Ok This Just Cuts It...

[derwoodly]

Originally posted by Monketh

4.) To compare Bush to Hitler or Stalin trivializes the evil of two of history\'s worst dictators.  That alone should be enough to discredit you.  That Bushitler BS seems very common among liberals lately, and I feel sad because it distances people from new ideas, ergo less debate, less difference of opinion, fewer solutions.  You guys really need to hire a PR consulting firm.

Monketh, thank you, thank you, thank you.
This tread upset me way too much for internet drivel. It was not the original poster that upset me as much as Buddha joining them-- looks like I lied about the shutting up part.  Well again thank you Monketh.

[buddha]

I don\'t believe I compared Bush to Hitler or Stalin.  That\'s not really my style.  If I did, I was exaggerating.  I used Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union to demonstrate other historical states that required documentation to move about internally.  Can you think of another nation that demands it?

I don\'t think you should shut up, derwoodly.  I\'m all about the \"freedom of speech\" thing.

But really, how can you defend the five items I listed?  I did use the phrase \"don\'t be an apologist for fascism\", which I stand by.  My impression of the right is a bunch of people who have been fooled by this administration.  The republicans used to stand for individual liberty, self reliance, and state\'s rights.  That is a thing of the past.

If your issues are economic conservatism, then you may have a man in Bush, though I doubt it.  If you issues are State\'s rights, well, Bush has stepped all over those.  If your issues are individual rights, then the republicans are not your party.

Face it, the right wing has been mostly usurped by the so-called \"neo-cons\".  People who put \"Gay Marriage\" ahead of fiscal responsibility.  This is not the party that many conservatives signed up for.  It\'s like when Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson go off the hook, I somehow feel obligated to defend them because they are on \"my side\".

If you want to have an argument about the national debt or the tax burden the wealthy should bear, I\'m up for that.  And I can completely respect that you may disagree, it\'s hard to prove any of those larger economic issues.  But, can you really look me straight in the, um, monitor, and say that allowing federal agents to enter your home un-announced, without a warrant and without charging you with a crime is somehow a good thing for this country?

I tell you what, I won\'t defend Clinton\'s sex scandal, which I think was his own private business, if you\'ll just concede that the above is \"illegal search and seizure\".

There is, in my opinion, a large gap between honest to goodness conservatives and the power mad maniacs running the White House and Congress. Unfortunately, the party line conservatives have been railroaded into defending ludicrous and hypocritical legislation.  I respect a solid conservative they way I respect an honest Christian.  However, televangelists and Dick Cheney deserve none of that respect.

[Foresteer]

*points 4 and 5* Ya\'ll are both seemingly under the assumtion that i am a liberal bashing conservitives.. When really when a president of either leaning screws up im up in arms.. ive just only been here during the bush administration.

*Point 1* Well France is wrong but europe doesnt have a constitution, Also i feel they are in a tight balance between facism and socialism *not all of europe.. but a good chunk* almost all the time (yeah i would rant about the EU more but i work on improving MY country.. i figure if europeans want it fixed they would work on it themselves)

*Points 2 and 3*Hey that also is un-constitutional.. but im tackling the newest problem that lowers the bar before trying to raise it.. ya know?

*Point 4 Again* I said they share some same features.. yeah most liberals DO seem to compare him exactly with hitler.. hes not... he hasnt killed 6 million of our boys or iraqis yet, I just tend to think he has \"mini-hitler-itous\" And without the government murders He\'s Pretty Much stalin in his thinking though not his meathods (if you extract communism and add neo-conservitism)

*point 5 again* if your so weak in your belief that you would join something because of something i said then that says more about you then me :\\
(though just the thought of one more bible thumping \"do what god says or die by our hand or the \"devils\"  does scare me; but not enough to stifle me)

And on the topic of solutions and debate, what do you do? your so fast to rush to republicans side when critized.. what have you done to reform the party? what have you done to return America to a ethical state? (not a christians morals state as thats even more unconstituional then realID.. just an ethical one)

If you\'ve done something.. anything I respect that, i mean hey at least you tried.. and I\'ll remain silent on this facet of the discussion until you answer

Now for solutions.. If one state ANY state argues the states right clause of the constitution (with allows them not only to suceed if the going gets tough.. because america isnt a nation in its itself its a colilition of tightly orginized 50 mini-nations,also lets them recall their tax money and NULL AND VOID any law within thier bonderies they feel violates both THIER constitution and the USA\'s one) the entire law would fall to shit.. if one state wont do it.. then no states might as well bother

Also its stated that states that dont comply with realID get thier tax funding removed (or as far as ive read thats what it seems). But what if a state refused AND PULLED THIER TAX MONEY TO THE GOVERNMENT?! they wouldnt need federal funding.. every states gets back just about what it pays in taxes anyway (i might be talking out my ass on this one. i read that somewhere but i way me wrong) so

Not the mention what a coup that would be.. it would hit bush and the government right where it hurts.. the coffers (money supply). And would make them seriously consider a repeal.

All that said.. we should just focus on one state insted of everywhere or just protesting in DC. Then the pressure would rise in that state, and then by extention on DC even more then just focusing on DC in the first place

Thoughts?

EDIT: well said my friend well said.. i to just draw conclusion of where we are headed.

And i only have a problem with conservitives in that they are Neo-Cons \"vote slaves\" they so seem to believe in either god tells them to vote for them.. or something,

For a group so fiscaly smart can vote for people who put terri shiavo over a trillion dollar budget deficit blows my mind as much as anything ever has.. i\'ve almost given up trying to shake some sense into the party... as you can tell im in combat mode, i used to try facts and easoning to awaken the real converitives.. but basicaly all i got was \"gods plans defy facts\"  a few induviduals (not just the carbon copies of some \"touch by an uncle*angel*\" extra) listened but sonn where back where they started, and if they do mean that then that means no reasoning has or will work ;(

EDIT mach II: Also the reason ive been so combative is not only living in the middle of both \"jesusville\" and \"Neo-con-burg\" for my entire childhood life (not much of a childhood i might add.. ive always said i reach teenaged at 10 and adult at 15 mentaly anyway... so im wayy ahead of the synical curve on that one)

So ive seen facist, misogynistic, neo-con, republicanism in all its evil glory.. i sat on the throne of satan and thats why i oppose him so .. you see where it is now (thats why are are so lax and optomistic).. ive seen where it will all end (stressed and pessimistic)

[derwoodly]

Wow!
Forester,
If that had been your first post.  I would not have been so agravated, and possibly not posted at all (maybe that was the intent).  Clearly you have given some thought to your opinions.  I would only suggest that you consider that some of your facts are not 100% accurate.  I would be more consise but I have real life catching up with me and can not surf the web all night.

Buddha,
Good to hear from your sensible side.  I actually think Bush is not a fiscal conservative.  Bush is not really my man for exactly the reasons you listed.  As too your five points.  
1) National ID-- does not seem much different than what we already have. Given the opposition I will do a little more reasearch. You just may convince me it is another Bush mistake.
2)Prisoners in Cuba-- To my knowledge they are not US citizens and deserve no such protection. They are prisoners of War.  They are leverage.
3)FBI do as they please-- forgive me,  I just don\'t belive this one.  There are just too many lawyers for this too work.
4)US congress rights-- yes, actually that is the one branch of government that can change the consitution. So they do have complete control.  If they screw up then we elect new members (yes I know it is more complicated than that)
5)National Policy to trade blood for oil--  Not sure I want to touch this one.  Lets just say, if it is true, what do you think we should do?  allow more offshore drilling, more nuclear power plants?  Cuz conservation just isn\'t going to cut it.  And don\'t even say hydrogen, because hydrogen comes from burning natural gas.

Take care all,

[Foresteer]

Yeah sometimes my meaning gets lost in my trying to get it all out XD im stupid like that (i was tryig to aggrivate however.. sometimes seems like the only way to get people moving.. besides *realID* is something to be angry about, no?)

Yeah i openly stated i was just talking flowers and bung on some of it if i am wrong on something tell me about it.. it only serves to educate me (thats always been my stance)

EDIT:

#1 its very different... its more info on one card then criminals usualy have in thier files (also the information they have now is unconstitutional.. we *libertarian types* can only piss on so many fires those types light im afraid )

#2 geneva converntion.. plus how we treat our POW\'s is how ours will get treated.. also any suspected terrorists (and by suspected i mean there is a bounty for bringing in a \"terrorist\" to the us military.. people make money bringing in all manner of \"terrorists\" and collecting thier cash) that go thier arent always what they appear.. they naturaly \"confess\" same way the \"heritics\" of the spanish inquisition \"confessed\"
*2nd edit also they arent \"pows\" bush-rummy skirted that law by calling them \"terrorists\" (people who may very well be absolutely innocent but where brought in for a bounty as stated above) and so they arent bound by it *the converntion*.. its just one immoral abu-garib every day there from what ive been told and imagine (not being bound by any laws makes government projects go haywire... look at area 51 *ill cover this if you ask*) o.O

#3 believe it my friend \ the system has failed you more then you seem to know

#4 heh i love the optimistic ones

#5 for civilites sake and im trying to get realID repealed with this thread  (or at least inspire some people here to try) im not touching this one either.. its a whole \'nother rant anyway

[buddha]

I\'m glad we\'re back to respectful disagreement.  Also, let\'s concentrate on the original purpose of this thread.  For that, I have one simple question:

How much government surveillance is too much?

[Monketh]

Just FYI, I don\'t like Bush, haven\'t since the before end of his first term.  It just pisses me off to see this loser compared to Stalin or Hitler.  They make him look like an average rich white guy, he\'s not even as far along as ol\' Vladimir Putin.  He hasn\'t been above 50% with moderates since January of last year, and as a fiscal conservative, if his administration was a corporation it would have been scrapped long ago.  If it takes a die-hard Democrat to balance the budget again, good, the change will be pleasant.

As for things making me more conservative, if something drags down everything with it, I wouldn\'t want to be associated with it, and it diescredits some things associated with it.  It isn\'t going to be enough to make me go out and find Jesus, though.  Nothing short of God\'s hand flying out of the clouds and commanding it be so would make me go neo-con.

To me, ultimately, the ID question is a question of how a national ID is implemented.  There is a way you can do this right.


Sidenote:As for how much states actually get back from federal funding, the amount is getting smaller and smaller.  If you include indirect returns such as military bases, it isn\'t so bad, but dollars for never-ending social programs and military spending funded with loans from China rarely make it back home.

[Foresteer]

According to the constitution ANY government surveillence is too much.. (the government cant even know where you work)

also *income* taxes arent in the constitution *article 1 section 8 clause 1, and all of article 1, section 9 also applies*.. as the government forceably steals this money from you.. you get no choise to NOT pay the money.. and even then you cant decide what its used for..

*edit: while there is a constitutional amendment on income tax.. neo-cons are also trying to amend the constitution to elect arnold, and ban gay marrage and also got it ammended to ban liquer.. so yeah :rolleyes:

i think states SHOULD hold back thier taxes and use them inside the state

Screw a dem vote for Badnarik

[derwoodly]

On the topic of National ID--- I read some of proposed law.  I really could not find all of the stuff you were talking about. To me it looks just like the ID I already have.  Here is a snipet of the LAW taken from Senator Sensenbrenner\'s site (I believe he wrote it).


(b) Minimum Document Requirements- To meet the requirements of this section, a State shall include, at a minimum, the following information and features on each driver\'s license and identification card issued to a person by the State:

(1) The person\'s full legal name.

(2) The person\'s date of birth.

(3) The person\'s gender.

(4) The person\'s driver\'s license or identification card number.

(5) A digital photograph of the person.

(6) The person\'s address of principle residence.

(7) The person\'s signature.

(-8-) Physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting, or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes.

(9) A common machine-readable technology, with defined minimum data elements.

[Edit:  I found a lot of the items Forester was mentioning on a web site for Imigration Lawers.  The hole story is rather intriging.  This bill was passed by the house by an overwhelming majority, then turned down by the Senate under presure from some 600 or so special intrest groups that really run the gamet on idealology.  Then the bill was added to a Millitary funding bill where it pass through both houses like grease through a goose.  It sounds like a great bill to me. It urks 1000\'s of lawers, closes our borders, gives the FBI teeth, and your ID will look great with that picture of your retna scan on it.  What is so bad about that?]

[Foresteer]

Well the FBI really shouldnt exist much less have \"teeth\" and our borders shouldnt be closed o.O

Also as ive been trying to get you to realise the drivers licence ans SS# though something you are used to is still HIGHLY illegal

The government is not \"entitled\" to anything its not our \"leader\" its our slave it does as we ask to keep us safe.. it does not tell us what to do WE tell IT what to do for us (or are suppost to be able to)

Should your mailman know where you work nour tele# your salary? same thing with government.. used to the drivers licence was used to in the 40\'s-50\'s show you can drive (it fails at that) not as an ID card.. it would have been struck down if it was though ti would evolve into that

Its called the shifting baseline.. YOU dont see anything different because you where born into it.. your greatgrampa would pick up a rifle and shoot government members for allowing such facism into the country as he didnt have and didnt need such strangle-hold controls placed on him by \" the molesting uncle\" Uncle Sam

[derwoodly]

I see your point:  Conservitives do not want the ID as it means more government agencies getting involved in there life.  Liberals also do not want the ID, because they do not want the illegal aliens tracked and deported.  There were a lot of other reasons as well.  600 or so special intrest group from both sides of the spectrum.   Even my friends think it is a bad idea.

I think they are all wrong.  It is not that I am just used to using my drivers license as an ID.  Actually I am not.  My credit card has my pictured right on it and I almost never get asked for it.

This is the digital information age.  Every thing I own has its own ID.  I want one too.  It should be credit card sized with the American flag as a 3D back ground and in the forground a picture of my face.  No fingerprints or scans that is silly.  It should take the place of all of my other plastic in my wallet.

[mikewsnc]

Hey Foresteer
      My friend I will buy you a first class ticket out of America sense you seem to hate this country so much. God I have so much to say but not sure how many liberals there really are on these boards so I will hold on to it right now.

Aranis


(libralism = mental disorder)

[Foresteer]

Originally posted by mikewsnc
Hey Foresteer
      My friend I will buy you a first class ticket out of America sense you seem to hate this country so much. God I have so much to say but not sure how many liberals there really are on these boards so I will hold on to it right now.

Aranis



(libralism = mental disorder)

WOOP WOOP! i was wondering when the short bus would pull up with the default \"compliments of the red, white and blue stick a boot up your ass if you dont think in our cookie cutter\" answer... looks like it has

yeah baseline liberals are kinda flaky.. no more then fiscal conservitives though :\\ (now neo-con/oil monger and feminazi/anarchist are forms of mental illness i will concede most rapidly) but hey they are valid spectrums... what does liberal discussion have to do with me though? o.O *thinks he missed something*

Anyway check out \"The Libertarian Party and Other Minor Political Parties in the United States\" written by Joseph W. Hazlett II (puplished by McFarland Publishing) its quite a good read that shows a 3rd party of some form has been building steadily for some time and the Libertarian party could be the final fruition of the 3 party dream (it shows all sides of all minor parties. even the whig party of 100+ years ago )

EDIT: Derwoodly i seem to detect some of modernism *not really an insult.. just an observation* in what you say.. do you really believe we need all this info on us? Or have you heard the buzz-word \"information age\" so long you actualy believe it?

We get along fine and i have no info on you really :\\ you boss/teacher doesnt have much info *unless you gave it to him/her*and ya\'ll function right proper *i suppose*.. try out http://www.lp.org read about ther and try the book i listed.. you\'d be supprized how little the government needs to manage your safety (what is suppost to be its only job).. Its grown addicted to the power it stole long ago and had resisted the change of freedom back to what it was

[buddha]

Hey Mike,

Is your offer good for me, too?  I\'m going on my honeymoon and we could use even a one way fare to Costa Rica.   We want to leave on July 27th.  I suppose you won\'t spot me for the return trip, as you\'re trying to get rid of me.  But at least Amerka will be safe for 7-10 days from nasty dissention!

PM when you\'ve got it.  I\'m thinking of taking TACA airlines, but I\'d be greatful for anything.

If you change your mind, you\'re being unpatriotic.  You know, this country was founded on the principle \"Love it or leave it.\"   You have a duty to pay my way out of the country.

EDIT: Oh my god, how did I screw up \"grateful\"?  Ouch.

[derwoodly]

Forester,
First of all I was joking about the information age stuff.  I was trying to get your goat, in the same way you did in your first post.  However, after a couple of nights of internet surfing, I hate to say it but I have to agree with you (on one point ) We don\'t need the national ID.