Well Then…. Let’s Just Get it All Out There Part 2

stand-up-for-americaAs I mentioned in part one, I have finally been able to get to reading al of the comments directed to me out there. I am taking the time to answer some of them directly so that we can move forward with a better understanding of what is true for me. In the first part I responded to TexasChem on the ideas of personal freedom and liberty for all persons in the United States, regardless of their religion or sexual orientation. Now I will take the time to address D13, who seemed to question my path forward. The interesting thing is that I am not much different from him, but I think that he has misconstrued my thoughts and ideas. So I want to clear that up and discuss how I view the discussions on this site as three distinctly different ongoing conversations.

I will say up front D13, I will often give you a wider berth on subjects because of our shared background. Now, we all know that I am smarter than you, simply because I was a Senior Enlisted member and you were relegated to the officer corps. And we all know enlisted men make the military work (I certainly hope that you take that for the humor intended, as rank meant much less in our line of work than most of the military, and I obviously don’t actually believe that rank has anything to do with your intelligence). In reality, that shared brotherhood gains you a lot of “street cred” with me obviously. So I am willing to listen to any opinion that you choose to share. But I think you are way off base in terms of understanding where I stand in today’s mixed up world. I will answer parts of what you posted and then I will expand further on my thoughts.

What is the alternative since NONE of you believe that you can change anything by the vote. Keep on talking and not doing anything? Keep on spouting rhetoric with no solutions? Keep on talking about understanding core beliefs and then criticizing those whose core does not agree with yours? BF, you are good at that. You did it to me. Every time you make a claim that someone’s thinking is “flawed”…you just made a judgment. You all say that your reason for posting is make people question and then everyone of you criticize our government and the freedoms and liberties that are being taken away (which is true) but you offer no solutions….saying that any solution that infringes upon the rights of another is no solution so do nothing. Each of you challenge everyone (and this is good)and each of you support free thought (and this is equally good) and then you criticize those that do it and you pass judgment on those that do not agree with you and then you camouflage, very successfully at times, that you are not passing judgment but trying to make people question. I would rather you just say…think about it this way and leave it alone. You get your point across and you just challenged thought. But when someone does not see it YOUR way, then you have a “cat” and claim that they do not know, or do not understand, and continue to try to destroy the free thinking that you claim you are trying to support.

If Voting Changed Anything IllegalLet me say up front that I was shocked to find you level this criticism at me. A look back at the archives would find me arguing vehemently against BF and his claim that voting serves no purpose. That is one of the stances that BF takes that I stridently oppose. More on this below.

As for passing judgement on those who offer their thoughts here. I don’t know how to respond to such a claim. Perhaps I do and have not realized it. If that has been the perception of anyone here allow me to formally apologize. I do challenge people and their thought processes here. My goal in starting the site was to enable dialogue between opposing viewpoints and subsequently to allow all of us to learn from one another. I am challenged every single day on the opinions and viewpoints that I put forth. I relish the learning that I get from that. And while I get frustrated when JAC, BF, and others argue me to death on a subject, I find that I have learned more about what I believe and refined more of my path forward in the past 8 months on this site than I did in many years prior. Being pushed and probed on what I think allows me to refine my argument and belief system, so I attempt to do the same pushing and probing to others who post here.

I can speak for no one but myself. I have no right to do more than that. I do not wish to make anyone bend to what I believe. I will argue my points as far as I can. I try to make people see my point of view. But they do not have to follow it. If anything that I do, in any way, stifles or destroys free thinking on this site, then I will cease doing so. That is the last thing I have ever wanted to do.

I would be willing to wager that every one of you use government facilities, police department, fire department, federal airways, federal airwaves, pay your taxes, and you are using the freedom that this country protects to espouse your beliefs and core values and this VLDG movement. And, this country does protect your freedoms. It does not provide them….it protects them. Like it or not. And the minute you claim brainwashing by years of teachings, etc….(as you have)then you have done something you claim you do not do. You passed a judgment and then use the “Las Vegas” smoke and mirrors trick to camouflage under…I am not passing judgment, I am simply trying to make you think and question.

I certainly do use all those things. I think that you will find, much to the chagrin of BF and some others, that I in no way espouse or believe that the government should be abolished. I, in no way think that all taxes are illegal. You are making the same argument that I have made time and time again here. So I am baffled that I would be thought of as thinking differently than this.

indoctrination-cneter-aheadAs for the brainwashing statement. I do believe that to an extent. I believe that the public education system is doing its level best to eliminate the spirit of liberty and freedom in this country. I do believe that there is a lot of “learned” thought processes today that undermines the concepts of liberty and freedom. I do my best to work past those and discuss how we can reverse course in that arena. So I guess I am guilty of this.

If I have read your postings and archives correctly,and I think that I have, each of you correctly have pointed out discrepancies by philosophy and definitions of freedom and liberties and the erosion of same. I cannot agree with you more. Our government and the people in power are usurping and were slowly (and now furiously) taking our liberties and freedoms away. And you are correct in saying that something needs to be done. But, and this is my judgment, doing nothing is worse than doing something. We have a system and, I agree, that it is flawed. But, never the less, it is our current system and our current government. The vote, right or wrong, is still the method we (USA) employ and still the most important weapon that we (as individuals and citizens)have. Al Franken proved that the vote is powerful as that is what was manipulated to get him elected and part of the bullshit that now resides in Washington. (And my bullshit throwing arm is an area weapon…it is non discriminatory and hits ALL in Washington). The system is good, but the mechanics are flawed. It can be fixed, we just need the statesmen to do it.

I think we are on the same page here. You can tell me after reading below.

It appears to me, that I (and the gang of five above) are saying the same thing. But the method to achieve change is different. I believe in a form of government (for what ever you wish to call it, the minute a group gets together and formulates a theory and espouses it, they just formed a government…for example VLDG). Any organization that has rules is a government, including the Lion’s Club, Boy Scouts, Camp Fire Girls, Little League Baseball, religion, work, etc.

So, voting and organizing the vote to stop this madness is the most direct and correct way. Stop the leak, then repair the dam. Change it again for the better after that…then change it again. But do something other than lip service. I hope that it never gets to the point that change will require getting back to the basics, and those basics were the point of a gun in the end. Rebellion against an evil empire.

I think we are in agreement here as well.

Don't Mess With TexasTexas tried the BF approach. Don’t mess with me and I won’t mess with you and we will be just fine. Texas, as a free and independent state in Mexico, helped Mexico fight and beat Spain. Texas lived quietly for years as a free republic in Mexico. A truly free republic with a government that understood this concept. That is until 1821, when a military dictator decided that a free Mexican Republic is not what he wanted. The rest is history that is well documented. He came to us with guns because years of talking did not work and got his ass kicked. And the government of Texas at that time did wish to discourse other than fight and tried it. I only wish we did not aspire to Statehood but, alas, we did. I use Texas a a model because we are still this way to an extent. I wish it were more so but we still have a strong separation of powers here and strong constitution that requires fiscal responsibility. It is constantly attacked by interlopers but we are holding off well, for the time being. Wish we were still a republic,though.

I greatly admire what I am learning about Texas. I hope that at some point you or someone else knowledgeable will offer a guest commentary that completely explains the way that Texas operates, its government, its processes, and its constitution. I think it would help greatly to have that example of something less intrusive that is working on a large scale.

Time for me to shut up, perhaps for good (not).

Peace to all until the need for the .50 cal is required.

Barrett 50 calI, for one, hope that you never shut up for good. We all know that your previous occupation afforded you a wealth of experience and a level of common sense in your approach to problem solving that, if no one else appreciates, you know that I do. That is what we did, brother, solve problems. I need all the help I can get from those that think like me. I think that you do, but you will have to be the judge of that. As for the .50 cal, that my friend is one of the greatest “problem solvers” ever invented.

everyone of you criticize our government and the freedoms and liberties that are being taken away (which is true) but you offer no solutions….saying that any solution that infringes upon the rights of another is no solution so do nothing.

I decided to focus on this part of your overall response because I think it is the most important aspect of what we talk about here. I see our discussions on the site falling into three different categories. The first category encompasses the series such as the “Building a Foundation” series. This category is one where we talk about what we would ultimately want to have happen. If the collapse that some fear were to actually come to fruition, and we were given the chance to start anew, build from the ground up, what would we create? The Constitution lays out the most morally just form of government ever created. But it is not without flaws. So what could we do to make a better one if given the chance. In these discussions we are critical of ideas that step away from moral bounds, that cross into the realm of being unethical or infringing on another’s rights, because that is what we decided we wanted to avoid.

The second category of discussions deals with today’s issues and the fights that we see in current events. The actions that our government should and should not be undertaking. Sections such as “March Towards Socialism” series fall into this group. This category focuses, in my opinion, on education. It is a chance for all of us to learn about the realities of the issues, because we know that the politicians and the media are not going to tell us the truth. Education on the issues is the first step in confronting them. We must understand our opponent and their tactics if we are to use the third category effectively.

Voter ApathyThe third category, which I will freely admit we have been lacking lately, is dedicated to actually stopping the runaway train that we find ourselves speeding down the rails on. Let me start with voting. I will admit that voting has not, thus far, been an effective tool in holding government accountable. I do not believe, as BF does, that this is the case as a matter of the nature of the act. I instead believe that the reason that voting has not been able to get the job done thus far is because the American voter is apathetic, uninformed, uneducated in political realities, and too busy to engage in what would be a difficult subject to garner enough knowledge on. My intention as a course of action begins with education. It begins with getting people to understand the reality of what we face, of what is happening, and of what government is doing wrong. Only then will the vote be an effective tool. It will not be an effective tool so long as those who think like we do are such a small minority who will be crushed by a majority of people getting their opinion from the media and other dishonest or uninformed sources.

I liked your analogy that we must first stop the leak before we fix the dam. I think that is accurate. Our government has spent ample time under both parties stripping Americans of their freedoms, liberties, wealth, and ability to think for themselves. They have spent ample time creating a culture of dependency on government when government has anything but our best interests at heart. We have to begin by stopping this particular leak. The answer to doing so is as elusive to me as it is to many, but we are searching for avenues to take. Before you condemn those like myself and JAC, remember that we are taking part in those activities as well. I attended the tea parties. So did he. I spend 4-5 hours a night writing and researching for this blog for no other reason than to be a voice in the storm to help end the madness going on in Washington.

futility1I am willing to give voice to EVERY idea aimed at doing something. This blog has given voice to articles on the tea parties and GOOOH and other actions that can be taken. I have never, ever been an advocate of doing nothing. I will challenge every idea. Because I don’t think we need to dedicate scarce resources to a tactic or plan that does not help us to meet the goals that we have to meet. But I am willing ot hear any plan at all and offer my thoughts. I am actively searching at all times for what we can do now to stop what is happening. But I don’t pretend to have all the answers.

Often this may appear as being what you have claimed. Just because I can see that a certain plan will not work does not mean that I have a better plan. But are you advocating that I get behind every plan that I don’t have an alternative for? Let’s put it in terms you and I can relate to. You and I lead our teams to the objective. We know that our guys cannot cross the field we need to cross without exposing ourselves to massive fire that will surely wipe out both teams. There is no clear alternative to crossing the field but to do so is doomed to certain failure. Do we simply send our teams out to die because we have to do something? Of course not. We may not have the answer to devising a better way to do it yet. But that certainly doesn’t mean that we take a known failing course of action. We stop, think, and try to find a better way that will result in mission success. We avoid losing our teams to useless actions.

Unlike BF, I have never submitted to the idea that we can simply ignore government and it will simply lose its power and implode. I know that we have to figure out the first steps in taking back our country. I know that government is going to exist no matter what, in some form or fashion. And I have argued over and over that government is something that must exist in today’s society lest we fall into true anarchy, which never lasts long and results in a government eventually anyway.

To that end I will support what I can. I will do what I can. If it means that I have to make the choice between the lesser of two evils on a ballot, I will do so because to not do so is to give my silent consent to the worse of two evils. Obama won by 3,000,000 votes. And that was important in my eyes. It should have made him understand that a “mandate” from the people was far from what he got. When a candidate gets 80% of the vote perhaps he could make that claim. So I advocate voting. I advocate action. But that action must be just, and it must have a chance of making a difference. I cannot support something immoral, and I won’t waste my time on something that plainly won’t have any effect what-so-ever.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Birdman says:

    I think we are all frustrated with the current system and where the liberals are taking the country. We don’t have a third category response. I liked your analogy about leading troops in a situation that will fail. I don’t know what to do other than continue to write your representatives or attend tea parties, even if it is futile. The liberal democrats cannot be stopped if they want to pass cap and trade, health care, amnesty or any other programs. We have to do what we can for now and vote out democrats and several republicans in 2010.

    I see no harm in continuing first category discussions to at least set our moral compass and then use it to establish a third category response.

  2. I got hammered a little for expressing my thoughts, that those parts of Sharia law which promote killing or enslaving people of different faiths should not be taught in public or private school. I must be dense, since every time I write these words, I do not feel like a racist. So how do I justify refusing them their freedom of religion? I have not advocated censoring their churches or what parents teach in their homes.

    When a foreigner come to America to live, and pursue citizenship, they are required to learn our language and some history. This is meant to bring them to be a part of our society. If they refuse, does this not mean they have no interest in becoming Americans? That they are in fact invaders, not immigrants?
    Our founding fathers had some thoughts on immigrants.

    * George Washington, in a letter to John Adams, stated that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that “by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.”

    * In a 1790 speech to Congress on the naturalization of immigrants, James Madison stated that America should welcome the immigrant who could assimilate, but exclude the immigrant who could not readily “incorporate himself into our society.”

    * Alexander Hamilton wrote in 1802: “The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits; on the exemption of the citizens from foreign bias and prejudice; and on that love of country which will almost invariably be found to be closely connected with birth, education and family.”

    * Hamilton further warned that “The United States have already felt the evils of incorporating a large number of foreigners into their national mass; by promoting in different classes different predilections in favor of particular foreign nations, and antipathies against others, it has served very much to divide the community and to distract our councils. It has been often likely to compromise the interests of our own country in favor of another. The permanent effect of such a policy will be, that in times of great public danger there will be always a numerous body of men, of whom there may be just grounds of distrust;—the suspicion alone will weaken the strength of the nation, but their force may be actually employed in assisting an invader.”

    * The survival of the American republic, Hamilton maintained, depends upon “the preservation of a national spirit and a national character.” “To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens the moment they put foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty.”

    http://vdare.com/malkin/070703_assimilation.htm

    Countries that have failed to require their immigrants are reaping a poor harvest. There have been “honor killings” in the US.

    There were up to 8,000 forced marriages reported last year in England

    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3998

    • LOI

      While I often like Ms. Malkin’s work I must take exception to her position that we are NOT a nation of immigrants.

      She is guilty here, in my opinion, of exactly the thing she accuses Liberals of doing. That is to change the accepted understanding and meaning of a phrase to “reframe” a political debate.

      I submit WE ARE A NATION OF IMMIGRANTS. Hell, even the ancestors to the Native’s immigrated here, although some won’t admit it. We are immigrants or the descendents of immigrants. We all know it and it has been one of the major cultural identities that make us Americans. I hope we don’t fall into the trap of rejecting the phrase to suit our immediate problems with border security and lack of assimilation efforts.

      The use and understanding of this phrase pre-dates the problems Ms. Malkin is trying to address with her point. Again, I hope we don’t abandon our institutional memory represented by this phrase.

      On the issues of those who violate our laws or conspire to do so, I once again point out that the actual act of force/violence is not required to defend one self or our citizens from its use. If we are a moral nation with moral law based on non-initiation of force then the “forced” marriage of minors is a violation of the law, regardless of your religious beliefs. That is why all religious based standards have no place in law. The law of the land must supercede the religious standards. To do otherwise is antithetical to Liberty.

      Oh by the way. Those immigrants Hamilton was all tied in a knot over? They were French.

      Bet everyone is smiling now.
      JAC

      • JAC,

        I am indifferent to Mrs.Malkin’s position. It just came up first in a goggle search on founding fathers thoughts on assimilation.

        “George Washington, in a letter to John Adams, stated that immigrants should be absorbed into American life so that “by an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendants, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.” WHOOP!!, There it is!

        That says a lot to me, that a group teaching its OK to kill or enslave the majority of Americans is not being assimilated. Freedom of speech has been shown to not be absolute. I do not see the government having the right to enter any church or home and attempt to control what is said there. They already exercise control over schools, you cannot say a prayer, wear these shirts, etc., so to say they cannot tell a school teaching all women are property is not allowed?

        I thought this was “Stand Up for America”?

        • I get the sense that you think I have been criticizing your position/concern here.

          Is that true?

          • JAC,

            No, not you. I am trying to nail down a thought here. Flag expresses that government = evil. An absolute. I am saying the 1st amendment is not an absolute. And that the government suppressing the teaching of enslaving or killing others is a reasonable infringement on free speech. I feel some of our problems arise from condoning that which should not be, out of some effort to demonstrate our tolerance, or to be PC.

            You have written on principals many times. Do you think the US has free speech at this time?
            The government you envision with the VDLG, will it have absolute free speech?

            • Black Flag says:

              . Flag expresses that government = evil. An absolute.

              Yes. But understand why its an absolute.

              It is because of my definition of government and my definition of evil.

              There is a very direct and specific reason I demand everyone else’s definition of government – since that changes the entire discussion, right?

              But the vast majority are completely lost in finding that definition. Most want their wish and refuse (or can’t see) the reality of what it is.

              I am saying the 1st amendment is not an absolute.

              Well, the Constitution is not the document I would use to make a point about rights…..

              However, the 1st Ad. is a derivation from a Right – it is not The Right.

              It derives from Freedom – you have a Right to do anything you want as long as it does not impose upon my Right.

              So, a derivation of Right cannot supersede its source.

              But the Right – Freedom – is an Absolute.

            • Life:

              We do not have absolute free speech, nor do we even have free speech as envisioned by our founders. They probably would have supported censorship of pornography, without question, but would have opposed all efforts to control, permit or otherwise regulate where, when and how we can exercise “political speech”. We often forget that their concern was the power of govt to muzzle the people.

              Under VDLG we would have absolute free speech. That means freedom to speek our minds without govt interferance. But alas, our speech can not be used to create force against another who is innocent.

              Thus slander and lible are still no allowed. Screaming fire in my theater is not allowed unless there is a fire.

              As BF has pointed out, the primary right is freedom. All other principles we consider must be consistent with that.

              Possible Step One: The govt would dispose of all excess communication band widths (frequencies) by lottery. Those winning the lottery would be the new owners. Those currently using them would have to deal with the new owner.

              Not excess are those needed by the govt for secure communications.

              How’s that for a teaser?
              JAC

              • Free speech: Shouting “fire” in a crowded theater…
                Sorry for just posting links, but when I have said it all before….

              • LOI:

                One other thought specific to the radical school or any other group preaching violence.

                I think we have to go back to BF’s use of “clear and present danger” to help us with this.

                We all know of crack pots who preach violence but nobody listens. If someone acts and the connection is made then both do time. If someone is about to act “clear and present” or the teacher is storing “weapons and explosives” while recruiting and training in their use, then I would think we have crossed the “clear and present” danger line.

                Perhaps BF can jump in here and help, since he originally raised this concept.

                I think we all agree that as free people living within a free country we can not just sit around and let thugs conspire and then act to take it all away. But our preventative actions must be consistent with the principle of freedom.

                If we can not, then we will have to back up and start rechecking our definitions and/or principles that have supported us so far.

                Because what a strange freak of the nature that would be that a free people could not protect their freedom, due to the very nature of freedom itself.

                By the way, that was a view held by J. Edger Hoover, and we all know what his rationalizations led.

              • “as free people living within a free country we can not just sit around and let thugs conspire and then act to take it all away.”

                I think there were a couple of former students who committed violence as a possible result of their
                schools teachings. I am willing to admit this is a gray area that has not yet reached an action point.
                But that was my main thought, that there is a point where we don’t let thugs conspire, and that is a violation of the principal of complete freedom of speech.

              • Black Flag says:

                Each part of C&PD is discrete and wholly required. IF one cannot be shown, there is no right of preemptive action.

                For any example, apply the question?

                Explosives and weapons storage – is it clear this is being done? Is it clear as to why (that is, it must be shown to be for a reason detrimental to the safety of others; the owner does not need to show a reason why – the onus is on us to find evidence that he has said or acted in the past or intends to act with harm).

                Present – are they here or over there?

                Danger – obvious.

    • Patience, please. There have been many ethnic groups that have immigrated to the USA, and it took many years for them to discard their old ways and fully integrate into the mainstream US culture. For example, the Irish. You could tell an Irishman for a hundred and fifty years ago. They lived within their communities, spoke Irish to each other, and were distinct. Or maybe Italians. Lots of them in NY, and they have no problem telling you about their proud heritage. They built their own churches… So do you expect any immigrants to immediately throw off their old customs and way of life the moment they cross the threshold?
      This is not how it happened in the past, yet your expectations exceed the reality.
      Sharia law? Oh yea, it’s been around over 1400 years. It has been suggested that several fundamental English common law institutions may have been derived or adapted from similar legal institutions in Islamic law and jurisprudence, and introduced to England after the Norman conquest of England by the Normans, who conquered and inherited the Islamic legal administration of the Emirate of Sicily. Let’s see, what did they come up with first… juries, allowing the guilty access to lawyers,prohibition of illegal drugs, and lawsuits. Other possible influences of Islamic law on English common law include the concepts of a passive judge, impartial judge, res iudicata, the judge as a blank slate, individual self-definition, justice rather than morality, the law above the state, individualism, freedom of contract, privilege against self-incrimination, fairness over truth, individual autonomy, untrained and transitory decision making, overlap in testimonial and adjudicative tasks, appeal, dissent, day in court, prosecution for perjury, oral testimony, and the judge as a moderator, supervisor, announcer and enforcer rather than an adjudicator.
      But of course, you know all that, because I cannot imagine anyone rejecting a concept without any knowledge of it.

      After Sultan al-Kamil defeated the Franks during the Crusades, Oliverus Scholasticus praised the Islamic laws of war, commenting on how al-Kamil supplied the defeated Frankish army with food:

      “Who could doubt that such goodness, friendship and charity come from God? Men whose parents, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, had died in agony at our hands, whose lands we took, whom we drove naked from their homes, revived us with their own food when we were dying of hunger and showered us with kindness even when we were in their power.”

      And you condemn Sharia law with only the most superficial understanding of it?

      • Black Flag says:

        Hear Hear Dave!

      • USWeapon says:

        Well spoken Dave!

      • Dave,

        “But of course, you know all that, because I cannot imagine anyone rejecting a concept without any knowledge of it.”
        Well no, I did not know all that, thanks for sharing.

        “And you condemn Sharia law with only the most superficial understanding of it?”

        Is that what I have done? My words were,” that those parts of Sharia law which promote killing or enslaving people of different faiths should not be taught in public or private school.”

        When I condemn, its more like this.
        http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534116,00.html?test=latestnews

        But I was not doing so, that to judge any religion by what a faction does is not honest. Nor was saying that I was condemning
        all Sharia law. What is your thoughts on those parts where women are property or non-believers can be killed or enslaved?

  3. I made it to E-6 in the Navy, so your comment is well taken. Of course it is meant to be humorous, so hope the Officers don’t get offended.

    I was thinking, maybe we need a Woodstock-style event to try to get the MSM’s attention? I was 13 at the time, but I remember that the performers were trying to send a message. OK, we weren’t as concerned back then about drug abuse but there was a message of peace.

    I know I’m all over the map today, but the other comment I have was about Obama’s speech to the NAACP where he seemed to channel Bill Cosby. I was amazed and this is one of the few times I’ve agreed with him.

    We are so screwed if we let this Administration continue with their policies. They won and they don’t care what We the People want anymore. Firing the incumbents might help, but Jan 2011 may already be too late.

  4. Murphy's Law says:

    I appreciate what you do on this site, USW…….your articles are very well thought out and well written. I am in awe of your service to our country, as well as D13’s service.

    I am totally with D13 in believing that the vote is one of the best ways we have of making any changes in the direction of our country. I am also with you in believing that (taking from your words above):

    “the reason that voting has not been able to get the job done thus far is because the American voter is apathetic, uninformed, uneducated in political realities, and too busy to engage in what would be a difficult subject to garner enough knowledge on. My intention as a course of action begins with education. It begins with getting people to understand the reality of what we face, of what is happening, and of what government is doing wrong. Only then will the vote be an effective tool.”

    I believe you’ve nailed it there.

    I also think that grassroots movements like the TEA parties, blogs like this one, and websites such as D13 is working on have the potential of being very effective means of educating the public. Of necessity we start small and build from there.

    Thanks for the springboard you are providing here……I’m still relatively new to this site, but not new to this way of thinking. This blog is really helping me crystallize not only my views, but also the course of action needed in order to actually have an impact. It’s a lot better than just bitching and wishing things were different!

  5. Going back to a point quoted at the top of the post- When those of us who oppose the idea of government use government services or facilities it is because we are forced to do so because of a coercively enforced monopoly. I WILL NOT call the cops, and would prefer that no one ever do so “on my behalf”. I would MUCH rather be able to choose a free market competitor’s roads, dispute resolution, or fire department. But I am “legally” denied that choice. So, my only option is to minimize using the government services in any way I can and be called hypocritical by those who can’t see the beam in their own eye.

  6. Black Flag says:

    Some personal responses:

    BF, you are good at that. You did it to me. Every time you make a claim that someone’s thinking is “flawed”…you just made a judgment.

    YES! But not in the way you want it to be!

    I judge you by your own stated core principle. I do not use mine.

    I demand consistency. If you act or believe in contradiction to your stated principles, I do come down on you! If you honestly review every instance, you will see that I am consistent that way – I point out where you are inconsistent and demand an explanation.

  7. Ok, USW…Texan number two reporting in……
    _____________________________________________
    USW says: Let me say up front that I was shocked to find you level this criticism at me.
    ———————————-
    First and foremost, I am, indeed sorry, that you felt anything was aimed at you. It was not.

    Also, I take absolutely no offense at you for your comment as to enlisted and officer. If you read my post correctly, you will find that I was an E-6 for ten years prior to becoming a cannon fodder 2lt. Consequently, it made me a far better officer than the proverbial “ring bangers”.
    __________________________________________________

    USW says: As for passing judgment on those who offer their thoughts here. I don’t know how to respond to such a claim.
    ——————–

    You owe no such explanation as you do not pass judgments, in my opinion. You have never asked my opinion and when I gave it and justified it according to the gospel of D13…you have never said that my reasoning was flawed nor wrong. You have never told me that I did not know what I was talking about if my opinion differed from yours. You have never tried to insult me with platitudes and oxymoron.
    ——

    USW says: Being pushed and probed on what I think allows me to refine my argument and belief system, so I attempt to do the same pushing and probing to others who post here.

    D13 responds: Correct in all cases. Pushing and probing to foster thought is just fine and respected by me no matter who it is from.
    ____________________________

    USW says: I can speak for no one but myself. I have no right to do more than that. I do not wish to make anyone bend to what I believe. I will argue my points as far as I can. I try to make people see my point of view. But they do not have to follow it. If anything that I do, in any way, stifles or destroys free thinking on this site, then I will cease doing so. That is the last thing I have ever wanted to do.

    D13 responds: Perfectly stated and understand and in no way do you do this whatsoever.
    __________________________________

    USW says: I certainly do use all those things. I think that you will find, much to the chagrin of BF and some others, that I in no way espouse or believe that the government should be abolished. I, in no way think that all taxes are illegal. You are making the same argument that I have made time and time again here. So I am baffled that I would be thought of as thinking differently than this.

    D13 responds: My post was not directed at you as our thinking is on line with each other with minor exceptions and those are so minor as to not be mentioned. I do not think of you differently in this. I do find it the height of hypocrisy to denounce our government (flawed tho it is), to denounce those that support our government (even in its present and horrible state) and then use the very things that government provides. I am not inferring that you do this but others have made the inference to themselves.

    USW says: As for the brainwashing statement. I do believe that to an extent. I believe that the public education system is doing its level best to eliminate the spirit of liberty and freedom in this country. I do believe that there is a lot of “learned” thought processes today that undermines the concepts of liberty and freedom. I do my best to work past those and discuss how we can reverse course in that arena. So I guess I am guilty of this.

    D13 responds: You, sir, are guilty of nothing. How can you be guilty of truth? Everything you said in this paragraph is truth. Brainwashing may be a stretch……but, hell, I was a TAC officer in charge of OCS for three years….My job was to build leadership for the battlefield…not the White House. My job was to train men to lead men in combat. You cannot have a 2lt. in charge of a platoon of soldiers on the battlefield questioning whether or not he should be there. The fact is…he IS there and keeping his men alive and accomplishing the mission is the primary goal. So, as a TAC officer, I am guilty of “brainwashing” or cleansing the mind for combat. Not Suzie B’s sewing circle.
    ______________________________________

    USW says: I, for one, hope that you never shut up for good. We all know that your previous occupation afforded you a wealth of experience and a level of common sense in your approach to problem solving that, if no one else appreciates, you know that I do. That is what we did, brother, solve problems. I need all the help I can get from those that think like me. I think that you do, but you will have to be the judge of that. As for the .50 cal, that my friend is one of the greatest “problem solvers” ever invented.

    D13 responds: Naaah. Can’t shut me up. I have way too much invested in this great country and I will do what I can to preserve it. Yes, I know that you and I have a lot in common on the field of honor. Honest debate is good for the soul.
    ______________________________

    USW says: I liked your analogy that we must first stop the leak before we fix the dam. I think that is accurate. Our government has spent ample time under both parties stripping Americans of their freedoms, liberties, wealth, and ability to think for themselves. They have spent ample time creating a culture of dependency on government when government has anything but our best interests at heart. We have to begin by stopping this particular leak. The answer to doing so is as elusive to me as it is to many, but we are searching for avenues to take. Before you condemn those like myself and JAC, remember that we are taking part in those activities as well.

    D13 says: Now it is my turn to react with surprise. I did not think that I condemned anyone. I saw posts and answers all the time where people are “criticized” or told that they are flawed, which probably makes some thinner skinned people not post anymore. I understand where JAC and BF and Ray and others are coming from and I will take them to task the same as they do me and ask them for a better solution other than not voting. Rhetoric has its place but there is no time for this. Talk is worthwhile unless the dam continues to leak with out plugging the sucker up. That is all. Nothing more and I do not condemn them nor do I think that they are any less a person…but the time for talk right now is over. We have two weeks to stop some things from our government and calling and writing everyday will help get it done.

    USW says: But are you advocating that I get behind every plan that I don’t have an alternative for?

    D13 responds: No sir. That would be fool’s folly. But, to use your analogy of leading men across and open field and losing them for doing something instead of nothing….USE YOUR ARTILLERY. Keep the men back but fire something else and then exploit the breach. I happen to think that the artillery right now is the internet, telephone, and letters.
    ________________________________________

    USW says: Unlike BF, I have never submitted to the idea that we can simply ignore government and it will simply lose its power and implode. I know that we have to figure out the first steps in taking back our country. I know that government is going to exist no matter what, in some form or fashion. And I have argued over and over that government is something that must exist in today’s society lest we fall into true anarchy, which never lasts long and results in a government eventually anyway.

    To that end I will support what I can. I will do what I can. If it means that I have to make the choice between the lesser of two evils on a ballot, I will do so because to not do so is to give my silent consent to the worse of two evils. Obama won by 3,000,000 votes.

    D13 says: True and how many BF’s or others out there that did not think the vote would count and did not vote and are proud of it? And then criticize what happened? More than 3,000,000 I bet. And how many down ticket races were won or lost for a mere 10 votes or 100 votes? And the down ticket items are just as important if not more important than that of the Presidency.
    ________________________________

    I love my country. I love what it is and what it stands for.. (please, no crap about IRAQ etc. I did not say we were perfect). We owe no apologies to the world and we are not responsible for the world problems. We have contributed to them but not caused them. We are flawed and there are changes to be made. As stated before, we are a Nation of laws, right or wrong. You don’t sit back and just criticize, you get out and do something about it. Don’t like a law? Change it. Use the system against the system but work it. IT CAN BE DONE.

    So, USW, I hope you understand that you were not attacked nor were you vilified. I am not a very good writer or orator but was trying to get a point across.

    Have a wonderful evening. Come to Texas…we will take you.

    D13

    PS: Isn’t the .50 cal great? Like AT&T..it reaches out and touches someone.

    • USWeapon says:

      I am pleased to see that we are primarily on the same track here. I think that the reason that I thought you were addressing me was because you made the statement, “If I have read your postings and archives correctly”. I took that to mean the postings from others and the archives of my articles, since that is what they are called here. I apparently placed far more literal meaning on the term archives than you intended. My mistake indeed.

      I appreciate your responses here. I was concerned because I was feeling that perhaps one of the people that I was under the impression thought along my lines was not so much feeling that was true. But I see that it was a misunderstanding and we are on the same page.

      I hope that you don’t mind my addressing you personally on this issue. I did so because responding to your comments gave me the opportunity to address this subject of talk with no action for everyone. I gave me the chance to clarify where I stand on things. So I seized that opportunity. It was not meant to be an attack on you any more than the other one was meant to be an attack on TexasChem.

      • “If I have read your postings and archives correctly”

        I should have said…”the” archives because my response was to a particular posting that five specific people agreed to and it was to them, I was referring.

        Good morning.

        • USWeapon says:

          Good morning to you as well sir.

          I appreciate the response. As I said, I am simply relieved that I wasn’t crazy when I thought we were generally on the same sheet of music. How is the website coming? I am looking forward to it.

  8. William J. Demers III says:

    Hi Friends,
    I am not real smart and know very few big words, I did not even graduate high school. I never cared much about the government, yes we often joked about how corrupt they were and how they vote on their pay hikes at three in the morning. But I never seen so much happening and at such a fast pace. I have to at least make an attempt at giving my views and posting my concerns.
    For one I have always loved the United States of America and always prayed for everything. I stood as the flag was raised and or went by in a parade. I looked to see how very proud my dad was to serve and often seen a tear in his eye as the flag passed. I was taken to church as a child and I think learned a good value system because of this. I remember watching the moon landing and how very proud I was at the time. I to came to see the greatest things this country has done and saluted all and every man who served and died for 0ur freedoms. I always knew we could do better and had some things wrong and did some things not so right. But one thing I never did was question our standing in the world and never seen a reason to say we were sorry, for anything. I have and still am very proud of America and have a great love for God and believe it was Him that allowed us this greatness.
    Now things have changed, I am now being called a racist for showing my concerns for this great country. I would like to see a great need for God once again in this country and our children to have a moral compass. I see people complaining because of a cross on a hill and have to question why? We also pray for them as well and do not see why the hate for a simple cross. I now see people getting evicted because they post a flag out front of their apartment. Why would you care if people are offended by our flag? Why would somebody even protest such BS? I always hated it when I seen people burning the flag or spitting on the passing soldier. What really pissed me off was the ones protesting at a soldiers funeral. I see a change in America and I do not think this is for the bettering of this country. I can not remain silent if I think we are losing every freedom to communism socialism and or Marxism. I do not want big companies big unions or special interest groups running this country. I do not like what I see in Acorn, Apollo Alliance, SEIU, the Tides Foundation and GE. The CEO of GE is advising Obama and also owns MSNBC and that concerns me. SEIU was involved in the writing of the stimulus bill that no one felt the need to even read.
    I look at the czars and only see crazy. One Van Jones, a known communist, arrested in the Rodney King riots, blamed gov for 911, Tried to free a cop killer, said whites were trying to poison migrant farm workers and sending poison water into the black communities. Than we all know about Rev Wright, he said whites invented AIDS to kill blacks and not God bless America but God damn America. Other czars ask for whites to step down to make more room for blacks and gays. We have an ex-president calling us all racists for disagreeing with Obama. We also have Nancy Pelosi doing the same thing along with Bill Cosby. We have people on the left praising Hugo Chavez Castro and Mao, so is there no real concerns there? I seen footage of czars wanting to control the media, wanting animals to have the right to sue. Some talk about population control and care by age and value.
    The left will claim that Fox News is not a real news station but, that is the only way I found out about Bill Ayers, Van Jones, Acorn and Rev Wright. But my real concerns was when I seen all of the name calling. I felt my voice and my right to voice my opinions was in danger. I was not a racist, a gang, a mob, a thug or a racist so where was this coming from? Why did my concern become only a racist rant? I did not hear one single person saying they did not like Obama because of his skin color but all the same was accused of being a racist. We can not lose our rights to disagree or to voice our opinions. This is America, we are still free to voice our opinions and have our concerns addressed. Every time I question anything about Obama I am called a redneck racist that just does not like a black man in the white house. I do not mind being called what ever they would like to call me but I fear I will someday lose my right to even have an opinion.
    I see what looks to me to be a government takeover of my life and rights. I do not like where this country seems to be going and I should have a right to voice my opinions without fear. To me the massive spending is not the answer and fear we will never be able to pay this back. I fear all of the takeovers and bailouts along with the government involvement in companies will only serve to give them more control over our lives. I was also very upset to learn that our children were singing Obama praise songs. Taking the name Jesus out and replacing it with Obama. Our children are watching films like “The Story Of Stuff” that teaches them to hate and blame capitalism. I also heard that Obama wanted to change the US constitution. I was very upset when I heard Obama was going around the world telling all we were sorry. It hurt me when I heard our first lady saying this was a down right mean country and for the first time was proud. Again I am not a racist, only concerned for this once great country. I love America, God and would die for America as so many did before me and hate the white hating America hating radicals telling me this must all change.

%d bloggers like this: