence, are unable to draw on the vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources, that I have.

That's your real gripe.....isn't it.


Each day I provide undeniable facts that lead to an irrefutable conclusion. Hence, an education that government school and the media hide.

You should take notes.

Hilarious! By "...vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources" you really mean Google. Or, is it Bing?

Fuck you, Chink Chong Chung! You are embarrassing yourself. Maybe I will put YOU in YOUR place: the state mental asylum.

Typical leftist thuggery, belittling and name calling. You lose.

 

[Moonglow]

Our independence.


1. That applies both to our individual independence to the mandates of a government that orders collectivism....
....and our national independence, known as sovereignty.



2. Progressives, Liberals, statists have always opposed the freedom and individualism, principles on which this nation was founded. It was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label, and applying it to the Socialist Party, giving us the folks who claim 'Liberalism' today.

Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism.

a. “Once [WWI] is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties

"....to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” And that is the very best definition of 'collectivization.'





3. On a national level, independence is called sovereignty.

" Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation,.... The Founding Fathers understood that if America does not have sovereignty, it does not have independence. If a foreign power can tell America “what we shall do, and what we shall not do,” George Washington once wrote to Alexander Hamilton, “we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.”

The Declaration of Independence tells us why sovereignty mattered to America’s Founders.

When America declared its independence in 1776, the Declaration described Americans as “one people” who had the right “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America?



4. Which of the 'shameful six' is based on personal independence, or on the sovereignty of our nation?
Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism?

That's right....none of them.

You are such a well informed and articulate writer, PoliticalChic. It is always a pleasure to read your threads!

It's the best cut-n-paste you've ever seen?

I've yet to see you author a thread that could compare to any threads PoliticalChic has posted, Moonglow. No offense, but when it comes to PoliticChic you guys are out of your league.

I'd never use the Heritage Foundation to author an ideology...You are correct..

 

[Moonglow]

If I may, l would like to summarize PoliticalChic's post for the marxists that are unable to read and comprehend:
The leftists would like us to give up our freedom, liberty, property rights, and immediately surrender to an increasing authoritarian government.

Yet that is not in the works, so you and Polistink are wrong, as usual..

 

[ZackB]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

You are another one who should take note.....if you ever want to be educated.


“Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Cross-posting from theNew Zeal blog

Why Did U.S. PresidentBarack Obamaorder a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress – as he is constitutionally obliged to do?

Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as “R2P,” shorthand for the world’s “Responsibility to Protect” civilians.

But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?

The United Nationsreported in July 2009;

The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing theResponsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries,including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first.If they don’t work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.

In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attacked militarily.

“Responsibility to Protect” means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state’s legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed “rogue” nation – does Israel spring to mind?

“Responsibility to Protect” – three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world."

http://keywiki.org/blog/?p=1928

Do you not fucking realize that every state in the world that has signed onto the UN Charter, save for a few shit hole third world states, did so with the express reservation that they do not consent to UN/ICJ(Hague) jurisdiction over matters involving and affecting that state's domestic affairs? It is law.

You did not know that, clearly. Educate yourself before you speak on a subject, PC, you ignorant twit.

 

[JFK_USA]

The personal attacks are evidence that you've hit the bulls eye (once again).

Considering PC's response to anyone who challenges her positions is ad hominem, it's not surprising. She says the most ridiculous things, uses the hasty generalizations fallacy to say ALL progressives are X. Then when she is challenged, instead of answering it fairly, she just insults.

She is literally Donald Trump. No substance, just hot air.

 

[ZackB]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

lIbya, syria, egypt, .........arab spring......where have you been?

The UN forced the US to go to war in those places?

Peruse post #42.

You are citing pure tripe,

 

[Weatherman2020]

Our independence.


1. That applies both to our individual independence to the mandates of a government that orders collectivism....
....and our national independence, known as sovereignty.



2. Progressives, Liberals, statists have always opposed the freedom and individualism, principles on which this nation was founded. It was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label, and applying it to the Socialist Party, giving us the folks who claim 'Liberalism' today.

Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism.

a. “Once [WWI] is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties

"....to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” And that is the very best definition of 'collectivization.'





3. On a national level, independence is called sovereignty.

" Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation,.... The Founding Fathers understood that if America does not have sovereignty, it does not have independence. If a foreign power can tell America “what we shall do, and what we shall not do,” George Washington once wrote to Alexander Hamilton, “we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.”

The Declaration of Independence tells us why sovereignty mattered to America’s Founders.

When America declared its independence in 1776, the Declaration described Americans as “one people” who had the right “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America?



4. Which of the 'shameful six' is based on personal independence, or on the sovereignty of our nation?
Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism?

That's right....none of them.

The left care nothing about Liberty. What animates the left is equality. That's why they think Cuba has a great healthcare system. No one can get an aspirin equally so they think it's a wonderful system.

 

[Moonglow]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

You are another one who should take note.....if you ever want to be educated.


“Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Cross-posting from theNew Zeal blog

Why Did U.S. PresidentBarack Obamaorder a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress – as he is constitutionally obliged to do?

Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as “R2P,” shorthand for the world’s “Responsibility to Protect” civilians.

But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?

The United Nationsreported in July 2009;

The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing theResponsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries,including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first.If they don’t work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.

In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attacked militarily.

“Responsibility to Protect” means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state’s legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed “rogue” nation – does Israel spring to mind?

“Responsibility to Protect” – three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world."

http://keywiki.org/blog/?p=1928

Yet Reagan attacked Libya more than once, yet it was the UN which ordered him to do so..

 

[ZackB]

It's the best cut-n-paste you've ever seen?

'cut-n-paste' refers to the manner facts are presented.

This post indicates that you have no dispute with the facts themselves.

You have served a valuable purpose.

Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit.

See....now I'm gonna have to put you in your place again!

"Cut and paste means that you did not originate the content, you ditzy twit."

I hear that a lot from those who don't have the background and education that I have, and, hence, are unable to draw on the vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources, that I have.

That's your real gripe.....isn't it.


Each day I provide undeniable facts that lead to an irrefutable conclusion. Hence, an education that government school and the media hide.

You should take notes.

Hilarious! By "...vast compendium of knowledge, and array of sources" you really mean Google. Or, is it Bing?

Fuck you, Chink Chong Chung! You are embarrassing yourself. Maybe I will put YOU in YOUR place: the state mental asylum.

Typical leftist thuggery, belittling and name calling. You lose.

I am not a leftist, numb nuts! I am probably more conservative than you and PC. The difference is that I am sane.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

Where is the UN sending US troops?

You are another one who should take note.....if you ever want to be educated.


“Responsibility to Protect” – The End of National Sovereignty As We Know It?
Cross-posting from theNew Zeal blog

Why Did U.S. PresidentBarack Obamaorder a military attack on Libya? Why did he seek the permission of the United Nations Security Council, but not that of the U.S. Congress – as he is constitutionally obliged to do?

Those who justify the Libyan intervention on humanitarian grounds draw much of their logic from a concept which has dramatically gained ground over recent decades. The concept is known as “R2P,” shorthand for the world’s “Responsibility to Protect” civilians.

But what does this catchy little phrase mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications?

The United Nationsreported in July 2009;

The Obama administration is supporting moves to implement an U.N. doctrine calling for collective military action to halt genocide. In a week-long debate on implementing theResponsibility to Protect Doctrine, the U.S. joined a majority of U.N. countries,including Russia and China, in supporting implementation of the policy. The doctrine itself was approved in 2005 by more than 150 states including the U.S.
The doctrine specifies that diplomatic options such as internal conflict resolution, sanctions, and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, should be used first.If they don’t work, then a multi-national force approved by the Security Council would be deployed.

In other words, if the United Nations does not approve of a certain government’s behavior, and that government’s leaders will not respond to sanctions and the threat of prosecution, they will be attacked militarily.

“Responsibility to Protect” means the end of national sovereignty. It mandates the surrender of any nation state’s legal authority over their own citizenry and armed forces to a supra-national body, with the power to sanction or destroy any deemed “rogue” nation – does Israel spring to mind?

“Responsibility to Protect” – three little words, that should strike terror into the heart of every patriot in every free nation of the world."

http://keywiki.org/blog/?p=1928

The President does not need permission of Congress to take military action.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

You mean when GW Bush and his supporters were repeatedly citing UN resolutions as justification for the disastrous needless invasion of Iraq?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The personal attacks are evidence that you've hit the bulls eye (once again).

Considering PC's response to anyone who challenges her positions is ad hominem, it's not surprising. She says the most ridiculous things, uses the hasty generalizations fallacy to say ALL progressives are X. Then when she is challenged, instead of answering it fairly, she just insults.

She is literally Donald Trump. No substance, just hot air.

I notice you haven't challenged my positions....

...due to fear, or....wisdom?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Our independence.


1. That applies both to our individual independence to the mandates of a government that orders collectivism....
....and our national independence, known as sovereignty.



2. Progressives, Liberals, statists have always opposed the freedom and individualism, principles on which this nation was founded. It was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label, and applying it to the Socialist Party, giving us the folks who claim 'Liberalism' today.

Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism.

a. “Once [WWI] is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties

"....to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” And that is the very best definition of 'collectivization.'





3. On a national level, independence is called sovereignty.

" Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation,.... The Founding Fathers understood that if America does not have sovereignty, it does not have independence. If a foreign power can tell America “what we shall do, and what we shall not do,” George Washington once wrote to Alexander Hamilton, “we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.”

The Declaration of Independence tells us why sovereignty mattered to America’s Founders.

When America declared its independence in 1776, the Declaration described Americans as “one people” who had the right “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America?



4. Which of the 'shameful six' is based on personal independence, or on the sovereignty of our nation?
Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism?

That's right....none of them.

The left care nothing about Liberty. What animates the left is equality. That's why they think Cuba has a great healthcare system. No one can get an aspirin equally so they think it's a wonderful system.

"The Left has been far more interested in fighting material inequality than tyranny, which is why Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc., tend to have the support of Leftists around the world."
Dennis Prager

Great minds think alike.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The nation is still sovereign if it agrees to binding treaties.

Is that why the UN is currently dictating when and how we go to war instead of our Congress?

You mean when GW Bush and his supporters were repeatedly citing UN resolutions as justification for the disastrous needless invasion of Iraq?

"Responsibility to Protect knew they would get nowhere under Bush, but viewed the 2008 elections as an opportunity for change.
Clearly, the Obama Administration has proven far more sympathetic to Responsibility to Protect’s agenda than was that of President Bush."
Op. Cit.

 

[Siete]

Our independence.


1. That applies both to our individual independence to the mandates of a government that orders collectivism....
....and our national independence, known as sovereignty.



2. Progressives, Liberals, statists have always opposed the freedom and individualism, principles on which this nation was founded. It was the socialist John Dewey who openly promoted the idea of stealing the liberal label, and applying it to the Socialist Party, giving us the folks who claim 'Liberalism' today.

Dewey, in his book Individualism Old and New argued that liberal individualism had in fact disappeared and been replaced by state capitalism and that collectivism.

a. “Once [WWI] is on, the conviction spreads that individual thought is helpless, that the only way one can count is as a cog in the great wheel. There is no good holding back. We are told to dry our unnoticed and ineffective tears and plunge into the great work.”
From a Randolph Bourne essay published in June 1917, “The War and the Intellectuals.”


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.”
Taking liberties

"....to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” And that is the very best definition of 'collectivization.'





3. On a national level, independence is called sovereignty.

" Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation,.... The Founding Fathers understood that if America does not have sovereignty, it does not have independence. If a foreign power can tell America “what we shall do, and what we shall not do,” George Washington once wrote to Alexander Hamilton, “we have Independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little.”

The Declaration of Independence tells us why sovereignty mattered to America’s Founders.

When America declared its independence in 1776, the Declaration described Americans as “one people” who had the right “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America?



4. Which of the 'shameful six' is based on personal independence, or on the sovereignty of our nation?
Communism, Socialism, Liberalism, Fascism, Nazism, or Progressivism?

That's right....none of them.

What freedom do you want that you don't have?

SHE's Canadian.


LOL