http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/cop-ruptures/#axzz2rQgfWxAC [video=youtube;9tiDIUwQRmQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tiDIUwQRmQ[/video]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
If you are the principled "conservatives" that you claim to be then you would have addressed the issue before I brought it up. Instead of bad mouthing me or the TRUTH I mentioned you would have the guts and character to admit to your faults. Nothing in your hostile post in any way refutes the truth of what I wrote. All you do is to engage in your never ending anger and emotionalism because you lack the principle to take a consistent position on this and all other issues. Is there a police state? Of course there is - NYC police, sheriff Arpaio, federalized police and New Orleans police attacks on people when they stole their guns during Katrina, attacks on Occupy Wall Street are ALL proof of a police state. This is the same when the FBI used COINTELPRO to attack the Black Panthers and liberal groups. Same when the Pentagon drafted young men into the military. Same when the government under Bush rounded up and harassed people of Middle Eastern background. To say this is off topic is a total absurdity. An absurdity that comes from someone who has again lost the debate as right wingers always do on this forum. Because of your endless lies and hate you right wingers can never and will never win a debate. Now try to address the issue here. You posed the question, is there a police state? I just answered it and proved that it has long been in existence. Further, that today it is the local/state police who are its biggest components. Now let's see you address these same matters instead of engaging in childish recriminations because you have again been defeated by the TRUTH. That, of course, takes a demonstration of principle - one you have failed to show on this forum. Oh by the way, just to prove a point - here is the OP's first words on this thread: Police State USA I believe I may start an on going thread, every day I will post at least one story of police violating basic human rights. Notice how the OP originally started with POLICE abuses. Therefore, my comments have been on topic all along. To say that I have sidetracked only proves the point that I was on topic and correct all along and have defeated your baseless claims. Thus, the TRUTH wins out again - another victory for the patriots!
Too bad Bush did not know that and arranged to have weapons confiscated: [video=youtube;kf8trl69kzo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo[/video] Clearly the video shows federalized police and troops marching under Bush's orders. Naturally, the right wingers all applauded and later said that Democrats were to blame.
I don't mind blaming State governors for any leadership failure regarding what is necessary to the security of a free State.
That's like liberals saying they are against war and then ending all the anti-war protests the moment Obama became President (I know, I was at the protests and suddenly 90% of the people were gone.) Frankly, I think all statists are hypocrites. You have to be, in order to maintain the idea that the state should interfere in some areas of life, but not others. The only way to be a consistent statist is to be a totalitarian. I don't disagree. The problem I have with Obama is that he promised hope and change and has basically become Bush III. Exactly. Their principles are about as vague and meaningless as the principles of your average liberal progressive. You all want government to fix what you perceive as problems and leave you alone for what you are fine with. Principles are only for people like libertarians who are logically consistent and are fine with dealing with problems as peers, rather than as authoritarians. I suggest that you start a new thread on that topic then. I'd be happy to point out their inconsistencies. I just wonder if you see your own.
"Obama = Bush" so why does the right wing love Bush and hate Obama? ---------- "promised change" Republican obstructionism is the real problem as we all know. ------------ "Principles are only for people like libertarians who are logically consistent and are fine with dealing with problems as peers, rather than as authoritarians." **********s claim to be libertarian. --------------- "inconsistencies" If you troubled yourself to read my posts rather than read into them you would have seen that I have been consistent in my principles.
It may be a problem for those who believe that government is the solution to all problems. While I don't think that Republicans are against big government when it suits them, I do appreciate that they tend to slow down the pace of totalitarian domination. Conservatives claim to be for small government. Liberals claim to be compassionate. Lots of people claim lots of things. It's actions and consistency that count, not assertions. Most members of the Tea Party (I don't see a need for childish epithets, but if it makes you feel good....) are for smaller government when it comes to economic regulations and sometimes they call for states' rights, however they do not embrace the principles of liberty and do not apply their same thinking to many areas, such as the right to travel freely, or the right to dispose of one's own property if that property is one's body. In that regard, they are like their liberal counterparts. What principles are those? Totalitarianism?
You really don't know any Tea Party people or actual conservatives. The Tea Party hates Bush. I am firmly in the Tea Party camp, I live in a deeply conservative area in which the major political following is the Tea Party movement. Bush is the reason the Tea Party movement coalesced - it gradually built throughout the Bush disaster and took off with TARP. Bush was not a conservative. Bush was a fiscal disaster and military fool. Iraq, TARP, bailouts, Kelo, No Child Left A Dime, the Patriot Act, the "Rumsfeld" strategy, Medicare Part D, S-CHIP - the list of Bush disasters goes on and on. And what has obama done that counters Bush? Nothing. obama is Bush part 2, continueing and expanding all of his policies. If Bush was black and had a "D" after his name you would think obama had a twin and the progs would be fawning all over Bush. The TP is not Republican, the Republican establishment is not conservative but Democrat Lite. The Republicans are as bad as the "progressives", R's are going down the same road as the progs but at a slightly slower speed.
we all remember the actions of the police when they sprayed Tear gas on Occupy protesters for no reason
Sometimes tear gas gets sprayed for bad reasons and sometimes it gets sprayed for good reasons by the police; but it is never sprayed for no reason whatsoever.
the was no reason for this http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/23/pepper-spray-cop-uc-davis-compensation [video=youtube;VBntXr1QFnU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBntXr1QFnU[/video]
Yes there was. The court (most likely headed by a liberal judge) did not LIKE the reasons stated by the officers involved, but still there were reasons. Bad reasons are still reasons.
Fine. But here it was federalized police and national guardsmen who were used to violate people's constitutional rights. What happened next? The right wingers blamed the Democratic mayor when the blame clearly belongs with REPUBLICAN Bush because he is the one who federalized those troops. If you are a principled federalist that's what you would do. So I ask, do you blame Bush? Just give me a yes or no answer. Nothing else.
Republicans are against big government when it suits them, I do appreciate that they tend to slow down the pace of totalitarian domination The Patriot [sic] Act was created by Bush - innocent Americans of Middle Eastern origin were incarcerated under this evil law without the slightest objection from the far right. See Phillips's American Theocracy for proof. Liberals claim to be compassionate. So do the majority of Americans: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/gallup-poll-finds-democra_b_4683688.html selfish fears swept concerns on the Republican side, whereas concerns for others (and especially the weak) swept concerns on the Democratic side. One can therefore reasonably infer from this survey that the main difference between Democrats and Republicans is the difference between compassion versus psychopathy. childish epithets Mod Edit ~ Rule 7. Using the term on this forum, is a violation of forum rules. Totalitarianism? As you know from reading my earlier posts I have always demanded that the Patriot Act be abrogated. Your fellow right wingers only objected to it when Obama took office. That's hypocrisy of the worse kind.
You really don't know any Tea Party people or actual conservatives. I was associated with James Buckley's senate campaign for a short while in 1971 and have long known NYS conservatives - but dropped out of their fold a long time ago. As for the Tea Party they were active here in St Paul and came on like a firestorm - but only for a short while. As soon as the word "**********" hit the airwaves many of them dropped out of the movement because they were humiliated by their own choice of words and downright stupidity. The Tea Party began on January 2009 in NYS under Trevor Leach: http://theredphoenixapl.org/2011/07/13/analysis-of-the-tea-party-movement/ To his credit Leach is extremely charismatic, is superbly well organized, and is a genuinely able leader. Leach identifies himself as libertarian. Some of his disciples, however, are questionable as you can see from their demonstrations shown in the link above. Clearly many of these people here are not "principled" but are racist and hate filled. If they were opposed to taxation and government intrusionism, where the hell were they during Bush's Patriot [sic] Act, the taking of guns in New Orleans, and the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan??? - - - Updated - - - And where were the Mod Edit ~ Rule 7 to protest against this type of government abuse????
please get back to posting examples of the police state or I'll request this thread be closed for all the off topic posts going on.
Mayor de Blasio announces New York's stop-and-frisk appeal is on hold Mayor Bloomberg’s administration had sought to appeal Judge Shira Scheindlin’s ruling, which stated the NYPD had abused its power. But de Blasio is working to settle the case out of court. ‘We believe these steps will make everyone safer,’ de Blasio told a Brooklyn news conference. ‘This will be one city where everyone rises together, where everyone’s rights are protected.’ http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...top-and-frisk-article-1.1596610#ixzz2s5NkGFGd Good to have a liberal in office in order to stop the criminal police state repression towards minorities. Mod Edit ~ Rule 7 Why did they not march to protest against police criminality towards minorities?? Right wingers always claim to be unprejudiced and supposedly hate government intrusionism. But their failure to attempt to stop police criminal actions and the abusive police state is proof that they really stand for nothing.
Why are State governors getting a free pass regarding what is necessary to the security of a free State; as commanders in chief of it?
It seems to me that someone billing himself as "Mr Truth" would not need to dictate the terms of the debate.
I am not on the right. I had plenty of objections. Where are you objections as countless innocent victims are killed by Obama's drones? Bush is gone. There's someone else in the White House now. Passing the buck back to Bush does no good. Claims are not truth, Mr. "Truth." It's nice that they show concern for (some) others. However, demanding government to do something is not compassion. It's assuaging of guilt. Compassion is actually volunteering to help people, or giving one's own wealth to help others, perhaps by charity. Government cannot give something without first taking it, so where is the compassion for those who are forced to pay for the assuaging of your guilt? I find it to be one type of psychopathy versus another type of psychopathy. Both sides look to others to take care of their problems, criminalizing certain behaviors and cheering on the growth of a bureaucratic class that treats all private citizens as cash cows and serfs. Again, I am not a "right winger." I've never voted for a Republican. You have far more in common with your right-wing counterparts in statism than I do. You both believe that violence is the solution to peaceful problems. As I said, I was out there protesting the war in Iraq and Afghanistan when Obama was elected. The day he was elected, the Vigils for Peace went from hundreds of people to just a few of us libertarians and a few other true pacifists. The rest of you left-wing statists dried up. You had your man in office, and now, for you, war is a good thing again. Even the right wing counter-protestors were more committed to the cause than their opponents on the left. Hypocrisy of the worst kind, indeed. Now, we have a growing police state that didn't start with Obama, and it continues unabated despite his promises of "hope and change". Obama promised transparency, and we have the least transparent administration in history. He promised to leave medical marijuana alone, yet we've seen raids going on by his justice department for years and I have many friends in jail because of his broken promises. He promised hope and change, and he has delivered more of what the previous administrations delivered, only worse.
