September 17, 2015 at 11:09 am #43861
WhirlibirdSurvivalistSeptember 17, 2015 at 12:42 pm #43870
The President has lied about many things but he spoke the truth one key item when he said he was going to fundamentally change the US. The problem was none of us understood at the time how he intended to that. Now we know.September 17, 2015 at 1:05 pm #43873
Your gonna make my head pop or or something… We he said “fundamentally change” no one in the media even mentioned his statement, like it wasn’t important, and the populous sat and did nothing except voting him in twice? Hey I’m going to fundamentally change your life, behavior, income, freedoms, and what; people thought that was going to be okay?September 17, 2015 at 1:25 pm #43874
When the president is chosen by popular vote ( the people ) then we can blame or praise ourselves , until then we are not to blame . The other 90% of government , from your local goobers , to the house and senate ………..then yes we are to blame . If I remember correctly ( its been a long time ) , I believe Gore should have been president instead of Bush if it was by popular vote .September 17, 2015 at 1:27 pm #43875
74, human nature is such that when a Presidential candidate with some charisma says he’s going to fundamentally change the country and doesn’t give any specifics as to how, the general populous then fills in the blanks using whatever positive scenario they were hoping for. For some like the CAIR group, Sharpton, and the like, they in fact did get what they were hoping for. The rest of us not so much.September 17, 2015 at 1:32 pm #43876
Also , Sponge Bob could have beaten John McCain ………………………..just gives me more evidence that its all set up in advance .September 17, 2015 at 6:12 pm #43880
“Popular vote” means doing away with representative Republican government, the Electoral College and going to a straight democracy… people too stupid to understand what the Electoral College is and why we have it, why it’s important are the kinds who support a popular vote…
It’s just mob rule. Allowing swarms of invaders into the country – and amnestying them – will make the problem exponentially worse…
The wicked flee when none pursueth..." - Proverbs 28:1September 18, 2015 at 6:02 pm #43888
That’s why the borders are open. The plan is for amnesty, and then allow them to vote. Initial vote will be for Democrats. (Hello President Hillary) However, as many are assimilated, I believe their political perspective will change and a more conservative country will evolve.
Probably not in my lifetime, but hopefully in the lifetime of my kids and grandkids.September 18, 2015 at 8:05 pm #43889
The Constitution of the United States, as (presumably) everyone here knows, originally set the selection process for U.S. senators as a function of individual state legislatures. It was all part of the brilliance of separation of powers, in order to avoid exactly what Malgus mentioned – mob rule. The House was appropriately supposed to be a very localized selection by groups of citizens within states. Fine. But the Senate’s job was to represent states’ individual interests, NOT the interests of the mob. Almost no one knows that senators weren’t “always” elected by the people.
The Electoral College was an additional layer of security against mob rule. “We” (the general population, which doesn’t seem to be well represented here, thankfully) have bought into the poorly presented, knee-jerk, emotion-based, limited logic arguments for doing away with the Electoral College.
And top top it all off (not even mentioning the imperial President and legislative Supreme Court), the news media is skillfully shaping “our” attitudes about who’s qualified, not qualified, absurd, a joke, frightening, picked on unfairly, etc, in the presidential race. They’re weeding out the field until they finally get the chosen candidates that WE get to “vote” for. Smoke, wires and mirrors…. And the brilliant combination of Marx’ and Engels’ final chapter, Cloward & Piven’s 1966 strategy, and Uncle Saul’s “Rules,” have been so thoroughly integrated and perfected that overthrowing the system is pretty much a pipe dream. It will have to implode if there is even a chance of eventually making things “right” again (whatever that means).
Only the few that had “ears to hear” understood Obama’s fundamental transformation objective – because they knew not only who Marx and Engels were, but also what their philosophy was (particularly as summarized in their 3/4 page final chapter), along with Cloward and Piven, and Uncle Saul (Hillary’s old friend from her college days). Want to go back and relive those fateful days of yesteryear? You can re-watch and listen to Obama as he emphatically stated, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” It sent shivers up my spine then, it sickens me now, having watched it happen.
Meanwhile, my prayers are with Greece this weekend, while knowing that in reality they’ve got no more chance at a good outcome than we do in the US – probably even worse.September 18, 2015 at 8:23 pm #43890
… as many are assimilated …
I don’t believe they want to be assimilated, for the most part. The evidence seems clear – they band together, fight the system, and organize to gain power, especially as White America dwindles to a minority. Assimilation used to work relatively well 50+ years ago, and was relatively widespread among immigrants – the legal variety. But the new versions in the form of illegal invaders are not interested in what they can give to their new society, but how much they can extract from it while taking it over. I don’t see this ending well.
I listened to Dr. Thomas Sowell being interviewed just days prior to the 2012 election. He was asked if he believed that the United States could survive as a constitutional republic if Obama got a 2nd term. He waited a moment before answering, and then answered with a simple, “No.” He did go on to explain his reasoning a bit as I recall, but didn’t even begin to walk back that initial response. Welcome to fundamental transformation.September 18, 2015 at 10:10 pm #43891
The electoral college is meaningless and has been for a long time. When the nation was more diversified with regional interests and no organized national media it was more or less effective. Now with mass communication at all levels, the population is more unified within a framework. To win the presidential election a candidate only needs 270 electoral votes. The democrats have been winning because the states with the most electoral votes have large urban areas that vote for democrats. They have large portions of of each state representing other interests but since electoral votes are winner take all, the urban centers win. The inverse is of the intended representation is happening. Really the only representative government is in the US House. The Senate is a popular vote since 1913 when they changed the election process taking it away from the State houses. We have mob rule and have had mob rule since 1913.
September 18, 2015 at 10:29 pm #43894
- This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by 74.
If the Electoral College were done away with, it would be the beginning of the end of States being anything more than historical vestiges. As it is the Feds are trying to micromanage States to a common Federal standard so as to wipe out State to State differences. States would eventually be like Counties are in much of the Northeast. Counties technically exist but County Govt was done away with long ago except for Sheriff’s Depts being based on County jurisdictions, and even then in States like Massachusetts, the County Sheriff’s Dept only function is to run the County Jail and provide some services at the County Courthouse (which itself is a State run entity being there isn’t any County govt.). The Electoral College is one of the key items that makes States pertinent.September 18, 2015 at 11:06 pm #43895
States hardly count for anything now. I mean really, except for a few laws they have no real say in whats going on. Ohhhh we can have different knife laws but how about that pond in your yard or how much water your toilette holds. How about what the kids are suppose to learn in school or how about medical care? States are neutered nothings now. I think our form of government is totally corrupted: Read this: Obama nominates openly gay man to lead Army http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/18/politics/eric-fanning-secretary-of-the-army/index.html
It should read: Obama nominates a person with no morals to lead the Army.If this doesn’t scare the SHT out of you it should.September 18, 2015 at 11:20 pm #43896
74, I know that the Feds have been neutering States into a one size fits all, but I don’t want to admit defeat and let go of this Constitutional vestige of States as sovereign entities. I would not be surprised to see the President try to do away with the Electoral College before he leaves office. I read somewhere that some of the liberals would like to do away with each state having two Senators given it is not representative of the population. They don’t like there being some low population conservative States that have 2 Senators same as California and New York do.
My selfish fear is my State, Vermont, would suffer mightily under majority rule if we weren’t a sovereign State. Our small population and economy yield us no clout whatsoever on the national stage but we’ve got our guaranteed 2 Senators and 1 Congressman and some degree of self governance as a sovereign State. As it is our population behemoth neighbors NY to the West and MA to the South do not like our gun laws being the polar opposite of theirs, and no doubt they’d put a quick end to our comparatively minimal government if they could.September 19, 2015 at 12:27 am #43897
The point I was getting at , was that our blame for how the nation is , ends with our senators and congress , because that is what we DO have control of . After that , I think its all rigged .
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.