Comments on: There Are Two Sides, Which One Are You On?

By: dhgalt

dhgalt — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:17:47 +0000

Well stated. It is simple; individual liberty versus totalitarian big government. Check out The National Liberty Unity Summit at http://www.nationallibertyunitysummit.org/ Note well NLUS's motto

By: B. Johnson

B. Johnson — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 19:27:03 +0000

From my perspective, citizens have failed to teach the Constitution and its history to their children for many generations. Consequently, state sovereignty has been forgotten, citizens not understanding that corrupt, Constitution-ignoring federal lawmakers are greatly overstepping their constitutional authority.

By: Clay Barham

Clay Barham — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:21:09 +0000

You are correct. There are only two sides. One side says, as did Obama, the interests of the community are more important than are the interests of the individual. They are the elite few who rule the many, the oldest, most established side of all. The other side believes legitimate individual interests are most important, where the many rule themselves. That's the newest side practiced only in America, now threatened with termination.

By: Question Everything

Question Everything — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:18:02 +0000

Educate me but don't put another down just because you may know more about a subject than others.

Who's really the fool the one who knows he knows nothing or the one who thinks he knows everything!

Thank you for helping me gain a clearer understanding, Josh!

By: Tim

Tim — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 15:27:15 +0000

if the federal govt took less from the states citizens, the state government could (if legal in their constitution) provide all these services at a lower cost, and more effectively. However the difference would be, that you would be better able to effect these programs (you have more of a say in closer government in general). By doing it at the federal level, we continue to support a government with no legal framework, which is setting the table for totallitarianism. I'm sure citizens of the USSR also appreciated the government taking care of them from cradle to grave, but there is a price to be paid for this, in liberty. We don't need the federal government taking their "cut" to provide these "free" services (that by the way we steal from other citizens), our states could do this at half the cost.

By: Josh T.

Josh T. — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 04:53:57 +0000

youre a fool…
A. it only bans force insofar as the force is used to "intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives" – i fail to see how 'moral strength' or intellectual vigor could possibly be seen as intimidating or coercing the US citizens

B. the bill defines force in terms of terrorism, ie in terms of violence. so unless youre using your moral strength and intellectual vigor to blow up buildings and kill people, youre not in any danger of losing your rights

C. youre playing word association games to create a mismatched story that conforms to your preformed opinions of what the bill means. government bills dont use definitions from the "online free dictionary". of course its possible to find a vague enough definition of force on the internet that makes it seem like this would be the end of all rights, that doesnt make it true. dont be dumb…

By: Question Everything

Question Everything — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:37:49 +0000

the page you sent me to is no longer there?!?

By: Question Everything

Question Everything — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 01:31:41 +0000

Ah thanks for pointing me in the right direction! My question is do you believe that it can be done peacefully? Do you think the moneychangers are just going to walk away from their seat of power?

"(4) IDEOLOGICALLY BASED VIOLENCE- The term `ideologically based violence' means the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual's political, religious, or social beliefs." taken from the:

Text of H.R. 1955 [110th]: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007.

IntroducedApr 19, 2007
Referred to CommitteeView Committee Assignments
Reported by CommitteeAug 1, 2007
Passed HouseOct 23, 2007

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill…

It did not pass but look at the wording in the paragraph " force or violence" now define force!

Force-
3.
a. Intellectual power or vigor, especially as conveyed in writing or speech.
b. Moral strength.
c. A capacity for affecting the mind or behavior; efficacy: the force of logical argumentation.
d. One that possesses such capacity: the forces of evil.
4.
a. A body of persons or other resources organized or available for a certain purpose: a large labor force.
b. A person or group capable of influential action: a retired senator who is still a force in national politics.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/force

this bill is still on the books if passed we have no rights.

By: Josh T.

Josh T. — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:24:42 +0000

are you kidding?
once we get rid of the damn government and create a free society, everyone will just share everything that we need. we dont actually need a government to bind us together and make laws for social well-being; no one would take more than they need and everyone would help everyone else out, just like individuals do in the status quo……oh, wait……

By: Jim B.

Jim B. — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:15:51 +0000

i'm pretty sure that water that comes out of my tap is clean enough for my consumption, something thats not available for billions of people on this planet. I also have a military that keeps enemies out of my country, an FDA that at least tries to have stds for food (admittedly sometimes stuff slips through, but its better than nothing> i also have the potential to recieve unemployment for two years, and government subsidized housing if i can't afford to get myself some. ALso, if i'm old i have access to that medicare program that is SOOOO horrible that seniors are fighting tooth and nail to keep it……..

idk, my bff Big Brother