It's coming sooner than you think (Page 5): I must agree with this. America was founded as a representative republic, and it was one of our founders who warned us about what would...

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

lpnmajor wrote:

There is a difference between an autocratic Government and a totalitarian Government, sometimes that line is blurred, but knowing the proper definitions can help one differentiate between them. So, to help folks make that call, here are the definitions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism

In almost every known case of these types of "governance", the justification presented is "for the good of the people". Isn't it amazing how often that rationale is used to justify completely selfish actions? A Government "of the people, by the people and for the people", should never be subjected to partisan censorship, ideological restrictions, or monetary blackmail, yet we've seen these types of action for decades if not centuries. The Federal Government, no matter it's partisan makeup, is responsible to ALL Americans, not just those of the ruling party or those that voted for the "winners", but we have let that slide over the years, until what we see now doesn't even pretend to acknowledge such a concept.

It matters not a wit by how large a margin someone wins whatever office he or she has, because the responsibilities are the same. One could win by a single vote - and STILL be responsible to those that didn't vote for them. A "representative Government" means exactly that, with the caveat that those representatives must represent ALL of their constituents, not just those of their own party or those that voted for them, yet we have accepted the opposite as the norm. We keep hearing the words "unconstitutional" and "Constitutional authority" and such, but no one considers the ENTIRE Constitution when spouting such things, nor do those hanging on every word. As in the case of the Bible, reading previous or following passages/paragraphs, often undermines the concept that is being "sold" to the public. It is the responsibility of every citizen to know what their Constitution says - and doesn't say - and insist that their representatives adhere to it.

Any American Government, regardless of who or what party holds what office in it, must be responsible to all citizens, again, regardless of what party they do or do not belong to. It is unconstitutional, on it's face, to try and mold the entire country along partisan or ideological lines, yet we accept this as normal and if we ourselves are partisans - demand it. What happens to the voices of those from the "losing" party, and more importantly, those that are members of NO party? Their voices are ignored, and/or attempts made to silence them, calling them "activist's" and such. The Government of the United States of America belongs to each and every citizen equally, from whom it derives it's power and authority, that is indeed what the Constitution says. That document does NOT say that the Government belongs to whatever party wins a majority in the Congress and/or the Presidency. The Constitution does NOT authorize whatever partisan platform or ideological principles of the "winner", to be enforced by Federal/State fiat - unless everyone agrees.

Cooperation and compromise are not optional political tools, they are a Constitutional MANDATE, therefor the law of the land. That is how a representative government ensures that they are representing ALL the citizens, including those that belong to neither major party. Neither democrats nor republicans even pay lip service to this mandate anymore, because we've gotten used to being ignored and TOLD what we will or will not believe, and what we will or will not do. Voting is a right - and - a responsibility. We vote for a person, we should not be voting for a party/ideology, or we are undermining our own Constitution and the rights it grants us.

We are rapidly approaching a totalitarian regime, the seeds of which were planted in 1864, when the republican party and the democratic party agreed to limit all political participation to their memberships alone. Don't believe me? That's fine, but if you look, even casually, you'll discover that such a thing is coming sooner than you think - it's here already.

There is a difference between an autocratic Govern... (show quote)

I must agree with this. America was founded as a representative republic, and it was one of our founders who warned us about what would happen if we didn't "keep it". We failed to heed that warning.

I'm not going to get into the partisanship and political ideologies that undermined the constitutional principles of a Republic and replaced them with the disastrous consequences of a democracy. In essence, a Republic is Rule by Law, a democracy is mob rule.

The beginning of America's transformation into a democracy isn't easy to pin down, but the seeds were planted after the Civil War and the move toward a democracy began in fits and starts until 1913. With the ratification of the 17th amendment, the deal was sealed. It was then that Federalism went by the boards, the states surrendered their power to the federal government. Several times since then, presidents and administrations have attempted to resurrect the Republic, but the democratic juggernaut was never fully stopped, much less reversed.

There is no doubt that the last administration gave that juggernaut a massive transfusion of energy that brought us to the edge. Without a doubt, that administration's attempt to "fundamentally transform America" was the most toxic to what remained of our representative republic.

Then came Donald Trump, a political enigma. He is neither a politician nor an ideologue. He never before held an elected office. He has not one fingerprint on any law or government policy in existence, he is the "outsider."

There are those that see him as a superman and a modern George Washington rolled into one, others see him as a combination of the Marquis de Sade and Hitler. Some see him as messianic, some sort of 2nd coming, others see him as diabolical, an apostle of the devil. Neither is correct. Trump is an enigma. And for this reason his opponents are clueless about what to do, and many of his supporters are simply riding the exhilarating waves of an envisioned salvation.

Many things he has done at the outset are assuredly outstanding, mainly his appointments to AG, SecDef, EPA director, NSA, SecEd, and of course his selection for a seat on SCOTUS. However, other things he has done and apparently will do are troubling. He has walked back on much of his immigration policy, his proposal for a trillion dollar infrastructure spending, and his trade policies are definitely troublesome. In any case, whatever the outcome, we are fortunate that Trump is in the office and not the "other one." We may have a chance now to right the course of the ship, however slim that may be. Only time will tell.

As aggressive and vicious as is Trump's opposition, he is definitely not cowed by it, he is a fighter for sure. No doubt he will never win them over, that is a given. It is the RINO republicans, the big government GOP elitists, that present the biggest obstacle, they are the ones Trump must win over. Whether or not he will succeed remains uncertain.

Looking at the big picture, as in how far America has fallen into the grips of mob rule, how deeply entrenched are the anti-constitutionalists and their policies, any recovery (or resurrection) of our representative republic is going to be a long, long haul, far beyond what can be done in four or eight years. Just the reduction of our national debt to a sustainable level will only scratch the surface.

In chapter 22 of a novel by Brad Thor, Act of War, he describes quite accurately the situation we are in. And Republic vs Democracy is a crash course that should clarify the forms of government and why sustaining and maintaining a Republic is far superior to the destructive consequences of a democracy.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

fredsgirl1 wrote:

It's amazing the number of Trump supporters here have such poor command of the English language. They speak like Russians and spell like Russians that need to retake English 101. The upside is it's almost impossible for the educated American to make any sense of what they are saying.

Ueu speke worde ofkk stupit loooser.😀..

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

fredsgirl1 wrote:

It's amazing the number of Trump supporters here have such poor command of the English language. They speak like Russians and spell like Russians that need to retake English 101. The upside is it's almost impossible for the educated American to make any sense of what they are saying.

I had the best english programs in Moscow , you do not like the way of my english ? I think fred liked it fine ,,no? We are among you and watching .. It is almost time to rise .. Change your way lady ..we watch ..

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

fredsgirl1 wrote:

It's not the meaning of the words but the construction of the sentences that gives them away. The fact that you seem to be unable to see that indicates that you are either as ignorant of, or as uneducated in the English language.

Again ,, ask fred how to use QUOTE REPLY before you correct us on sentence structure .

reconreb Loc: America / Inglis Fla.

badbobby wrote:

don't shoot her Linda
You have already knocked her down

I agree badbobby ,, Linda please let fredsgirl stay for awhile ,, please .. I what to play with her ,, not in a playdate kinda way and certainly not in a sexual way unless she consider's someone telling her to get screwed sexy ..

missinglink Loc: Tralfamadore

reconreb wrote:

I had the best english programs in Moscow , you do not like the way of my english ? I think fred liked it fine ,,no? We are among you and watching .. It is almost time to rise .. Change your way lady ..we watch ..

Why bother reb. She will not understand . SHE IS EDUCATED .

I'll bet she's a kick in very day encounters with we , the uneducated masses.
Must pain her terribly .

We must repent our low class ways.

badbobby Loc: texas

reconreb wrote:

I agree badbobby ,, Linda please let fredsgirl stay for awhile ,, please .. I what to play with her ,, not in a playdate kinda way and certainly not in a sexual way unless she consider's someone telling her to get screwed sexy ..

econ
just from reading her rants
methinks she would complain that she wasn't getting screwed correctly

Onelostdog Loc: Restless Oregon

robmull wrote:

Geeeee, minor, did you hear THAT in the NYT??? A... (show quote)

If I may this is just a thought on the Major and his cronies.

jeff smith

lpnmajor wrote:

There is a difference between an autocratic Government and a totalitarian Government, sometimes that line is blurred, but knowing the proper definitions can help one differentiate between them. So, to help folks make that call, here are the definitions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totalitarianism

In almost every known case of these types of "governance", the justification presented is "for the good of the people". Isn't it amazing how often that rationale is used to justify completely selfish actions? A Government "of the people, by the people and for the people", should never be subjected to partisan censorship, ideological restrictions, or monetary blackmail, yet we've seen these types of action for decades if not centuries. The Federal Government, no matter it's partisan makeup, is responsible to ALL Americans, not just those of the ruling party or those that voted for the "winners", but we have let that slide over the years, until what we see now doesn't even pretend to acknowledge such a concept.

It matters not a wit by how large a margin someone wins whatever office he or she has, because the responsibilities are the same. One could win by a single vote - and STILL be responsible to those that didn't vote for them. A "representative Government" means exactly that, with the caveat that those representatives must represent ALL of their constituents, not just those of their own party or those that voted for them, yet we have accepted the opposite as the norm. We keep hearing the words "unconstitutional" and "Constitutional authority" and such, but no one considers the ENTIRE Constitution when spouting such things, nor do those hanging on every word. As in the case of the Bible, reading previous or following passages/paragraphs, often undermines the concept that is being "sold" to the public. It is the responsibility of every citizen to know what their Constitution says - and doesn't say - and insist that their representatives adhere to it.

Any American Government, regardless of who or what party holds what office in it, must be responsible to all citizens, again, regardless of what party they do or do not belong to. It is unconstitutional, on it's face, to try and mold the entire country along partisan or ideological lines, yet we accept this as normal and if we ourselves are partisans - demand it. What happens to the voices of those from the "losing" party, and more importantly, those that are members of NO party? Their voices are ignored, and/or attempts made to silence them, calling them "activist's" and such. The Government of the United States of America belongs to each and every citizen equally, from whom it derives it's power and authority, that is indeed what the Constitution says. That document does NOT say that the Government belongs to whatever party wins a majority in the Congress and/or the Presidency. The Constitution does NOT authorize whatever partisan platform or ideological principles of the "winner", to be enforced by Federal/State fiat - unless everyone agrees.

Cooperation and compromise are not optional political tools, they are a Constitutional MANDATE, therefor the law of the land. That is how a representative government ensures that they are representing ALL the citizens, including those that belong to neither major party. Neither democrats nor republicans even pay lip service to this mandate anymore, because we've gotten used to being ignored and TOLD what we will or will not believe, and what we will or will not do. Voting is a right - and - a responsibility. We vote for a person, we should not be voting for a party/ideology, or we are undermining our own Constitution and the rights it grants us.

We are rapidly approaching a totalitarian regime, the seeds of which were planted in 1864, when the republican party and the democratic party agreed to limit all political participation to their memberships alone. Don't believe me? That's fine, but if you look, even casually, you'll discover that such a thing is coming sooner than you think - it's here already.

There is a difference between an autocratic Govern... (show quote)

yep the constitution states that the government is to represent ALL people. it also states that it is to protect this country and the citizens of this country from our enemies. that are from outside this country or from within this country. the democratic party has for MANY years done every thing possible to disrupt the harmony of this country. they buy votes with their help the people programs . with their let any one and every one into the country as long as they say they will be good people. although most but not all terror attacks have been done by citizens of this country . if we let any one from terror war toen countries come into this country how many of them are being sent here just to fit in until the orders come in to start killing and bombing to kill as many as they can? which is a form of buying more votes doesn't matter that some of them will be terrorist. as long as them dumocrates get their vote to run the country as they want until it is totally destroyed. who do you want to run this country? the communist? the socialist? who? do you want to stand in line for food and hope just hope that there will be something there to buy and bring home to cook? wait in line for gas and hope you can have your allotment? what do you want? did you want the lying criminal to be our president? then you got nothing coming. you dare call yourself an American.

Callan

I do not understand the absolute panic in your entire diatribe of non-sense. President Obama doubled the national debt, dramatically increased the number of persons on welfare and food stamps and tried to drive our nation to the far left and into socialism. All of his efforts were to promote reliance on taxpayer money to support more welfare programs which increase the number of bought and payed for voters. We were fast approaching a tipping point where federal socialism would be so large that it could not be corrected and great nation would become just another leftist hell-hole. The biggest reason for the Trump election is that working people became very tired of the leftists agenda which promotes the end our American Culture of hard work, honesty and a belief in God.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Callan wrote:

I do not understand the absolute panic in your ent... (show quote)

Cal,

"hard work, honesty and belilef in God"" You sure have a strange way of demonstrating those values...

EL Loc: Massachusetts

permafrost wrote:

Cal,

"hard work, honesty and belilef in God"" You sure have a strange way of demonstrating those values...

That's strange???

Callan

Frost: Would it be OK for a bunch of non-working people to come to your home so that they would live with you in your home and you would totally support them?

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Callan wrote:

Frost: Would it be OK for a bunch of non-working people to come to your home so that they would live with you in your home and you would totally support them?

What a stupid question. do you bring then into your home? Why would i want them in my home?

HedgeHog

fredsgirl1 wrote:

It's amazing the number of Trump supporters here have such poor command of the English language. They speak like Russians and spell like Russians that need to retake English 101. The upside is it's almost impossible for the educated American to make any sense of what they are saying.

Russians have their own language. They don't need to speak English. Apparently, though, they fooled the CIA.

It's only impossible because Leftist/Liberals have not been taught how to think. Only how to regurgitate so-called "factoids" that are contradictory, because only if the factoids are contradictory, are they considered to be a true reflection of reality. It is called Hegelianism.

Is that understandable, fg?