One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
United WE Stand Divided We Fall
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
Apr 11, 2014 18:38:16   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
That being said what do we use to buy of at least give to people to do our bidding?

Let just face it we the general public will never have what it takes to compete with Big Money.

About the only thing we have is votes. If we are split 50/50 we can never have any one waste their time with us.

If we could ever agree say 70/30 It would get attention.

May be 60/40 could make it happen.

53/47 is considered a land slide by the winners.

So this is a race that will take time to work it's self out.

It will work if we can find one issue at a time to catch the eyes of those in power.

Issues that we here see eye to eye on & take it to other sites & see if it catches on. Or other sites & bring issues here.

We can never win a head to head all issues fight.

But it would be best not to look at it as a fight.
Just as an issue that could be changed or made better.

It is a simple as just agreeing with things you can agree with & disagreeing or not supporting issues you wish not to support. To be true to you self at all times. If you start trading support you just carry on what is going on now.
That being said what do we use to buy of at least ... (show quote)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great idea. Sounds so sincerely political correct. I think I can assure you that it MAY work, given several decades, but it won't happen that way during my lifetime, not in your lifetime, and probably not in your grandchildren's lifetimes.

Got any ideas for NOW?

I do, but nobody wants to hear them, nobody wants to work at it, nobody is interested if it involves them having to DO something or having to PAY for it.

All we really need to do is slap the federal government silly and tell them and show them that they are not our masters, that we PEOPLE pay them to do a job and they'd jolly well better get busy doing it. We will tell them that all of our liberties are sacrosanct and that THEY WILL NOT TOUCH THEM NO MATTER HOW MUCH THE LEFT HOWLS IN PROTEST. There is no wrangling re our freedoms, our rights, no compromise - they don't own them; ergo they cannot give or promise them away. We need to force feed the US Constitution to the left and to Congress (one and the same) and make them postpone writing another single law until they can answer any question put to them about the US Constitution. We should insist any law written WILL be checked for Constitutionality BEFORE it becomes law, and no law will comprise more than one page, and it will be written in readable and understandable English. We should insist the archives be lessened by at least a ton. We need to tell them they can serve two terms, then it is OUT without retirement and without perks. We should tell them they will cut their staffs by 1/2 and everybody in DC will have his salary stuck where it is until further notice.

That would be the preamble to their service if I were in charge.

Reply
Apr 11, 2014 20:01:29   #
Striker Loc: Arizona Rockies
 
Tasine wrote:
That would be the preamble to their service if I were in charge.


LOL, I kinda suppose that NONE OF US, not you, not I, not Floyd, might ever be "in charge". With 98% of the voters going for progressive / communist / fascist socialism last round, the best we can hope is that they relieve us all of our pain quickly. We are GOVERNED, you know!

Reply
Apr 11, 2014 20:51:38   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Great idea. Sounds so sincerely political correct. I think I can assure you that it MAY work, given several decades, but it won't happen that way during my lifetime, not in your lifetime, and probably not in your grandchildren's lifetimes.

Got any ideas for NOW?

I do, but nobody wants to hear them, nobody wants to work at it, nobody is interested if it involves them having to DO something or having to PAY for it.

All we really need to do is slap the federal government silly and tell them and show them that they are not our masters, that we PEOPLE pay them to do a job and they'd jolly well better get busy doing it. We will tell them that all of our liberties are sacrosanct and that THEY WILL NOT TOUCH THEM NO MATTER HOW MUCH THE LEFT HOWLS IN PROTEST. There is no wrangling re our freedoms, our rights, no compromise - they don't own them; ergo they cannot give or promise them away. We need to force feed the US Constitution to the left and to Congress (one and the same) and make them postpone writing another single law until they can answer any question put to them about the US Constitution. We should insist any law written WILL be checked for Constitutionality BEFORE it becomes law, and no law will comprise more than one page, and it will be written in readable and understandable English. We should insist the archives be lessened by at least a ton. We need to tell them they can serve two terms, then it is OUT without retirement and without perks. We should tell them they will cut their staffs by 1/2 and everybody in DC will have his salary stuck where it is until further notice.

That would be the preamble to their service if I were in charge.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ br Great idea. Sounds so si... (show quote)


The big hold is finding enough people to shift the balance away from a 50/50 mix.

We need to find away to shift the balance of what we propose from both sides of an issue.

The need is to shift 3% or 4% from one side of an issue to the other side.

One thing is to poll people on this site as to where they stand on a certain issue. If issues were presented & there could be a shift one way or the other we might be on to some thing.

If we present an issue we each should be willing to except the other side of the issue.

You see to be firmest in you views so maybe you could go first.

Reply
 
 
Apr 12, 2014 07:42:32   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
The big hold is finding enough people to shift the balance away from a 50/50 mix.

We need to find away to shift the balance of what we propose from both sides of an issue.

The need is to shift 3% or 4% from one side of an issue to the other side.

One thing is to poll people on this site as to where they stand on a certain issue. If issues were presented & there could be a shift one way or the other we might be on to some thing.

If we present an issue we each should be willing to except the other side of the issue.

You see to be firmest in you views so maybe you could go first.
The big hold is finding enough people to shift th... (show quote)


Good idea Floyd!
My question to the group is:
1. What is the difference in a "right" and a "privilege"?

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 10:09:07   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Tasine wrote:
Good idea Floyd!
My question to the group is:
1. What is the difference in a "right" and a "privilege"?


This may be hard.

We have the right of free will. Do do what ever we wish.
We can do this an individual or as a group.

That being said we as members of a group set guide lines on what individuals can do. Acts that can be punished for acts not in the best interest of the group.

Any acts not punishable would be left as a privilege. As groups get bigger rules or laws are set down listing the different actions & steps to be taken.

There are many benefits or privileges to being part of a group. Those benefits or privileges may well be worth more that some freedoms.

But there may those that hide behind so called freedoms that have come to be seem as privileges.

There are those that seek power & use it against others by denying rights & privileges of others.

This is done by some who would extend the freedom of the market place & control of governments to the few who control the money supply & much of government.

As groups get larger & more complex so do the laws & rules.

At this point in time we have to treat the world as one complete group in putting down rules & laws.

It is the hope that we can come to the proper balance to have the fewest restrictions on every body.

This is a ruff outlook but I hope you can flesh it out in a way that you could live with.

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 11:04:50   #
Striker Loc: Arizona Rockies
 
Tasine wrote:
My question to the group is "What is the difference in a "right" and a "privilege"?"


We have the Right to Life, and to all that is necessary to sustain and enhance that life. Rights to Property are necessary to effect these rights.

Governments own no rights, only "claims" made via the "laws" they write. Governments have no Right to Life to hand out, do they? Thus government steals from one to hand some "privilege" to some other.

The boundary of that Right to Life is the logically limited to the lone individual who has that Life, and does not extend to intrude upon any other.

Only a total fool (and there are many) compromises the only Right he has!

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 11:10:51   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Striker wrote:
We have the Right to Life, and to all that is necessary to sustain and enhance that life. Rights to Property are necessary to effect these rights.

Governments own no rights, only "claims" made via the "laws" they write. Governments have no Right to Life to hand out, do they? Thus government steals from one to had some "privilege" to some other.

The boundary of that Right to Life is the logically limited to the lone individual who has that Life, and does not extend to intrude upon any other.

Only a total fool (and there are many) compromises the only Right he has!
We have the Right to Life, and to all that is nece... (show quote)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Brief, succinct, easy to understand. Yet I'd be willing to bet that half of America doesn't grasp this simplicity. Great comment!!!

Reply
 
 
Apr 12, 2014 11:12:31   #
Striker Loc: Arizona Rockies
 
LOL, vote2012 conclusively proved that 98% of voters do NOT grasp that!

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 11:28:25   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Striker wrote:
LOL, vote2012 conclusively proved that 98% of voters do NOT grasp that!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How well I know. I got scolded by some republican "conservatives" because I didn't vote for Romney or Obama, but voted my principles - individual liberty by virtue of candidate, Gary Johnson. They accused me of "electing Obama". Go figure ~

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 12:09:20   #
Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI
 
Tasine wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
How well I know. I got scolded by some republican "conservatives" because I didn't vote for Romney or Obama, but voted my principles - individual liberty by virtue of candidate, Gary Johnson. They accused me of "electing Obama". Go figure ~


Some how the words you just used is a message that needs to get out to those who would be a part of government.

I would put it this way:

We as voters are looking to elect people who will stand on their principals & vote on those principals.

But we as voters need to vote on our principals & not on what the elected person can do for us.

Reply
Apr 12, 2014 18:39:28   #
Tasine Loc: Southwest US
 
Floyd Brown wrote:
Some how the words you just used is a message that needs to get out to those who would be a part of government.

I would put it this way:

We as voters are looking to elect people who will stand on their principals & vote on those principals.

But we as voters need to vote on our principals & not on what the elected person can do for us.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Funny you say that because I had commented on that site that if we expect to elect principled people we should vote our principles - how can we expect elected officials to be principled if we ourselves aren't principled. I was told by a "conservative" republican and others on that site agreed, that principles shouldn't have trumped "allowing Obama to be electd". THAT IS THE SORT OF ATTITUDE REALLY TURNED ME OFF.

Reply
 
 
Apr 12, 2014 22:22:40   #
Striker Loc: Arizona Rockies
 
:) :-D :mrgreen: :shock:

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.