Loading Loading
Just for optimization

Politics.comblogPerso

freecreditcheck.com |  creditreports.com |  whois.domaintools.com |  bookclub.com

Quiz: Name That User Quiz: Name That User

Visit CrashTack's Blog | 8 months ago

I see an article on the home page describing how the Department of Homeland Security is warning of "rightwing extremist activity."  The comments posted by users in response to that piece speak for themselves.  "This sounds like the beginning of a dictatorship to me. Suppress the voices of who oppose you by classifying them as a dangerous militia..."

Take a look, at http://www.politics.com/news/9460/us-government-warns-of-right-wing-radicals.

OK, then.  Time for a bit of digging.

Who, among the good citizens of this site,

- is really no fan of the United States government, calling it "the ultimate bully"

- is a big supporter of gun rights, saying "The government is afraid of the guns people have because they have to have control of the people at all times. Once you take away the guns, you can do anything to the people."

- believes our country is headed as far left as Sweden: "We are slowly turning into a socialist government. The government is continually growing bigger and more powerful, and the people need to prepare to defend themselves against government control."

- has some very real issues with taxation, and politicians: "Taxes are a joke. Regardless of what a political candidate "promises," they will increase. More taxes are always the answer to government mismanagement. They mess up. We suffer."

- referred to the Golden State as "The People's Socialist Republic of California"

- believes we face "imminent danger" from our government

???

Sound familiar? 

Is it a user we hear from regularly? 

Is he or she even among this site's "Top Users?"

Maybe those sound like your words?

tick

tock

tick

tock

Trick question.  Those are the words of Timothy McVeigh, executed in 2001 following his conviction for conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives, and first-degree murder.

One hundred and sixty-eight were killed and some 800 others injured in the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

Be very afraid, indeed.

Tags: right-wing extremists

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

Rosetteismyname (Centrist) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (2 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
I had to laugh when reading this because it sounds like all of the republican's and right wing indep … Show full comment

and something is wrong with that. to me it says that right wings and independents take politics more seriously -

there really aren't that many of us on here in total either.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

TheyreALLliars (Libertarian) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
I still think you missed my point. There are things I support and there are things I don't support b … Show full comment

I see your point, but I was referring to your comment on how Obama was aware of individual rights. I am not trying to stop you from supporting anyone, Obama least of all. What I am trying to show is that he is not in tune with individual rights. Either he is unaware (which I strongly doubt), or he does not care. And though the G.I.V.E. bill (or whatever they wish to call it next week) is, as you say, gobbledegook, the constitution is fairly straight-forward. I understand, as I am sure most people do, the words, "congress shall make no law..."

It should never come to taking it to supreme court. Some people are not able to take it to the supreme court. That takes money and time, two things that a lot of people do not have, and especially the ones that the G.I.V.E. bill affect (and why I believe they targeted these individuals in the first place). The President, and all the other politicians, take an oath to protect the constitution and the rights it guarantees. That should be the end of it. He should do what he promised to do and not sign into law anything he knows to be a violation. If I got a job, and upon entering that job promised to do a certain thing, my employees or managers should not have to appeal to H.R. and then when that falls through picket outside my office to get it done. I promised, I took the job, I do, or I pack my stuff and get out. That's the end of the story.
We all know that the supreme courts often side with the president or the executive branch at that time. They are not out to protect the people anymore, they essentially get hand-picked by the president to do his bidding. And if the tea parties have taught us anything, it is that protesting is not doing much. The only thing that works- refuse to do it. Just refuse, and they will not have enough jail cells for all of us. Or we could move to another country- over 50% of Americans already want to. But it should never have to go that far. We shouldn't have to write letters, sue, protest, beg, and grovel for this man to do HIS JOB. He should just do it.
-Danielle
www.theyreallliars.com
The mostly political blog that isn't Republican or Democrat.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

TheyreALLliars (Libertarian) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
Send it to me.

These are articles I wrote about his administration violating the 13th and 1st amendment (the second article explains the 1st's violation in detail), and also the 14th amendment, as this affects only people under 25, and no one else.

http://theyreallliars.com/2009/02/27/13th-amendment.aspx

http://theyreallliars.com/2009/03/27/conscription-is-making-a-comeback.aspx

Here is the law, so that you may read it for yourself. At one point it was called the G.I.V.E. bill, but they changed the name to the Kennedy Serve America Act, but the wording hasn't changed much. I have read the bill, it took me about 4 days, but there is mandatory wording in there twice.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1388:

Here is my article on the law they are creating that extends part of the Patriot Act like searches, and takes it a step further. This is a violation of search and seizure protections because they are searching internet activity without a warrent, and have the opportunity to shut down the internet whenever they feel.

http://theyreallliars.com/2009/04/03/internet-fascist.aspx

Everything has links (with the exception of 13th amendment, I wrote that as a letter before I had a blog, but got a non-answer back- that is on my blog too, btw) so that you can see that I am not making anything up. Espescially with the 13th amendment and Conscription is Making a Comeback I give from the "horse's mouth" type examples, not links to others blogs, that link to other blogs. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's right there on the web-site that congress owns and updates.

I think everyone know his beliefs on the 2nd amendment. And while something of a 2,000 % increase in taxes on weapons is not a direct violation of the constitution, it is inching towards that direction.

Just let me know if you need anything else. I do want to say this, though. You kind of alluded to the fact that it was a little less important because it does not affect you that much. Well, I am 24, I am almost in the clear on his violating my 13th, 1st, and 14th amendment rights above, and as far as searching my internet records- I am sure they are, I own a political blog, and a libertarian one at that. The truth is- I don't much care when it comes to myself. They would just get so bored at my boring life they would abandon that mission. And though I support a person's right to own weapons, I don't own a single gun. I don't even own mace or pepper spray. My point is- it doesn't matter whether those particular amendments meant anything to you (I can think of a couple of them that should, but that is just my opinion), when you start picking at the constitution, it is only a matter of time before you have none left at all. I think we can all agree that the constitution is important to us in one way or another, and would not like to see it destroyed.
-Danielle
www.theyreallliars.com
The mostly political blog that isn't Republican or Democrat.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to TheyreALLliars
But what about with the other rights? I can see no reason to take rights away from someone who has … Show full comment

I still think you missed my point. There are things I support and there are things I don't support but I see the point, and that's only from a purely legal standpoint. It's easier to litigate if things are straightforward instead of gobbledegook. You take away someone's rights with an executive order people need to take it to the supreme court. If it's truly unconstitutional and the supremem court justices don't give it the time of day or vote in line with the president then we have a reason to protest in earnest. I'm not for overthrowing the gov't but then again I'd like to be president so let's start a coup! Wait does that term work here? :)

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to TheyreALLliars
But what about with the other rights? I can see no reason to take rights away from someone who has … Show full comment

Send it to me.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

TheyreALLliars (Libertarian) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
There are alot of things with Obama that I don't support and then there are things that I do support … Show full comment

But what about with the other rights? I can see no reason to take rights away from someone who has committed no crime whatsoever, such as with the G.I.V.E. bill (the name has been changed several times, but the insides are essentially the same- begin conscription on America's youth and the end of the 13th and 1st amendments asap [I'll send you the details if you like- I spent 4 days reading the bill]). Those kids didn't do anything, I can't see anything good in this, I can think of a million things wrong with it (and if you want I can send you my reasons as well). And as my first post says, I see nothing wrong with you supporting him, I see something wrong with you saying that he is out to protect individual rights. Support him because he gives you hope, support him because he's NOT a Republican (that was a major point for me), support him because he was better than the other guy (not my opinion, but I can see that), but not because he supports individual rights. He has done more to crush individual rights in 100 days, than what many consider the worst president ever- W, did in his 8 years. That's what we are talking here. I will never take away someone's right to support someone, but I will agrue that Obama (and just about everyone in his administration) are not for individual rights in any way, shape, or form.
-Danielle
www.theyreallliars.com
The mostly political blog that isn't Republican or Democrat.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to TheyreALLliars
"How does Obama have a cagey understanding of individual rights?" While I do not think … Show full comment

There are alot of things with Obama that I don't support and then there are things that I do support. Extending the patriot act, not something I support. Remember I'm probably on that list for some of my reading materials. There are things with him that I can see his point on why he's doing it, but I think it's stupid. Like the whole thing with limiting Defendants rights. Do I agree with that? No. Do I see the legal point and the loopholes. Yes. As americans we are supposed to know our rights, but the fact is most americans don't know their rights or they get scared when they come in contact with authority. On the up side this will give lawyers a definite security blanket when it comes to earning a paycheck. I think what he want s todo in that regard is unfair and unbalanced. Not everyone can be so expensively educated. You can support someone and not agree with everything they do or say. Why do you think husbands are still around?

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

TheyreALLliars (Libertarian) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
<sigh> now you have forced me to be serious, just when I thought you were liking my laid back … Show full comment

BTW- Obama voted to extend that Patriot Act as well.
-Danielle
www.theyreallliars.com
The mostly political blog that isn't Republican or Democrat.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

TheyreALLliars (Libertarian) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
<sigh> now you have forced me to be serious, just when I thought you were liking my laid back … Show full comment

"How does Obama have a cagey understanding of individual rights?"

While I do not think that he does not understand individual rights (on the contrary, I think he knows exactly what he is doing), I think he is not abiding by the rights we currently have, and that is not a very good indication of us acquiring any new rights(or at least a disheartening feeling that he may value some rights over others). Within the first 100 days he has made statements that suggest he may not be in support of habeas corpus and signed in to legislation laws that would crush the 1st, 13th, 2nd, 4th, and 14th amendments, and that it just off the top of my head. On top of that he is going on a virtual spending spree which also violates our unwritten and unspoken right to not have our money spent frivolously. Do I think he has an understanding of our rights? Absolutely, but he is showing that he just doesn't care about them that much. Now, I understand that Bush did some things that were unconstitutional as well. As a matter of fact, he was the one that said, "The Constitution is just a g*dd**n piece of paper," but Obama is interfering with American's rights, and doing it on a greater level, he's just smart enough to not be that vocal about it. And the Patriot Act that you are speaking of is being used right now by the Obama administration to spy on Americans via the internet on a massive scale. I also don't care, as I am not doing anything wrong. But the idea that the simple, very patriotic act of attending a protest would allow my government to mark me as an extremist is not right. And the idea that my sister and father who served their countries are marked as potential terrorists because they were in the military, is beyond insulting and offensive.
I also once supported Obama, but then I started doing some digging. And I have said it before, and I will say it again- There is no point in allowing people the right to choose who they want to marry if they are not allowed to deny working for someone they don't want to or to say what they want to, as you and I have done, and as has been done for hundreds of years. I think if most Obama supporters actually had the info in front of them, they would no longer be supporters anymore, as happened with me. But if you still want to continue supporting him, fine, do it, but don't say that he protects individual rights more than Bush did (who was also a bozo, btw), because it just isn't true.
-Danielle
www.theyreallliars.com
The mostly political blog that isn't Republican or Democrat.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to FREEDOMMM
that was tongue and Cheek, except the Alinsky part. Obama has a very cagey understanding of Individu … Show full comment

<sigh> now you have forced me to be serious, just when I thought you were liking my laid back side (no pun(s) intended). How does Obama have a cagey understanding of individual rights? I think he has a very good understanding of them since he is an american too. There are certain things I don't agree with that he's doing, but I can see his point. I think that it takes a certain amount of intelligence to be able to agree with him or disagree with him and actually know what you are talking about. Each administration puts out lists like these. I'm surprised Bush didn't wiretap my house and put me under surveillence since I do own a copy of The Anarchists Cookbook and it's supposedly illegal. Do I care? No. If i disappear tomorrow then you know the feds have me.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

FREEDOMMM (Republican) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
Hey!!! I didn't call you a moron..... I called you a smarta$$..... Sometimes people need to slow dow … Show full comment

that was tongue and Cheek, except the Alinsky part. Obama has a very cagey understanding of Individual Rights, so when they put pro lifers and pro 2nd Amendment types on lists, that isn't so funny.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to FREEDOMMM
Calling me a moron isn't very nice, BTW; then again, If I'm getting married to anyone, I should get … Show full comment

Hey!!! I didn't call you a moron..... I called you a smarta$$..... Sometimes people need to slow down and read.....

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

FREEDOMMM (Republican) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to MrsPresident
ok smarta$$ I wasn't including you in my comment. :) I couldn't marry a moron.....

Calling me a moron isn't very nice, BTW; then again, If I'm getting married to anyone, I should get used to it now. Let's have your name put on a list like in the Nixon years for opposing the current occupants of the Elected branches, it's not so much fun being on an Enemies' list. this is a bit more serious than you guys let on. Nixon didn't build his career on Saul Alinsky like a certain someone...

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

Show full conversation (14 messages)
Reply to FREEDOMMM
Yeah, left wing McCarthyism is hilarious.Maybe someday we'll call it Waxmanism or Schumerism.

ok smarta$$ I wasn't including you in my comment. :) I couldn't marry a moron.....

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

FREEDOMMM (Republican) - 7 months ago

Yeah, left wing McCarthyism is hilarious.Maybe someday we'll call it Waxmanism or Schumerism.

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

MrsPresident (Democratic) - 7 months ago

I had to laugh when reading this because it sounds like all of the republican's and right wing independents on this site. lol Good one!

Sorry

or Register to add your comment.
It will take only a few seconds, we promise!

1 - 16 / 16