Useful Reminder
A pal of ours sent this via email. A bit late for today, but…
YMMV, and I dunno if it’s appropriate for here?
Just struck me that this might be the kind of thing our Founding Fathers would have done had they the technology?
Category: Politics
The report stated that the various “Patriot” movements are making attempts to lure disaffected service members. And that is an accurate statement, and a realistic concern.
You’re not getting PC on me now, are you?
And in doing so smeared ALL veterans, douchenozzle. Not real smart on their part.
Seriously folks, Sam-I-Am is just pissed because ya’ll aren’t falling into line like the good little proles should when Obumbles speaks. Sam it the same guy who was running around with a Bush t-shirt with the caption, “Not my president” but when HIS guy is in office, well, just fucking deal with it, or he’ll claim you want to kill all them furr-i-ners and lib-ruls while Lee Greenwood’s singing in the background!
At the end of the day, Sam-I-Am can claim anything he likes, but I’ll wager that if Obama came up to Sam and instructed him to start sucking the Dear Leader’s cock, Sam would fall on his knees so fast he’d crack the marble floor tiles when he hit.
“And that is an accurate statement, and a realistic concern.”
But the citizenry’s concern that the federal government is overreaching and injurious to the Constitution is a call for blood in the streets? Oh I forgot, according to you since it’s the almighty gubmint saying it then it’s 1,000% legitimate and true and we just have to lock heels and say “aye aye”, right?
You really are a statist aren’t ya Sammy boy?
“And in doing so smeared ALL veterans, douchenozzle.”
Not only smeared us Sparky, but damned near declared anyone to the right of Mao as enemies of the state. Never mind the Isalmists or the left wing terrorists who have actually, you know, committed real acts of terrorism, no the threat comes from the American citizens who believe in the principles this country was founded on. And Sammy wonders why we are worried.
“UpNorth, I know you are but what am I?” Wow, just wow, what a resounding put down. What’s next, Sammi, am too, am not?
I gave you more credit than was due you, though. Not only did you fail American Government in high school, last year, but you failed Playground too. The notes on your report card denote that you don’t play well with others, and are unable to articulate your arguments in a rational, logical manner.
I’m sure that your school district owes your parents a refund, they didn’t educate you, they only indoctrinated you.
Sam Says @ 201:
I want to put that on a bumpersticker!
The thing is, a lot of people are using the Second Amendment as an excuse to let their dicks hang out in public, in a figurative sort of way — as if they are trying to make up for something they find lacking…
Sam Says @ 215:
“Madison was discussing the importance of establishing a legislative body as opposed to a pure democracy.”
Mostly because it would be unwieldy to have a pure democracy. It is an expedient form of government to have representatives who stand in the place of a constituency in a governing body such as a legislature. Madison took a lot of words to explain that simple fact. We use popular vote to elect our representatives — that is the “Democratic” portion of our system. Once we elect our representatives, THEY form a democratic body to vote on items in our stead. It is a lot easier to house 535 representatives of the people under one roof to make decisions for the whole of the country than it is to deal with almost three hundred million.
The sad thing is that a lot of people here aren’t going to concede any ground to you. It just isn’t in their nature to admit that you are correct. Instead, they will spend all of their time nitpicking what you say, and when that fails, they will insult you and call you names.
I can see why Sam’s ego is astronomically overinflated … in all of his (?) life prior to posting on this thread, he (?) hasn’t received this much combined attention. Even weeds will die off if you don’t water them.
DJ Allen Says @ 256:
“Mostly because it would be unwieldy to have a pure democracy.”
Eh … close, but no cigar. Madison, Jefferson and most of the Founding Fathers carefully crafted our representative republic because they feared the “Tyranny of the Democracy.” Nice try at spin, though … might want to stick to the sort that you do after your yoga.
It is interesting to see Sam blow off commentary that is very much on topic by saying to stay no topic.
To me the video and Crunch’s post that is contained therein boils down to these two parts of the DOI:
I see no call to violence, just a reminder that these remedies always there if the government, not Dems or Repubs specifically but collectively do not change their ways.
Sam is obviously a “glass is half empty” kind of person.
He also has a really good thesaurus at hand. Somehow I doubt that all those big words come natural to him. He just wants to try to stump us with them.
Crunchie: Oh I forgot, according to you since it’s the almighty gubmint saying it then it’s 1,000% legitimate and true and we just have to lock heels and say “aye aye”, right?
It is demonstrable that there are some people, a very small number of people, but some people who are legitimately so inflamed by the demagoguery of our time and their own issues that they do pose a threat to others. People like the guy who shot George Tiller, the retards of the Hutaree “militia”, you know these people exist.
If you’re like NHSparky and you buy the opposition propaganda, then you would irrationally convert that concern over a handful of nuts that happen to be veterans to “all” veterans.
Cannon Fodder, lol, what words have I used that you’ve found so sesquipedalian? Seriously, other than that last one if you’re consulting a dictionary to understand things I’ve said, something is wrong. Your education has failed you. Let’s not resort to the Idiocracy movie “he talks like a fag” meme.
Thanks for the perspective, DJ Allyn. I’m not usually one for internet arguments, but I am interested in American subcultures particularly conspiratorial and strange or extreme political subcultures. I’ve spoken with people on several occasions, both in reality and here, who are very primed by culture to overreact to anything but agreement. Either you are in compliance 100%, or you are an “Obamatard”, “Obamabot”, or some other class of “others”.
“Are you conservative? Do you not agree with my extreme interpretation of this world? Then you are an “Obamaniac”, and are an outsider until you norm with the rest of the group.” There is a certain hint of emasculation associated with being ostracized which the individual is expected to find dis-pleasurable, motivating them to norm even if it is against their better judgement. It’s just a higher form of calling someone a “pussy” for not doing something the group wants you to do.
But what if you really are a pussy?
LMFAO bbmmfd!
bbmmfd, then you would capitulate and go along with the group, and suppress any misgivings. That’s what they call ‘irony’.
Not to say that the group is by definition pussies. Just that pussies tend to arbitrarily capitulate to the expected norms of their group. There are pussies in all groups, they’re just afraid of being perceived as ambiguous or insurgent.
If someone is in lockstep with an ideology, it’s either a really thoroughly tailored ideology that just happens to perfectly fit them, which is unlikely, or they’re pussies willing to cede personal choice for the sake of congruity.
Suck on that paragraph, Cannon Fodder.
Now this is just too freaking funny! Now Sammy is a internet psychologist.
As I wrote earlier, Sam’s original premise for posting “cause he was tired of the bullet box being “constantly, paraded” and that he felt it was extreme to do so has been debunked. There is no evidence of constant parading, just one video. JUST ONE. Last I checked this wasn’t the “Get your Gun and Rebel Right Now” website.
But, it was enough to summon the faux indignation that allowed him to engage in his real agenda, which is denigration. This could lead one to question what motivates Sam to engage in such behavior. But who cares? If his life is so lacking that he feels the need to create conflict to receive attention, well, I just hope Sam finds some other method for getting what he needs. Keep in the mind that this is a entity that refused to answer a basic question cause he hoped “it would agonize”. Interesting choice of words…
Sam writes more like a college sophomore who is a Sociology Major trying to impress his “professor.” But he’s probably not a Sociology major, more like Liberal Arts or Poli-Sci.
Regardless, he is disingenuous, so “discussing” anything with him is futile. You could show him example after example of extra-constitutional behavior from this admin and he will not admit that there is a pattern of abuse or even admit that it isn’t unreasonable to see the pattern. In his developing mind, all here are clouded by our “extremist” tendencies from the beginning. Before this is over he will invariably introduce racism and insinuate that it it the real motivation behind the post.
Good Luck Sam. I hope you get everything you deserve in life.
No evidence? Troy, you must be naive.
Sharon Angle and her “Second Amendment remedies” comment? Tea Party rally attendees marching around with rifles slung? The record increase in the number of death threats against the current President vs. previous Presidents? Record membership in paramilitary and militia movements? Are you even aware of this subject?
And as I’ve repeatedly asked, where are your examples of Constitutional infringements? A few examples of questionable behavior have been mentioned here, but they’ve been of a technical nature, and nothing particularly noteworthy in the grand view of American history.
And liberal arts is actually a more difficult degree path than sociology or polisci. People don’t mock it because it’s easy, they mock it because it is great for self-development but has no practical follow-on in the job market. What do you think liberal arts is? I would LOVE to get a liberal arts degree, but I would also like to make money.
Talk less, read more. Ignorance is not strength.
And Troy, let me pose this question to you.
If I am right and there is a strong vein of irrational, paranoid violence fetishism in the right wing at this time, is that a bad thing in your opinion?
Interesting, the sarcasm of my statement toward Sam was totally lost on him.
Sam, lemme clue you in on a little something. Liberal Arts is only difficult to those who major in them. The rest of us majored in math, sciences, or engineering.
As far as Sharon Angle’s 2A remedies, at least her suggestion was within the law and framing of the Constitution. Strange how you never seem to come around to answering my quote of Jefferson. I can give you a myriad of examples of leftists either suggesting or actually undertaking acts of violence to further their agenda, which is a lot more than you have on your allegedly violent TP folks. Whoa, they have GUNS! Oh, noes! And as far as “record membership” goes, Jonn has repeatedly shown that claim (mostly by Potok and his ilk) to be more full of shit than a Christmas goose.
NHSparky, let me clue you in on a little something. You’ve demonstrated a profound ignorance throughout our conversation so I really don’t care what you have to say. Don’t shit on your own reputation by running your mouth so carelessly, so often.
“Don’t shit on your own reputation by running your mouth so carelessly, so often”. Good advice, you really ought to take it, Sam. But then, from what you’ve displayed here, your reputation can’t be all that great, can it? So, do try to save what you can.
And, remind us again, from your vast wealth of knowledge, how does a Federal judge get removed from the Federal bench?
Well Bless his lil heart, Sam asks me a question after refusing to answer a question I posed to him…and he thinks I will answer him…oh to be young an naive again.
Sam, I got nothing for ya, there is nothing to be gained from continued interaction.
Troy… read more.
UpNorth, by being impeached. Read more. Jesus Christ…
Sam, I’ve impartially re-read the other commentators and your replies, and I have to say in all honesty, you have missed so many of their points and sarcasm, that you have totally be-clowned yourself in this conversation. Now I don’t know if it’s because you are so focused on making your own point that you are ignoring what everyone else is saying, or your just dense. But either way your total lack of comprehension of your opponents points has made it impossible for you to make a cogent counterpoint to anything said here.
Let me see if I can condense your main arguments to three basic points and tell me if I’m in the ball park, m’kay?
Anyone who mentions that there is a final recourse though the 2nd Amendment in defense of liberty is a violent extremist screaming for blood. Any reminders that the 2nd Amendment remedy exists are calls for revolution. Anyone who is concerned that the federal government may be acting in an extra-constitutional way, is a paranoid nut job.
Am I close?
Can you mention specifically which points?
If someone mentioning that there is a “final” (which is to say arbitrary point in time when that person has had enough) in the defense of “liberty” (which, from what I’ve gathered here is actually a very subjective and misinformed notion of what is going on vs. what should be going on), then what are they if not screaming for blood? Quietly whispering for blood? Casually mentioning blood? That is what the Second Amendment remedy is. It’s blood! There is no Second Amendment Lite Edition. No Second Amendment 30-Day Trial. The Second Amendment remedy is shooting your political leadership and countrymen.
And whether it is revolution that you are calling for by invoking the 2nd Amendment, or merely killing fellow countrymen, how constructive do you actually expect that to be? How popular do you really expect it to be?
And most importantly of all, are your concerns for whether or not the federal government is acting extraconstitutionally (which isn’t necessarily to say unconstitionally, it refers to acting in situations which the Constition does not explicitly condone or ban), are those concerns real? Or are they “death panels”, “FEMA camps”, “civilian national security force” and birther conspiracy theories? So far you haven’t presented me with a cogent demonstration of egregious unconstitutionality in the Obama government, you’ve only demonstrated to me a fear that it exists. To me that means you are proceeding on the entire issue from a false premise.
See, there are a lot of unstated realities of the things you’re saying that aren’t very easy to dismiss as part of what you’re asking me.
“UpNorth, by being impeached. Read more.” Yeah, we all knew that, you were the one who got schooled, newb. Tell us again, is the US a democracy?
AS 0311 said in #275, “your total lack of comprehension of your opponents points has made it impossible for you to make a cogent counterpoint to anything said here”. And, from post #2 to # 276, you haven’t failed to measure down.
LOL, oh UpNorth…
Sam, I know that assholes like you have a pathological need to ALWAYS get in the last word, but seriously, if that’s the best you’re going to do, “LOL?” Seriously?
In the words of the great poet warrior Shaq, “How’s my ass taste?”
What can you say to a person who cannot come up with a viable reply? He’s revisiting one technically incorrect thing that I said, that federal judges can be “recalled” when technically they are impeached, and then failing to understand that, yes, the United States is a democracy. We’re also a republic. We’re also federalized. We’re a lot of things, and it’s not inappropriate to refer to a relevant property of the nation individually, and the fact that we are democratic was germane to the original point.
So, yes, “LOL”. Once someone crosses a certain threshold of obstinance that is about all you can do.
And can the passive-aggressive “I know you like to have the last word hurp durp” non-sense at the same time as you, yourself, are doing exactly what I am doing (posting) but without a hint of substance. I reply when I feel it is appropriate to reply in a way that I feel it is appropriate to reply. It’s not about the “last word”. It would be nice if you would come up with some better point than “How’s my ass taste?”, but based on your record so far in this encounter I understand that might be beyond your capacity as a commenter.
I’d appreciate it if you would weigh in rationally on 276, and keep your projections to yourself.
“One technically incorrect thing”? I hope you weren’t an FO, I’d hate to see what your technically incorrect things could do in the real world.
Anyway, it’s not “technically, they can be impeached”, it’s just a technicality that they can’t be removed by “recall”?
By the by, you don’t set the rules for debate, so your demands that people answer your question, or weigh in rationally on your posts are just so much waste of bandwidth.
I’ll take that to mean that you’ve got nothing.
Here ya go Sammy boy, my last word on this, unless you blather something irresistible. And technically they’re not my words.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/tyrannus_obama_rex.html
This deals specifically with Ogabe, while my main thrust has been the federal leviathan as a whole, but Mr. Clarke lays out a worthy read.
“By the by, you don’t set the rules for debate,…”
He don’t do much of a cogent debate either UpNorth.
Address post number 276, please. I don’t doubt that you have disagreements with policy, that is not the question.
“Address post number 276, please. I don’t doubt that you have disagreements with policy, that is not the question.”
It ain’t about policy dipshit, like I’ve said countless times already. Read my link.
Sam?
#209 “I’m not concerned with how they respond. I’m just not obligated to follow.”
You made the basis of your point very clear in #265:
“If someone is in lockstep with an ideology, it’s either a really thoroughly tailored ideology that just happens to perfectly fit them, which is unlikely, or they’re pussies willing to cede personal choice for the sake of congruity.
Suck on that paragraph…”
I think it is time to let go.
Spockgirl, I don’t understand what you’re getting at. Please elaborate.
Crunchie, then what is it about? You haven’t said it’s not about policy. In fact you’ve said that it is about unconstitutional behavior… which is policy.
And I read the link. It cites… drumroll… policy. Well, policy and erroneous comparisons of Barack Obama to Hitler.
#288 Sam:
In order for you to understand, you would have to take a moment to step back from your talking points, re-read every comment that you have made (just yours)and then go back to read your second paragraph in #265.
I can elaborate no further than that.
You can’t even give me a direct answer of what you believe the conflict is? I’m not going to interpret your meaning for you, there’s no way to accurately do that based on what little information you’ve provided.
Sam:
I am sorry my words were insufficient. They were simply meant to provide a path, nothing more, nothing less.
I trust you will be kind enough to allow me to bow out of this thread, and perhaps close it.
Sam, you really are dense. Spockgirl is introducing the pot to kettle. You know, pot calling the kettle black and all that. In other words, to quote the immortal bard; “physician heal thyself.”
“Well, policy and erroneous comparisons of Barack Obama to Hitler.”
It pointed out the tyrannical characteristics of Ogabe, drawing on historical parallels. And they are not erroneous. If you would break free of the ideological group think that you so soundly denounced in 265, you would see that Mr. Clarke makes a compelling case.
But then again unicorns farting skittles might swoop down on rainbows and “hope and change” the economy back into shape too. I think the latter is more likely than the former.
I think we all need to just stop for a moment and contemplate the supremely sublime contribution of Master Sam. Now patiently reread his erudite discourse on the error of our ways in resorting to violence against THOSE who know better then WE. Please also thank him for pointing out our inadequacies in bowing to the greatness of the Our President, HE who shall not be named, for it would be blasphemy.
I’ll note that you aren’t addressing the Second Amendment issue, again. A red herring debating whether or not a president’s personal demeanor is indicative of Hitler-like aspirations would be convenient, but I’m not going to give it to you.
Why won’t you address 276?
Once again, you proles just won’t fall into line as Sam says we should.
Psst…Sam? Don’t throw out that, “Not my president” Bush t-shirt just yet. You’ll likely need to pull it back out and put a new face on it after November 2012. Just sayin.
I supported George Bush, numbnuts. I think that parties out of power have a tendency toward irrationality, and threatening the lives of citizens and our proxies is part of that.
It’s interesting to note that of all of the things that have been listed as infringements, nobody has mentioned things like the PATRIOT ACT or the treatment of people like Jose Padilla. Those are far more egregious examples of increases in Orwellian executive power from the last administration… yet they don’t quite seem to make the cut for the “list of tyrannies”.
It’s a fact of life of every administration, so it’s curious that only this one is worth shooting people over. If you’re so staunch about killing people over the slightest hint of misapplication of executive power, one would think that you would be the one sporting the “Not My President” shirt, not me.
Also, NHSparky, do you cover up your “Love It or Leave It” bumper sticker when a democrat has been elected? Or do you just forget that it’s there?
Assholes and last words. Nice to see you’re not disappointing us, Sam I Am. Tell me my boy, who’s the last Democrat to leave the country in better shape when he left the WH than when he showed up?
Well, I guess we’re both assholes. But only one of us can stay on topic. The other one is you.