The Forgotten Right

[SOCALHUSKER]

I hereby invoke Godwin's Law. Yikes.

 

(If you don't know Godwin's Law, you should. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law AKA reductio ad hitlerum. Either way, the conversation is irrevocably lost if either Hitler or Nazi Germany are mentioned.)

 

Did you even watch the video? Go ahead, click the link and watch.

 

I'll repost the link here for your ease and convenience.

 

 

What I'm saying here guys is ask yourself some very basic questions about what you believe:

 

Do you believe in freedom?

Do you believe that individuals should be responsible for their own lives?

Do you think that the federal government has grown too large?

Do think that entitlement programs need to be expanded?

Do you think that the money you work so hard for should be taxed even more to fund entitlement programs?

 

 

If you answer yes to the first three questions and no to the second two then you seriously need to do some research on just exactly what Obama wants to do. Then, look into the people who he appointed as members of his cabinet and what they are trying to do. Trust me...it'll give you the creeps.

 

Yes I did watch the link. Did you happen to notice that it is a 30 second blurb that provides no context whatsoever? Did you notice that it is a politically motivated hack job? I searched with google for 15 minutes to try to find what the topic of his talk was...all I could find was conspiracy theorists saying that the Fourth Reich is well on it's way. Is it possible he misspoke and meant to be talking about the Peace Corps or the National Guard? It might be. Unfortunately, with such a short agenda driven video there is literally NO WAY that I can take it seriously. If I could find a transcript or a video of the entire speech then MAYBE I could take it more seriously.

 

If you are honestly afraid for the future of your freedom as a citizen of the United States you are a little loony. Between Congress (which at the moment does not provide much of a check against executive power) and the Supreme Court (which is the REAL check) If I had the time and compulsion I could find you cases and statutes that show that your supposed "civilian army" is either illegal or straight up unconstitutional. Your point is moot. Nothing will change.

 

And for the record, I am not an Obama supporter. I dislike his policies for real reasons, not for flaky right wing conspiracy theories. Example, his proposed health care plan terrifies me.

 

Drop the Hitler and Communist comparisons. Until Obama kills 6 million+ it makes you look ridiculous.

 

So when he and his policies create a disaster, then she's allowed to compare him to what she thinks he is today? That's mighty noble of you. It's short-sighted thinking like that, that has allowed the Hitler's and Pol Pot's of the world to rule as they please. By calling her "ridiculous" or "loony" for studying history and finding correlations between the policies of Obama and those of some of the most evil, tyrannical men who have ever walked the face of the earth, shows that you are either ignorant of history or you really don't care all that much about retaining your freedom.

 

Also, what are your "real" reasons for disliking his policies? And who decides which person's dislikes are "real" and which are "conspiracy?" Obviously people are worried about the direction our country is headed and the reasons are fairly obvious. Freedoms are slowly disappearing, whether you believe it or not, and hopefully the tyranny will be stopped before the freedoms you value (healthcare) are lost too.

 

Here's a quote by Martin Niemoeller I posted on another thread but I think it also bodes well with what we are discussing here . You could easily exchange each different affiliation (Communism, Socialism, etc...) with the freedoms being restricted today (right to bear arms, healthcare, etc...).

 

"First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."

 

It's funny that you mention studying history because my BA is in history. My apologies if you think a 30 second youtube chop job that has a 15 second speaking section immediately followed by still photos of Hitler is "real" political discussion.

 

What does the video have to do with anything I said?

 

The video was the start of the Hitler/Obama comparison that is the topic of discussion.

 

Where were you when the Patriot Act was passed? I don't remember Obama being responsible for that particular loss of freedoms. Where were you when people were being tortured? Where were you when people on US soil were declared enemy combatants and held without trial? You want to talk about loss of freedoms, blame the former more than the present.

 

As far as the right to bear arms (of which I am an ardent proponent), that is VERY secure at the moment. (Check out the recent case of District of Columbia v. Heller. It's on wikipedia.) Despite the hype, even if Obama wants to he is going to have a very, very hard time going after guns.

 

As far as Communism and Socialism (which should technically be communism and socialism...the former implies the political parties themselves, not the political doctrines) you have a slightly better argument. Taxing the rich and giving to the poor is socialism in a way. Unfortunately, this is not an Obama phenomenon. (Obama-non?) Taxing the (demonic!) rich and giving to the (noble!) poor is a plank of both parties. I don't agree with it, but we'll see if the decades of this particular American tradition can be overcome.

 

I'm in no way trying to peg the blame for the problems we face on Obama. Yes, I think his policies will undercut and further deteriorate our foundation of freedom, but I would be crazy to think he is solely to blame. You bring up good points about the Patriot Act, torture and disregard for Habeas corpus and I too wonder how we could stray so far from the seeds of liberty our founders planted. We live in a society that for many years has been hijacked by special interests, both welfare and warfare, and the only way to right the ship is to return to our roots and follow the Constitution.

[hosker]

Well do you? Or Hannity, Coulter, Beck, Weiner....

 

I don't listen to ANY talk radio. I take an issue, I look at as many differing sources as I can and based on my research then I formulate my opinion based on my own intellect, reason and values. I sure as the hell don't need Limbaugh, Coulter, Obama, Pelosi, etc to tell me what or how to think.

 

And if you must know, I don't think there's a penny's difference between the republicans and democrats. They ought to simply drop the facade of being two different parties and simply merge into one party and call themselves the republicrats or the demicans.

 

I'd like to see some proof about Obama or Pelosi wearing red stars on their persons.

 

Do your own research because it's the only way you'll see the light. Read various socialist or communist materials and then listen to Obama, or any elite democrat give a speech. Over time you will see what I'm

 

I will give you this to consider...

 

Obama's Nazi SS Corps

 

On you tube there are countless videos you can see where Obama talks about socialism, government control and a myriad of other topics.

 

You need to read, and understand the Communist Manifesto first because then you'll have contect in which to put Obama's words.

 

And the republicans aren't much better. They get into power and they tax and spend equal to, and in some cases, exceed the democrats.

 

I hereby invoke Godwin's Law. Yikes.

 

(If you don't know Godwin's Law, you should. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law AKA reductio ad hitlerum. Either way, the conversation is irrevocably lost if either Hitler or Nazi Germany are mentioned.)

 

with the quote in your sig, im surprised to see you make that statement

 

You shouldn't be. How can people rationally discuss our democratically elected president when he is being compared to one of the biggest mass murderers in world history. (You don't have to argue that Hitler was democratically elected, the most he ever won was 28% of the votes.) Let me give you an example of a typical flow of a discussion.

 

Oz Husker - You are a guy. (I think.) - Hitler was a guy too! - OMG OMG! - Oz Husker is just like Hitler!

 

Ridiculous.

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

[carlfense]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

[carlfense]

I'm in no way trying to peg the blame for the problems we face on Obama. Yes, I think his policies will undercut and further deteriorate our foundation of freedom, but I would be crazy to think he is soley to blame. You bring up good points about the Patriot Act, torture and disregard for Habeas corpus and I too wonder how we could stray so far from the seeds of liberty our founders planted. We live in a society that for many years has been hijacked by special interests, both welfare and warfare, and the only way to right the ship is to return to our roots and follow the Constitution.

 

Good post, and agreed.

[SOCALHUSKER]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

1. I hate to use this as an example because I totally disagree with her solutions, but Naomi Wolfe outlines the very transformation of America from a free state to a fascist state. Note that none of it has to do specifically with Obama, but in many of the cases he is continuing the policies of former Presidents that have led to where we are today.

 

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

 

As far as you disproving the "Civilian Army," that has yet to be seen.

 

2. You, yourself brought up examples of unconstitutional actions that have yet to be struck down by the Supreme Court: everything under the Patriot Act, Gitmo, disregard of Habeas corpus. How unconstitutional must the actions be, before America will wake up?

[carlfense]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

1. I hate to use this as an example because I totally disagree with her solutions, but Naomi Wolfe outlines the very transformation of America from a free state to a fascist state. Note that none of it has to do specifically with Obama, but in many of the cases he is continuing the policies of former Presidents that have led to where we are today.

 

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

 

As far as you disproving the "Civilian Army," that has yet to be seen.

 

2. You, yourself brought up examples of unconstitutional actions that have yet to be struck down by the Supreme Court: everything under the Patriot Act, Gitmo, disregard of Habeas corpus. How unconstitutional must the actions be, before America will wake up?

 

1. Referencing the article, how many of those are on the decline or outright gone? The gulag one would be the obvious example. I can provide more if you'd like. It's an interesting theory, but it appeared to be more of a "What If" then a genuine belief on the part of the author.

 

The only halfway reputable source anyone has found about the "civilian army" is this one:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/21/o...tional-service/

It references the expansion of AmeriCorps, which has the terrifying and Nazi Germany like function of funding such programs as the American Red Cross and Teach for America. There is NO, ZERO, NADA, credible report that says anything about an armed civilian force that could be akin to the Brownshirts or Blackshirts of Nazi Germany fame.

 

2. The Constitution as an enforceable document has to be interpreted and applied by someone. As you undoubtedly know that someone is the Supreme Court. Under the current Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution those actions were constitutional. (Personally, I prefer Scalia's interpretations but that is a different story.) I don't agree with the Court's interpretation of the actions that we discussed, but it is rather unbelievable to argue that they would allow the actions required for a facist scenario to play out as described in your Wolfe article. (notwithstanding the fact that the US populace wouldn't allow it.)

[SOCALHUSKER]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

1. I hate to use this as an example because I totally disagree with her solutions, but Naomi Wolfe outlines the very transformation of America from a free state to a fascist state. Note that none of it has to do specifically with Obama, but in many of the cases he is continuing the policies of former Presidents that have led to where we are today.

 

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

 

As far as you disproving the "Civilian Army," that has yet to be seen.

 

2. You, yourself brought up examples of unconstitutional actions that have yet to be struck down by the Supreme Court: everything under the Patriot Act, Gitmo, disregard of Habeas corpus. How unconstitutional must the actions be, before America will wake up?

 

1. Referencing the article, how many of those are on the decline or outright gone? The gulag one would be the obvious example. I can provide more if you'd like. It's an interesting theory, but it appeared to be more of a "What If" then a genuine belief on the part of the author.

 

The only halfway reputable source anyone has found about the "civilian army" is this one:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/21/o...tional-service/

It references the expansion of AmeriCorps, which has the terrifying and Nazi Germany like function of funding such programs as the American Red Cross and Teach for America. There is NO, ZERO, NADA, credible report that says anything about an armed civilian force that could be akin to the Brownshirts or Blackshirts of Nazi Germany fame.

 

2. The Constitution as an enforceable document has to be interpreted and applied by someone. As you undoubtedly know that someone is the Supreme Court. Under the current Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution those actions were constitutional. (Personally, I prefer Scalia's interpretations but that is a different story.) I don't agree with the Court's interpretation of the actions that we discussed, but it is rather unbelievable to argue that they would allow the actions required for a facist scenario to play out as described in your Wolfe article. (notwithstanding the fact that the US populace wouldn't allow it.)

 

It is a very genuine belief, check out her books and many of her speeches if you think it's just a "what if" theory. And like your sig says, "those who are unfamiliar with history are condemned to repeat it without a sense of ironic futility."

 

Also, what happpens when the National Service Act, doesn't become voluntary? What would we call it then.

[carlfense]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

1. I hate to use this as an example because I totally disagree with her solutions, but Naomi Wolfe outlines the very transformation of America from a free state to a fascist state. Note that none of it has to do specifically with Obama, but in many of the cases he is continuing the policies of former Presidents that have led to where we are today.

 

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

 

As far as you disproving the "Civilian Army," that has yet to be seen.

 

2. You, yourself brought up examples of unconstitutional actions that have yet to be struck down by the Supreme Court: everything under the Patriot Act, Gitmo, disregard of Habeas corpus. How unconstitutional must the actions be, before America will wake up?

 

1. Referencing the article, how many of those are on the decline or outright gone? The gulag one would be the obvious example. I can provide more if you'd like. It's an interesting theory, but it appeared to be more of a "What If" then a genuine belief on the part of the author.

 

The only halfway reputable source anyone has found about the "civilian army" is this one:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/21/o...tional-service/

It references the expansion of AmeriCorps, which has the terrifying and Nazi Germany like function of funding such programs as the American Red Cross and Teach for America. There is NO, ZERO, NADA, credible report that says anything about an armed civilian force that could be akin to the Brownshirts or Blackshirts of Nazi Germany fame.

 

2. The Constitution as an enforceable document has to be interpreted and applied by someone. As you undoubtedly know that someone is the Supreme Court. Under the current Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution those actions were constitutional. (Personally, I prefer Scalia's interpretations but that is a different story.) I don't agree with the Court's interpretation of the actions that we discussed, but it is rather unbelievable to argue that they would allow the actions required for a facist scenario to play out as described in your Wolfe article. (notwithstanding the fact that the US populace wouldn't allow it.)

 

It is a very genuine belief, check out her books and many of her speeches if you think it's just a "what if" theory. And like your sig says, "those who are unfamiliar with history are condemned to repeat it without a sense of ironic futility."

 

Also, what happpens when the National Service Act, doesn't become voluntary? What would we call it then.

 

I suppose we'd call it a less threatening version of the Selective Service Act.

 

And if you really want to follow my sig...it's saying that even if you study and understand history you will still make the same mistakes.

 

And don't you mean "if" it becomes mandatory? Because if you want to play the what if game there are plenty of terrifying scenarios out there.

 

(from your posts I think that we actually share a very similar political philosophy, fiscally conservative, socially very liberal (as in preservation of free choice/freedoms.) I just happen to disagree that the US is in any way going to turn into the next Nazi Germany. To me, that is just reactionary drivel.)

[hosker]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

 

off the top of my head...

 

1. our transformation from non-interventionist to acting as world police

2. patriot act

3. directive 51

4. department of education(many other departments for that matter).... the founding fathers envisioned a society where the education standards would be left up to parents at the local level, not suits in DC.

5. IRS

6. the overthrowing of govs. around the world, practiced by the CIA

7. the idea that the gov. is the one who should protect us.

8. gun control

9. FCC

10. the central bank

11. nafta

12. the north american union

[SOCALHUSKER]

 

 

lol, your right, that is a ridiculous argument... that'd be like sayin hiltler was jesus because they were both guys

 

although you can find many many similarities, i didn't say it because of they're gender, political party, marital status, favorite hobby, fav. color, shoe size, ect.... it was said it because it applies to what were talking about. if your tired of hearing that argument, maybe you should really listen to what's being said.

 

 

it wasn't said to undermine the current administration or even former administration(they do/did a good enough job on their own with that), it was said to show that the ideals and philosophies in DC, have been evolving for several decades into what now looks/shaping into ALOT like nazi germany.

 

the only way i can think of to correct that, is to follow the Constitution.

 

what it boils down to is that theres really only 5 forms of gov.(from one extreme to another...)

1. Monarch/Dictatorship.... rule by one

2. Oligarchy.... rule by elite

3. Democracy.... rule by the majority

4. Republic.... rule by law

5. Anarchy.... rule by none

 

 

the Constitution, a Republic.... not a democracy, not socialism, and not fascism. Freedom.

 

1. In what way in particular do you see this alleged transformation? Please, try to be specific. The "civilian army" youtube video has already been disproved. Obama was talking about an unarmed community service project similar to the CCC.

 

2. They are acting within the constitution. If they weren't, the action would be struck down by the Supreme Court.

 

1. I hate to use this as an example because I totally disagree with her solutions, but Naomi Wolfe outlines the very transformation of America from a free state to a fascist state. Note that none of it has to do specifically with Obama, but in many of the cases he is continuing the policies of former Presidents that have led to where we are today.

 

Fascist America, in 10 easy steps

 

As far as you disproving the "Civilian Army," that has yet to be seen.

 

2. You, yourself brought up examples of unconstitutional actions that have yet to be struck down by the Supreme Court: everything under the Patriot Act, Gitmo, disregard of Habeas corpus. How unconstitutional must the actions be, before America will wake up?

 

1. Referencing the article, how many of those are on the decline or outright gone? The gulag one would be the obvious example. I can provide more if you'd like. It's an interesting theory, but it appeared to be more of a "What If" then a genuine belief on the part of the author.

 

The only halfway reputable source anyone has found about the "civilian army" is this one:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/04/21/o...tional-service/

It references the expansion of AmeriCorps, which has the terrifying and Nazi Germany like function of funding such programs as the American Red Cross and Teach for America. There is NO, ZERO, NADA, credible report that says anything about an armed civilian force that could be akin to the Brownshirts or Blackshirts of Nazi Germany fame.

 

2. The Constitution as an enforceable document has to be interpreted and applied by someone. As you undoubtedly know that someone is the Supreme Court. Under the current Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution those actions were constitutional. (Personally, I prefer Scalia's interpretations but that is a different story.) I don't agree with the Court's interpretation of the actions that we discussed, but it is rather unbelievable to argue that they would allow the actions required for a facist scenario to play out as described in your Wolfe article. (notwithstanding the fact that the US populace wouldn't allow it.)

 

It is a very genuine belief, check out her books and many of her speeches if you think it's just a "what if" theory. And like your sig says, "those who are unfamiliar with history are condemned to repeat it without a sense of ironic futility."

 

Also, what happpens when the National Service Act, doesn't become voluntary? What would we call it then.

 

I suppose we'd call it a less threatening version of the Selective Service Act.

 

And if you really want to follow my sig...it's saying that even if you study and understand history you will still make the same mistakes.

 

And don't you mean "if" it becomes mandatory? Because if you want to play the what if game there are plenty of terrifying scenarios out there.

 

(from your posts I think that we actually share a very similar political philosophy, fiscally conservative, socially very liberal (as in preservation of free choice/freedoms.) I just happen to disagree that the US is in any way going to turn into the next Nazi Germany. To me, that is just reactionary drivel.)

 

Yeah, I agree we both have similar libertarian viewpoints. Hopefully you're right about what we don't agree on, I just don't see any other way it could turn out if we don't change our direction.

 

Also, is there such thing as less threatening when you're talking about involuntary servitude? Call it national service or selective service, they both amount to a loss of individual freedom whether you're building bridges or fighting a war. It's happened in this country before, and as you said about history repeating itself, it will happen again.

[carlfense]

1. our transformation from non-interventionist to acting as world police (are you talking about WWI? Because that is a little outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

2. patriot act (The Patriot Act was terrible. Luckily many aspects of it are getting struck down now.)

 

3. directive 51 (a codification of marshal law...and nothing new. See the Whisky Rebellion of centuries ago.)

 

4. department of education(many other departments for that matter).... the founding fathers envisioned a society where the education standards would be left up to parents at the local level, not suits in DC. (Which founding fathers? Are you suggesting that a quality government funded education tramples your rights? Interesting...)

 

5. IRS (There have been many lawsuits over this. Every single one has found that the IRS is constitutionally valid. Also, this is not new. Taxes have been around since the Articles of Confederation days.)

 

6. the overthrowing of govs. around the world, practiced by the CIA (I can think of a couple. CONTRA for example. How about the conquering of Native American owned lands centuries ago? That seems vaguely Nazi Germany-y. Once again, outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

7. the idea that the gov. is the one who should protect us. (Ummmm....did you miss the last couple hundred years where we've had a standing military to protect us? Hardly a new or unique idea.)

 

8. gun control (Moot. Your guns (and my guns!) are safe. See District of Columbia v. Heller that specifically held that privately owned firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed right.)

 

9. FCC (Perhaps you are looking for allowing hardcore pornography on network television? What exactly is your beef with the FCC?)

 

10. the central bank (The one proposed by founding father Alexander Hamilton back in the 1700s?)

 

11. nafta (The power to regulate international commerce has long been delegated to the national government. See various tariffs.)

 

12. the north american union (entirely theoretical. Largely baseless.)

 

Anything else?

[carlfense]

 

Yeah, I agree we both have similar libertarian viewpoints. Hopefully you're right about what we don't agree on, I just don't see any other way it could turn out if we don't change our direction.

 

Also, is there such thing as less threatening when you're talking about involuntary servitude? Call it national service or selective service, they both amount to a loss of individual freedom whether you're building bridges or fighting a war. It's happened in this country before, and as you said about history repeating itself, it will happen again.

 

I don't like the idea of mandatory governmental service any more than you do, but sadly, it might at times be necessary. I don't think we have to worry about it with the CCC type AmeriCorps. I'm not sure what the goal would be, and there are plenty of people who want and need a job badly enough to volunteer.

 

However, the Selective Service System (the draft) MUST remain on the books in the chance that it is needed again. I don't think anyone argues that it wasn't absolutely necessary in WWII. It might be necessary again.

[SOCALHUSKER]

1. our transformation from non-interventionist to acting as world police (are you talking about WWI? Because that is a little outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

2. patriot act (The Patriot Act was terrible. Luckily many aspects of it are getting struck down now.)

 

3. directive 51 (a codification of marshal law...and nothing new. See the Whisky Rebellion of centuries ago.)

 

4. department of education(many other departments for that matter).... the founding fathers envisioned a society where the education standards would be left up to parents at the local level, not suits in DC. (Which founding fathers? Are you suggesting that a quality government funded education tramples your rights? Interesting...)

 

5. IRS (There have been many lawsuits over this. Every single one has found that the IRS is constitutionally valid. Also, this is not new. Taxes have been around since the Articles of Confederation days.)

 

6. the overthrowing of govs. around the world, practiced by the CIA (I can think of a couple. CONTRA for example. How about the conquering of Native American owned lands centuries ago? That seems vaguely Nazi Germany-y. Once again, outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

7. the idea that the gov. is the one who should protect us. (Ummmm....did you miss the last couple hundred years where we've had a standing military to protect us? Hardly a new or unique idea.)

 

8. gun control (Moot. Your guns (and my guns!) are safe. See District of Columbia v. Heller that specifically held that privately owned firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed right.)

 

9. FCC (Perhaps you are looking for allowing hardcore pornography on network television? What exactly is your beef with the FCC?)

 

10. the central bank (The one proposed by founding father Alexander Hamilton back in the 1700s?)

 

11. nafta (The power to regulate international commerce has long been delegated to the national government. See various tariffs.)

 

12. the north american union (entirely theoretical. Largely baseless.)

 

Anything else?

 

What's this about?

[carlfense]

What's this about?

 

It's a reply to Oz Huskers post that listed those 12 points as facts that the US (in the last few decades) is transforming into a government similar to Nazi Germany.

 

The statements in parentheses are my responses.

[hosker]

1. our transformation from non-interventionist to acting as world police (are you talking about WWI? Because that is a little outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

2. patriot act (The Patriot Act was terrible. Luckily many aspects of it are getting struck down now.)

 

3. directive 51 (a codification of marshal law...and nothing new. See the Whisky Rebellion of centuries ago.)

 

4. department of education(many other departments for that matter).... the founding fathers envisioned a society where the education standards would be left up to parents at the local level, not suits in DC. (Which founding fathers? Are you suggesting that a quality government funded education tramples your rights? Interesting...)

 

5. IRS (There have been many lawsuits over this. Every single one has found that the IRS is constitutionally valid. Also, this is not new. Taxes have been around since the Articles of Confederation days.)

 

6. the overthrowing of govs. around the world, practiced by the CIA (I can think of a couple. CONTRA for example. How about the conquering of Native American owned lands centuries ago? That seems vaguely Nazi Germany-y. Once again, outside of your "last few decades" time frame.)

 

7. the idea that the gov. is the one who should protect us. (Ummmm....did you miss the last couple hundred years where we've had a standing military to protect us? Hardly a new or unique idea.)

 

8. gun control (Moot. Your guns (and my guns!) are safe. See District of Columbia v. Heller that specifically held that privately owned firearms are a constitutionally guaranteed right.)

 

9. FCC (Perhaps you are looking for allowing hardcore pornography on network television? What exactly is your beef with the FCC?)

 

10. the central bank (The one proposed by founding father Alexander Hamilton back in the 1700s?)

 

11. nafta (The power to regulate international commerce has long been delegated to the national government. See various tariffs.)

 

12. the north american union (entirely theoretical. Largely baseless.)

 

Anything else?

 

 

lol, *sigh*