The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Rastus on June 26, 2016, 08:41:38 AM
-
Sorry. This %@%^^ really is getting under my skin. I am super happy for the Brits. It may be way too late though....
And if you don't think both parties are against "We the people...", then read about this evil man:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/25/hank-paulson-cites-hillarys-globalist-platform-reason-endorsement/ (http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/25/hank-paulson-cites-hillarys-globalist-platform-reason-endorsement/)
-
Yea, I watched this two face assbag when he was with Wallace this past week! Quite frankly I'm not sure Wallace isn't an assbag too!
-
I applaud the people for voicing their opinion. I applaud the Prime Minister for being principled and stepping down (better to disagree and admit you are out of step then to rule in a setting where you are out of step). I am angered by the financial people who are manipulating the markets out of paranoia (just like 9/11, this does not affect our financial markets). I am angered by our leaders who think "one world government" is more important than diversity and freedom. And, I am really angered by the sound bites I am hearing today that there may be a revote.
All of that said I want everyone to think long and hard as you prepare to pull the lever in November. I ask everyone to quit using the phrase "the lessor of two evils." We have two choices, and if we don't line up behind the one who recognizes what the United States is, where we came from, why we are, and how we got here; and one who has all the players in place to turn us into the first member state of the United Nation's new world government. Our only hope is to get enough thinkers to actually exercise their rights to overrule the selfish, handout seeking, flower children to preserve our nation.
-
I figure the real reason was that the Prime Minister was attempting to manipulate the populace for a revote. The politicians (lawyers), bankers, equity players, corporate MBA's (CEO's, CFO,'s, COO's, Board members & directors) and hedge fund leaders are in bed together to enrich themselves at our considerate expense. It is about what benefits them and the rest of us are just pawns to manipulate.
They care not if 3rd world dregs rape, pillage and murder their world is insulated. And, as I have said, they care nothing of us.
If Hillary get's in it may be game over.
-
Only took'm 240 years, but at least 52% of the Brits finally get it.
-
EU better just pray to God, or Karl Marx, or who ever that GERMANY doesn't follow suit.
-
EU better just pray to God, or Karl Marx, or who ever that GERMANY doesn't follow suit.
I don't think the Germans are far behind, since, without G.B. they will be pretty much footing the bills for the whole thing.
Kinda like we do with the U.N....... >:(
-
I think from a nationalist stand point the French would exit, but they're enjoying sucking on the German teat right now to do anything. Beside, it would mean breaking there overtime rules.
-
We seem to be ahead of Texas on this issue as well.
http://www.concordmonitor.com/Manchester-NH-Foundation-for-New-Hampshire-Independence-NHexit-secession-3029464
ess than a week after Great Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, a group of New Hampshire residents has decided it, too, wants out – of the United States.
“NHexit,” named after the Brexit, or “Britain Exit” campaign, is a new movement that now exists to represent those hoping New Hampshire will someday part ways with the Union and create its own republic.
At their first-ever event on Sunday night, 13 demonstrators gathered with signs displaying phrases like, “Get DC out of NH” and “New Hampshire Independence Now” in front of Manchester’s Norris Cotton Federal Building, a structure that NHexit founder and organizer Dave Ridley said he “would like to see turned into a shopping mall.”
Ridley, 50, of Bedford, who has worked with the Free State Project in the past, said he aims to use the momentum from Britain’s break with the EU to draw attention to issues he sees in the United States federal government, like high taxes and lack of privacy, and maybe even find a legislator willing to propose a resolution for New Hampshire’s secession.
“It would be political suicide, but somebody out there has got to have the courage,” he said.
Ridley believes that the U.S. government has been corrupted to the point where New Hampshire and the country’s values no longer align. The best move for the state, he says, is getting out.
Demonstrator Steven Zeiler of Portsmouth said his interest in the concept of New Hampshire independence has been growing throughout the last several months.
“I’m mainly into the idea of personal independence – people taking responsibility for their communities and their own lives. And New Hampshire independence would be one way of achieving that for people,” he said.
Bob Neighbours, who wore a shirt that said “taxes are theft” to the demonstration, is originally from Washington, but he moved to Nashua last week because he views New Hampshire as one of the most free states in the U.S., but it’s not quite free enough, he said. Neighbours said he thinks secession is inevitable – not only for the United States, but for all unions. He believes after one state succeeds, a domino effect will ensue, and other states and will follow.
“We see how the internet has decentralized a lot of the existing power structures,” he said. “Information is more accessible and people are growing more and more intolerant of the government.”
Ridley said NHexit is allied with the pre-existing Foundation for New Hampshire Independence, a 501(c)(3)nonprofit founded in 2012 after President Obama was elected to a second term in office.
The foundation works from an office in Manchester, with the mission of educating New Hampshire residents about the benefits of the state’s independence. It proposes that the Republic of New Hampshire would thrive as an independent state under its strong, diversified economy and a geographical location ideally suited to international trade, citing New Hampshire’s border with Canada and 18 miles of coastline. It has more than 1,000 likes on Facebook.
The foundation is limited, though, Ridley said, by its 501(c)(3) status. It can’t lobby for legislative change, for example, which is what he wants to do.
Therefore, by creating the NHexit movement, “I’m trying to fill a niche that they can’t fill,” Ridley said.
The foundation supports independence under the authority of New Hampshire’s present Constitution, established in 1784.
Ridley said he agrees with the majority of the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence’s principles, including the idea of preserving the New Hampshire Constitution. Although he says the state’s Constitution isn’t perfect, he describes it as the “least bad government on the planet.”
“But we don’t get to enjoy the fruits of that, because we are overruled in many cases, while being arrested by Washington,” he said.
The legality of secession from the United States has been contested almost from the time of the country’s conception. The Declaration of Independence allows for citizens to “alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government” if necessary, but the meaning of that statement has been controversial throughout American history.
he most famous example of the various attempts at secession was in the mid-1800s, when 11 states in the South attempted to leave the Union, prompting the Civil War. Following the war, in 1869, the Supreme Court ruled that it was illegal for states to secede from the United States.
But that doesn’t mean states haven’t tried. A 2014 Reuters poll showed 23.9 percent of Americans would support their state peacefully seceding from the union if necessary, while 53.3 percent opposed the idea.
Texas, in particular, has been infamous for its secession attempts in recent years. In 2012, a group of independence activists created a petition on the White House’s “We the People” site, which garnered 125,000 signatures. Since the Brexit vote, nationalists in Texas have advocated their own “Texit” campaign, according to CBS News.
As for NHexit, Ridley’s primary goal for the coming months is to have a state legislator submit a simple, strongly worded independence bill, and continue to promote his movement.
-
I'd like to see Texas and Oklahoma hook up and leave. I bet Arkansas would follow. If New Orleans wasn't in the mix, Louisiana may leave too but controlling the Mississippi River may be too much for the Fed...or the children (emotional, greedy lawyers) running the Federal government may totally miss the significance since the water is muddy and they don't have condos overlooking the Mississippi.
-
If every one fed up with the way the GOP and Dems are running the country would vote for a 3rd party instead of trying to leave the Union, I believe things would change much faster and with less trauma than secession.
Instead, folks hold their nose and vote for the perceived lesser of the two evils...and nothing changes Somehow I don't think politicians give a hoot if they get voted for with noses held....they probably get a good chuckle from it.
-
I'd like to see Texas and Oklahoma hook up and leave. I bet Arkansas would follow. If New Orleans wasn't in the mix, Louisiana may leave too but controlling the Mississippi River may be too much for the Fed...or the children (emotional, greedy lawyers) running the Federal government may totally miss the significance since the water is muddy and they don't have condos overlooking the Mississippi.
Hmmm.....I guess 155 years ago the south might have actually been on to something...... ???
If every one fed up with the way the GOP and Dems are running the country would vote for a 3rd party instead of trying to leave the Union, I believe things would change much faster and with less trauma than secession.
Instead, folks hold their nose and vote for the perceived lesser of the two evils...and nothing changes Somehow I don't think politicians give a hoot if they get voted for with noses held....they probably get a good chuckle from it.
I can't disagree with this in principle......
BUT, how do you make it happen?
Everyone who is fed up would have to ALL be on the same page or it just hands the election over to a rep or dem on a platter.
-
Is there something about 3rd party's don't win" that you don't understand ?
Didn't you learn anything from Ross Perot ?
Young people have an excuse. You don't.
-
Is there something about 3rd party's don't win" that you don't understand ?
Didn't you learn anything from Ross Perot ?
Young people have an excuse. You don't.
you have it backwards, Tom.
3rd parties don't win because the idiots think doing the same thing, over and over and over, even while holding there noses, will have different results.
-
Unless and until you change the electoral college, a third party cannot win a presidential election!
The law requires 270 to win at the moment. Just won't work...
There are three voting blocks today and just like the Patriots that fought for our country, they had 1/3 in opposition and 1/3 who didn't give a shit! Not much has changed.. It's why independents have decided recent elections!
-
Yes, itch the electoral college.
Then you peons can be ruled by your betters in NY and Ca.
-
Yes, itch the electoral college.
Then you peons can be ruled by your betters in NY and Ca.
This is true.
The Electoral College system does need reform and consistency from state to state in the way that votes are cast, but it does not need to go away (IMHO).
-
You don't have to win.
Even if all you do is draw enough votes from one candidate to change the outcome, like Perot, you have gained two things.
Unlike Perot who was a flash in the pan candidate, established 3rd parties will be there in the next election and will have candidates at all levels of government.
One of the gains is that you will have let the established parties know they need to "rethink" the issues the 3rd party supports, and
Two, you will have let other voters know that the 3rd party is "growing".
If the 3rd party just gains a few % points of the vote each presidential election, it will become more effective with time.
Getting folks to look 15 or 20 years ahead instead of 15 or 20 months is the problem....but nothing will change with the established parties unless they do.
Another benefit of increased vote percentage is that they funds of the 3rd party can be more effectively spent. As it is, the two major parties make it very difficult for 3rd parties to even get on the ballot. If they haven't garnered a certain % of the preceding election vote, they have to get a large number of signatures on petitions in each state to get on that states ballot. And canvasing for signatures is expensive.
-
Yes, itch the electoral college.
Then you peons can be ruled by your betters in NY and Ca.
Never said ditch it Tom.
BTW, we're already run by the northeast and the west coast and large metro's in between! Heck, when was the last time NH went to a conservative, 1988?
-
You don't have to win.
Even if all you do is draw enough votes from one candidate to change the outcome, like Perot, you have gained two things.
Unlike Perot who was a flash in the pan candidate, established 3rd parties will be there in the next election and will have candidates at all levels of government.
One of the gains is that you will have let the established parties know they need to "rethink" the issues the 3rd party supports, and
Have you been living under a rock for the last 7 years ?
Yes, we do need to win. And if you saw what happened with the Tea party you would understand, THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHAT YOU THINK.
Do you know anyone who didn't oppose Obamacare ? They passed it anyway though, didn't they.
-
Have you been living under a rock for the last 7 years ?
Yes, we do need to win. And if you saw what happened with the Tea party you would understand, THEY DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHAT YOU THINK.
Do you know anyone who didn't oppose Obamacare ? They passed it anyway though, didn't they.
I agree, Tom. Neither of the 2 established parties give a shit what we want..... So, tell me, exactly how do you expect to win anything by continuing to vote for them? Holding your nose has no effect...really.
The only way to get a change (withing the election system) is to vote for a 3rd party and with enough votes hurt one or both of the Big Two.
-
The point is to keep the Democrats out.
-
The point is to keep the Democrats out.
Yup!
Hell, even I came around to Trumplestiltskin!
-
Essentially, what the UK has done is to say that they do not want to be part of the United States of Europe. Their culture and nation is different from other EU nations and they do not like being ruled from Brussels.
Now, the situation here in the US........
This nation is more divided than at any time since the Civil War and in many ways, more divided than ever. The Civil War was triggered by one issue: Slavery. Yes, I know that it was about state's rights - but in this case it was about the right of states to own slaves.
Today, the issue is that the federal government wants to ignore both the founding principles and the plain reading of the Constitution. The "blue" states are rapidly infringing upon many of our civil rights and the federal government will undoubtedly try to do this same.
Consider California, my native state from which I reluctantly fled one year ago. As far as California politicians are concerned, the 2nd Amendment does not exist. The number of oppressive and unconstitutional bills that land on Gov. Jerry Brown's desk is stunning. He vetoes the worst of them - his replacement will sign all of them.
However, guns are not the only issue. Religious freedom is under attack as well. A bill is likely to pass this session that will forbid instructors at religious colleges and universities from discussing religion unless that is the specific subject of the class. Academic freedom? Not for the religious! Let that sink in for a moment. This bill would forbid an instructor at a Catholic school from discussing the role of the church in social work in a class on sociology. Students frequently choose to attend religiously affiliated schools in order to learn how their faith relates to their chosen field. This bill forbids that. When they finish doing this, they will add more restrictions.....
The above is but one example. Know this, if Hillary wins and packs SCOTUS, these kind of bills (and executive orders) will be pushed nationally.
So, how would people in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Georgia and Idaho react to the federal government shoving this down their throats? How would they react to an order to turn in their guns given at the same time as their religious freedom is under attack? I know how my new home state would react - and I am confident that my state would not be alone. Best case scenario would be a peaceful parting of ways. I do not like to think about the worst case scenario.
So, this fall get out and vote for Trump. Hold your nose if you have to, but vote for him. Hillary must be stopped. Our entire future depends upon it.
-
Our focus here, mostly due to commonality, is about the highest level of political office. And I agree that Trump will provide a respite instead of loss or rights and human dignity we will suffer if Hillary comes into office.
However, this can't be fixed from the top down. It has to be fixed from the bottom up. We need to focus on fixing our own backyard...the field down the road will then take care of itself.
If it can't be fixed...if we have passed the point where ruin cannot be avoided, then leaving is an academic option. In the War Between The States there were geographic battle lines. In our reality there is little geographic difference except between urban and rural areas. Red state, blue state, it's a matter of degrees.
I doubt an attempt at "divorce" now would end any better than it did in the 1860's. In fact, I think it would look a lot like Kosovo.
But if it can be fixed it lies on all of our shoulders to work to fix it and not to bemoan a candidate or candidates who we expect to do our work for us. We must be politically active.
If we can't fix it we need to prepare ourselves and our children to live through enslavement. It may be many generations before the yoke of suffering and oppression we seem poised to receive may be thrown off.
-
Essentially, what the UK has done is to say that they do not want to be part of the United States of Europe. Their culture and nation is different from other EU nations and they do not like being ruled from Brussels.
Now, the situation here in the US........
This nation is more divided than at any time since the Civil War and in many ways, more divided than ever. The Civil War was triggered by one issue: Slavery. Yes, I know that it was about state's rights - but in this case it was about the right of states to own slaves.
Today, the issue is that the federal government wants to ignore both the founding principles and the plain reading of the Constitution. The "blue" states are rapidly infringing upon many of our civil rights and the federal government will undoubtedly try to do this same.
Consider California, my native state from which I reluctantly fled one year ago. As far as California politicians are concerned, the 2nd Amendment does not exist. The number of oppressive and unconstitutional bills that land on Gov. Jerry Brown's desk is stunning. He vetoes the worst of them - his replacement will sign all of them.
However, guns are not the only issue. Religious freedom is under attack as well. A bill is likely to pass this session that will forbid instructors at religious colleges and universities from discussing religion unless that is the specific subject of the class. Academic freedom? Not for the religious! Let that sink in for a moment. This bill would forbid an instructor at a Catholic school from discussing the role of the church in social work in a class on sociology. Students frequently choose to attend religiously affiliated schools in order to learn how their faith relates to their chosen field. This bill forbids that. When they finish doing this, they will add more restrictions.....
The above is but one example. Know this, if Hillary wins and packs SCOTUS, these kind of bills (and executive orders) will be pushed nationally.
So, how would people in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Georgia and Idaho react to the federal government shoving this down their throats? How would they react to an order to turn in their guns given at the same time as their religious freedom is under attack? I know how my new home state would react - and I am confident that my state would not be alone. Best case scenario would be a peaceful parting of ways. I do not like to think about the worst case scenario.
So, this fall get out and vote for Trump. Hold your nose if you have to, but vote for him. Hillary must be stopped. Our entire future depends upon it.
+1 on that, Vince.
There's not enough folks who know, or care, about the impact this election will have on SCotUS.
I saw a statement today... this is not worded exactly, but something to the effect:
It's not about the facts that Hillary Clinton is a liar, cheat, traitor etc....everyone knows that....It's about the fact that so many people know it, and yet they still support her.
Trump is a tourniquet.
I don't know if he can mend the wounds (that will take too much time), but maybe he can stop the bleeding.