So now what?

[taurusowner]

There are two Americas, and they are pulling apart more and more everyday: one producing the wealth and paying the bills and playing by the rules, the other feeding off the first.  Anyone who thinks these two Americas can be united, reconciled, harmonized at this point is smoking the funny stuff, repeating bromides spread by the propagandameisters.  There is one and only PRACTICAL answer: divorce.  Anything else is predicated on a vision of an America that disappeared at least two decades ago.  It is time for Americans to take a head count, get clear about who they are and what they believe, and vow not to aid, abet, or, most importantly, subsidize their enemies any longer.

This is pretty much it dead on.  There are those that produce, and wish to simply live their lives and be left alone.  And there are those who wish only to live by taking what others have produced.  I don't see how there can really be any reconciliation between the two sides.  they are as clear as a burglar and the homeowner he is robbing.  Who common ground is there.  Should the homeowner sit down with the burglar and talk it out as equals?  Should he agree to give the burglar only some of his belongings? No.  Thieves and moochers are to be cast off.

[Perd Hapley]

There are two Americas, and they are pulling apart more and more everyday: one producing the wealth and paying the bills and playing by the rules, the other feeding off the first.  Anyone who thinks these two Americas can be united, reconciled, harmonized at this point is smoking the funny stuff, repeating bromides spread by the propagandameisters.  There is one and only PRACTICAL answer: divorce.  Anything else is predicated on a vision of an America that disappeared at least two decades ago.  It is time for Americans to take a head count, get clear about who they are and what they believe, and vow not to aid, abet, or, most importantly, subsidize their enemies any longer.

I'm not sure what you're getting at with the divorce metaphor, but I'm thinking the answer is more along the lines of putting our collective foot down; politically.  Beat them; politically.  Don't argue with them or try to persuade them, just out-vote them, out-spend them, and out-recruit them.  If we're successful, they'll still be living in our house, but we'll be wearing the pants, and we probably won't be on speaking terms with them. 

OK, this is getting a little uncomfortable, so I'll stop.   

[longeyes]

The way to put our foot down is to tell them we are not going to subsidize our own enslavement, that we are not going to subsidize their collectivist dream.  What will that mean?  Recognizing that we cannot be one nation any more without finding ourselves serfs whose labor and treasure belong to someone else.  If they want a socialist state, let them have it, but not on our dime.

[Perd Hapley]

 If they want a socialist state, let them have it, several miles to the north, in Canada.

Fixed that for you.  

[taurusowner]

The way to put our foot down is to tell them we are not going to subsidize our own enslavement, that we are not going to subsidize their collectivist dream.  What will that mean?  Recognizing that we cannot be one nation any more without finding ourselves serfs whose labor and treasure belongs to someone else.  If they want a socialist state, let them have it, but not on our dime.

How does one do that politically when the moochers outnumber the producers?  When those who want your wealth outnumber you.  We live in a time when you can be robbed, legally and with the robbers under the protection of the government itself.  In fact, many of your robbers are the government.  What peaceful recourse does one have when the entire political process is held by your enemies?

[longeyes]

The real wealth of this nation, long-term, resides in its productivity and creativity, in is values, not in its current negative balance sheet.  Either this minority you speak of will find a way to separate itself or it will migrate.  In the shorter term I think we can expect the Golden Goose to become progressively constipated.

[KD5NRH]

Besides Urban Dictionary, I can't find a reference to that nickname anywhere on the 'net, and have never heard it.  Please refer to the forum rules stickied at the top of the board.

I just found a new reason to run for an elected office; then I'll be able to raise hell if anyone calls me anything but my full, legal name on here.

I guess the quoting function will have to be rewritten to handle that.

[Jamisjockey]

I just found a new reason to run for an elected office; then I'll be able to raise hell if anyone calls me anything but my full, legal name on here.

I guess the quoting function will have to be rewritten to handle that.

Its unbecoming and obnoxious.  It feeds into a DU-like atmosphere.  I'm sure there are plenty of forums on the web where its perfectly acceptable. 

How does one do that politically when the moochers outnumber the producers?  When those who want your wealth outnumber you.  We live in a time when you can be robbed, legally and with the robbers under the protection of the government itself.  In fact, many of your robbers are the government.  What peaceful recourse does one have when the entire political process is held by your enemies?

Don't ask him questions he doesn't have the answer to.  Unless its a witty metaphor about 'divorce', don't expect much content.

There are only two ways to effect change.  The first requies activisim, patience, and motivation.  Voting, actively pursauding people to the side of right, and possibly the creation of a new political animal free of the (R) moniker and mentality.  The second is armed revolution.  And, well, good luck with that, considering the overwhelming might of the US Federal Government.  And I'm not of the shcool of thought that the military would not face off against citizens. 

[Jamisjockey]

Similar topics merged.

[taurusowner]

And I'm not of the shcool of thought that the military would not face off against citizens. 

I'm not sure if it makes you feel any better, but I am both in the military and just entering law enforcement, and I most definitely will not face off against citizens as you put it.

[Boomhauer]

Its unbecoming and obnoxious.  It feeds into a DU-like atmosphere.  I'm sure there are plenty of forums on the web where its perfectly acceptable.

I have to agree with the no-nicknames rule. Sorry, it's very obnoxious and tiring. And it's such a cheap shot when there are endless real reasons to lampoon the SOBs with.

[KD5NRH]

Isn't that enough to pass a Constitutional Amendment? Of course the sorts of other things that can come out of a Con Con might not be at all pleasant.

34 to call it, 38 to ratify.  IIRC, each proposed Amendment would have to be ratified separately, which could limit their ability to do stupid stuff.  (38 states agreeing on something isn't that common, so I'm impressed there are that many standing up to this.)

[longeyes]

If we no longer have the right or ability to peacefully take our leave, then we are already slaves.  If you think you are going to turn what you are seeing around with "activism, patience, and motivation," you haven't been reading the papers or watching tv for a long, long, LONG time.  You're dealing with bandits and thugs and looters, and you want to go slow and reason with them and slowly attract adherents.  As if you had the time.  As if you had elections you could still count on to be legit.  Dude, when Lorettta Sanchez stole that election from Bob Dornan back in freakin' 1998, the GOP did NOTHING, and 12 years later we are where are.  Wake up.  I did not proffer "armed insurrection," YOU did.  I believe we may--may--have the ability to use our militancy to get political autonomy in some form.  If they want to shoot us, well, they will do that, and then the options will change.  It's happened elsewhere, and many died, and some left.  So be it.

[mellestad]

To the OP: My guess is this will be like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.

That is, once the furor dies down it will become popular and there won't be any large scale political support against it.  I would be careful about overestimating oppisition...most of the Dems who don't like it don't like it because of worries about abortion or worries that it did not go far enough and create a public option.  Don't mistake that lack of support for genuine dislike of the package.


Otherwise, if it turns out to be bad and unpopular it will hurt the Democrats badly, the Republicans will come back in to power and they will either repeal or modify it.  Rinse and repeat.

Just my 2c though, we'll just see how it shakes out.  Honestly though, no-one will know for sure either way for at least a year or two.  But you can count on the strong emotions fading as the media focuses on other issues, no matter how it turns out.

[Jamisjockey]

If we no longer have the right or ability to peacefully take our leave, then we are already slaves.  If you think you are going to turn what you are seeing around with "activism, patience, and motivation," you haven't been reading the papers or watching tv for a long, long, LONG time.  You're dealing with bandits and thugs and looters, and you want to go slow and reason with them and slowly attract adherents.  As if you had the time.  As if you had elections you could still count on to be legit.  Dude, when Lorettta Sanchez stole that election from Bob Dornan back in freakin' 1998, the GOP did NOTHING, and 12 years later we are where are.  Wake up.  I did not proffer "armed insurrection," YOU did.  I believe we may--may--have the ability to use our militancy to get political autonomy in some form.  If they want to shoot us, well, they will do that, and then the options will change.  It's happened elsewhere, and many died, and some left.  So be it.

So what praytell is your bright idea then?  "Political autononmy"?  How? Spell it out, I'm not all that smart.

[makattak]

To the OP: My guess is this will be like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.

That is, once the furor dies down it will become popular and there won't be any large scale political support against it.  I would be careful about overestimating oppisition...most of the Dems who don't like it don't like it because of worries about abortion or worries that it did not go far enough and create a public option.  Don't mistake that lack of support for genuine dislike of the package.


Otherwise, if it turns out to be bad and unpopular it will hurt the Democrats badly, the Republicans will come back in to power and they will either repeal or modify it.  Rinse and repeat.

Just my 2c though, we'll just see how it shakes out.  Honestly though, no-one will know for sure either way for at least a year or two.  But you can count on the strong emotions fading as the media focuses on other issues, no matter how it turns out.

It's funny, my guess is it will be like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security as well!

In that, if we don't fix them, they will kill our country. All this did was shorten the time horizon before collapse.

YAY WEIMAR!

[mellestad]

It's funny, my guess is it will be like Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security as well!

In that, if we don't fix them, they will kill our country. All this did was shorten the time horizon before collapse.

YAY WEIMAR!

Well we will see, won't we?

[longeyes]

Don't ask him questions he doesn't have the answer to.  Unless its a witty metaphor about 'divorce', don't expect much content.

There are only two ways to effect change.  The first requies activisim, patience, and motivation.  Voting, actively pursauding people to the side of right, and possibly the creation of a new political animal free of the (R) moniker and mentality.  The second is armed revolution.  And, well, good luck with that, considering the overwhelming might of the US Federal Government.  And I'm not of the shcool of thought that the military would not face off against citizens.

You talk in bromides.  You present false dichotomies.  You sound like so many of the talking heads in the media.  The time came and went for the political sea-change you dream of.   The culture of entitlement and of mendacity and cheating replaced earlier, more sober virtues.  The population that played by the rules and understood why the rules existed has been diluted, not by numbers but by a 50-year assault on assimilation.  We can take a stand or we can try somewhere else.  If the Federal government has the awesome power you say it has, what is the point of patient activism?  There is none; it is already lost.  IF you are right.  I'm not sure you are.  I think it's possible to carve out territory in which to preserve America as we have known it; territory both geographic and conceptual.  That is something we need to attempt, and it is there that our militancy and activism and patience should be applied.  We need a place to regroup and recoup our energies before we got swamped by the "one nation" anthem that is really collectivism with a happy face.

[zahc]

I'm not sure if it makes you feel any better, but I am both in the military and just entering law enforcement, and I most definitely will not face off against citizens as you put it.

Law enforcement already faces off against US citizens every day when they use force to enforce victimless and unconstitutional crimes. I wouldn't expect them to change their tune when unconstitutional crimes are slightly different. I'm not sure about the military, but remember New Orleans.

[Jamisjockey]

Okay, I'm still not really sure what you're saying.
Just what are you proposing?  Just how do you see that playing out?  

[longeyes]

What is political autonomy?  Look to other nations.   You can have regions where different rules apply.  This was true, certainly, in parts of Europe, pre-EU, but it is de facto becoming true again, with the arrival of Muslims in quantity and it is happening here with illegal immigration.  Is it an ideal situation?  Certainly not; it's volatile.  No one would say otherwise.  But it is a way of buying time and hanging on to something precious while we can during which many other historic forces, some unseen and unpredictable, will play out.  That doesn't mean that if it gets bad enough--and it certainly has the potential for that--that many of the best and brightest won't just leave.  There are always refuges for people with brains, ambition, and resources.  Maybe it will be Uruguay, Singapore, New Zealand, or the island of Tasmania, maybe it will be sea-going city-states that are techno-islands.  Freedom has been around since the mystery cults thousands of years ago, whether on the surface or esoteric.

[Boomhauer]

Law enforcement already faces off against US citizens every day when they use force to enforce victimless and unconstitutional crimes. I wouldn't expect them to change their tune when unconstitutional crimes are slightly different. I'm not sure about the military, but remember New Orleans.

There's plenty enough willing lefties to fill the shoes of the fired LEOs that refuse to oppress.

[longeyes]

We unite and tell the Federal government that in the States of X, Y, and Z we demand the right to establish our own rules, by the consent of the governed there, while still keeping allegiance, for collective security, with a national state.  We do this peacefully, with the idea that "diversity," so honored now, must indeed be given its real chance to flower.  Those parts of America that want socialism should have it, but those who do not should not be burdened financially with it.  Let the experiment in diversity bloom with a thousand points of light.

[longeyes]

As many are saying there, there will be no lack of willing oppressors.  So?  That isn't new, it's where we already ARE.  If we do nothing, we will simply become hosts for parasites to feed on.  Dead Citizens Walking.

[AZRedhawk44]

Okay, I'm still not really sure what you're saying.
Just what are you proposing?  Just how do you see that playing out?  

I think he's proposing a sea of 10th amendment oriented State-level protest against FedGov, which results in flyover America attempting to secede or dramatically separate itself from the Union over radically different expectations of taxation and individual responsibility.

It will essentially be the reverse perspective of the Civil War, where the "Union" forces (FedGov) seek to keep their slaves (profitable, responsible Americans) while the "Confederate" forces seek to carve out their own territory from the heart of the US.  It will start from the State legislature level, it will be messy and passionate, it will get only moderately violent (riot level with a handful of assassinations by both sides, not insurrectionist/guerrilla, and certainly not mobilized warfare) and end badly no matter how it ends.

The offenses to our liberty we face today are much greater than those faced in the 1760's and 1770's.  We can lie down and take it, we can fight in a civil manner, or we can fight in an uncivil manner.

Still working on option #2, here.