Extremism?

"I just want the government to stay out of my way. I won't get in their way if they don't get in mine...."

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas Gov. Rick Perry fired up an anti-tax "tea party" Wednesday with his stance against the federal government and for states' rights as some in his U.S. flag-waving audience shouted, "Secede!"

An animated Perry told the crowd at Austin City Hall — one of three tea parties he was attending across the state — that officials in Washington have abandoned the country's founding principles of limited government. He said the federal government is strangling Americans with taxation, spending and debt.

Later, answering news reporters' questions, Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union, though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that.

"There's a lot of different scenarios," Perry said. "We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."
Click to expand...

“TEXAS CONSTITUTION”

Sec. 1. FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE. Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.

Sec. 2. INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
 
2minkey said:
god forbid we profile people for voluntary participation in a hate group...

after we've already profiled people based on ethnic identities and religions they were born into.

*cough* dipshits *cough*
Click to expand...

It all depends on perspective

Nation of Islam = love group

Identity Church = hate group

NAACP = love group

NAAWP = hate group

Black Muslims = love group

White separatists = hate group

Democrat Black Caucus = love group

Republican White Caucus = non-existent but would be a hate group if formed

Black Panthers = love group

Arian Brotherhood = hate group

Louis Farrakhan = love

David Duke = hate

Black power = love

White power = hate

Get the picture? Get the perspective?
 
p160012004e997a12281546.jpg
 
Cerise said:
"I just want the government to stay out of my way. I won't get in their way if they don't get in mine...."



“TEXAS CONSTITUTION”

Sec. 1. FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE. Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.

Sec. 2. INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
Click to expand...

If Texas secedes I will move there as fast as I can get there.

Government governs with the consent of the governed. Once consent is withdrawn, the right of the people to abolish that government and reform another is paramount to all other concerns.
 
Cerise said:
"I just want the government to stay out of my way. I won't get in their way if they don't get in mine...."



“TEXAS CONSTITUTION”

Sec. 1. FREEDOM AND SOVEREIGNTY OF STATE. Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.

Sec. 2. INHERENT POLITICAL POWER; REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.
Click to expand...
Funny... I do not recall this incident.

Texans tend to be highly independent. If you ask a Texan to declare their loyalty it is almost always to Texas first, America second. The reason people tend to have a strong loyalty to Texas first is because Texas was a sovereign nation first, won by the blood of it's citizens (with no help from the US, though there are many people who think the US sent troops and helped, they did not lift a finger). For this reason, it is proper for the Texas flag to fly at the same level as the US flag when they are displayed together. (Many people only fly the Texas flag, though.)
 
jimpeel said:
I Texas secedes I will move there as fast as I can get there.

Government governs with the consent of the governed. Once consent is withdrawn, the right of the people to abolish that government and reform another is paramount to all other concerns.
Click to expand...
Oh, sorry... we are completely out of room. Uh... we'll put you on the list, though. ;)
 
jimpeel said:
It all depends on perspective

Nation of Islam = love group

Identity Church = hate group

NAACP = love group

NAAWP = hate group

Black Muslims = love group

White separatists = hate group

Democrat Black Caucus = love group

Republican White Caucus = non-existent but would be a hate group if formed

Black Panthers = love group

Arian Brotherhood = hate group

Louis Farrakhan = love

David Duke = hate

Black power = love

White power = hate

Get the picture? Get the perspective?
Click to expand...

no jim, i'm not quite bright enough to understand the perspective.

i fail to understand how you could possibly refer to the nation of islam as a "love group."

oh, right, it's the double standard that keeps christian anglo-americans like you down.

or, rather, it's just the bitterness of a member of the most culturally dominant group in america that has sunk to the bottom quartile of the pile.

how do you live with such oppression?

must be tough.
 
2minkey said:
no jim, i'm not quite bright enough to understand the perspective.

i fail to understand how you could possibly refer to the nation of islam as a "love group."
Click to expand...

You obviously have absolutely no concept of political correctness and the order of protected and unprotected classes.

Have I ever posted the totem of political correctness for the Balkanization of America for you? Let me do that for you.

This is from a piece that I wrote on hate crimes legislation, with formatting. The piece was much longer but this is the pertinent part as concerns this discussion.

To illustrate:

If a Heterosexual male is beating another Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating another Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating a Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Heterosexual male is beating a Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

We all know that the answer to all of these scenarios should be "No". In the case of the first three, the consensus of all would probably be just that -- "No".

But then we reach the fourth scenario; and that is where we go wrong. Here we have one of the protected class being beaten by one of the unprotected class and this is where the unprotected class would say "No" while the protected class would shout a resounding "Yes".

In America, you and I should be able to stand toe to toe with our noses almost touching screaming epithets, slurs, and hateful dialogue and there should be no crime in that; nor should the government intervene. It is at the point that our noses touch that the government has the authority to mandate that we be protected from others for the general welfare of society. As long as there is no actual harm done by one to another, the government has no say. There is no right enumerated in the Constitution, regardless of how much any group wants it to be so, that protects us from being offended.

Hate crimes legislation has nothing to do with hate. It has to do with power -- the kind of power that is gained by the oldest method there is -- divide and conquer -- the virtual Balkanization, the factionalization as it were, of America. I use the following to illustrate this point.

Imagine, if you will, that these factions are a totem. At the bottom of the totem is a White Heterosexual Christian male with no disabilities. At the top of the totem is a Black female Homosexual Athiest who is disabled. If you doubt this analysis, simply name one -- just one -- local, county, state, or federal program that is directed toward White male Heterosexual Christians with no disabilities. You can't. Simply change any one of those five criteria, however, and there are programs galore.

So let's examine who wields the power and why.

Women now outnumber men and are the most powerful faction by sheer numbers.

Minorities are the second most powerful faction with Blacks wielding the most power among them. This is because they have the most effective and vocal leaders. That vaunted position won't last, however.

The next most powerful faction are the religions with the Jews wielding the most power; but the Atheists are quickly gaining in influence and, in some cases, wield more influence. The Jews are still gleaning power from the Holocaust (as they should, lest we forget) and the Atheists can knock any religion with impunity -- especially Christianity. In the aspect of politics, however, Atheists wield Constitutionally mandated power granted by activist judges while the Jews hold no such mandate -- thus the Atheists' position at the top of the totem and the most points for religion.

The Homosexual movement comes next as they are vocal, visual, and they also have effective leaders.

Lastly comes the disabled as they are not as numerous, vocal, or represented. Yes, they got sidewalk ramps, parking places, and lower light switches but most people feel that they have been appeased.

So where do you score on the totem? I have weighted each faction or sub-faction on a Binary scale (start with 1, double it, and keep doubling each subsequent result). This prevents any two combinations of factions from scoring the same score thus assuring your unique position on the totem. Here are the scores. Simply add together your faction scores.

If you are not disabled, your score is 0

If you are disabled, your score is 1

If you are Heterosexual, your score is 0

If you are Homosexual, your score is 2

If you are a Christian, your score is 0

If you are a non-Christian, other than Jewish, your score is 4

If you are Jewish, your score is 8

If you are Atheist, your score is 16

If you are White, your score is 0

If you are a minority, other than Black, your score is 32

If you are Black, your score is 64

If you are male, your score is 0

If you are female, your score is 128

My score is 0 as I am a White (0) male (0) Christian (0) Heterosexual (0) with no disabilities (0).

My wife's score is 160 as she is a female (128) Mexican/Yakima Indian (32) Heterosexual (0) Christian (0) with no disabilities (0).

How do you score?

Now most people, without knowing the information I imparted to you at the top of this piece, would say "He is one sick a--, homophobic, racist, mysogenistic, anti-semitic son-of-a-b----."

Labels can sometimes fool you.
Click to expand...
 
There are now twenty states which have declarations of sovereignty on the table because they are tired of Washington trying to tell them what to do. They do not believe in centralized government. The SCotUS ruled many years ago that the federal government acts in the capacity of an agent to the states not the other way around.

WAKE UP CALL: TEXAS GOV. BACKS RESOLUTION AFFIRMING SOVEREIGNTY
Tue Apr 14 2009 08:44:54 ET

AUSTIN – Gov. Rick Perry joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Perry continued: "Millions of Texans are tired of Washington, DC trying to come down here to tell us how to run Texas."

[VIDEO]

A number of recent federal proposals are not within the scope of the federal government’s constitutionally designated powers and impede the states’ right to govern themselves. HCR 50 affirms that Texas claims sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.

It also designates that all compulsory federal legislation that requires states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties, or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding, be prohibited or repealed.
Click to expand...

Sovereignty explained.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8bbrXnYJOo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP8YnOADO3E

Pay attention to the map. Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California, and Georgia have all introduced bills and resolutions declaring sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. Colorado, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Alaska, Kansas, Alabama, Nevada, Maine, and Illinois are considering such measures.
 
jimpeel said:
This is from a piece that I wrote on hate crimes legislation, with formatting. The piece was much longer but this is the pertinent part as concerns this discussion.
Click to expand...

Kinda pretty much completely proves there's some serious nutjobbery going on there. :laugh:

Wow, calling one of the most completely unprotected and discriminated classes a "protected class" and acting as if your oppressed compared to them.

Holy shit, wow. Fucking geezuz.

The White Heterosexual Christian male oppressed by women, disabled, blacks, jews, and homosexuals wielding power over you. Oh let's save this...

To illustrate:

If a Heterosexual male is beating another Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating another Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Homosexual male is beating a Heterosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

If a Heterosexual male is beating a Homosexual male -- all the while screaming "I hate you! I hate you! I hate you!" -- is that a hate crime?

We all know that the answer to all of these scenarios should be "No". In the case of the first three, the consensus of all would probably be just that -- "No".

But then we reach the fourth scenario; and that is where we go wrong. Here we have one of the protected class being beaten by one of the unprotected class and this is where the unprotected class would say "No" while the protected class would shout a resounding "Yes".

In America, you and I should be able to stand toe to toe with our noses almost touching screaming epithets, slurs, and hateful dialogue and there should be no crime in that; nor should the government intervene. It is at the point that our noses touch that the government has the authority to mandate that we be protected from others for the general welfare of society. As long as there is no actual harm done by one to another, the government has no say. There is no right enumerated in the Constitution, regardless of how much any group wants it to be so, that protects us from being offended.

Hate crimes legislation has nothing to do with hate. It has to do with power -- the kind of power that is gained by the oldest method there is -- divide and conquer -- the virtual Balkanization, the factionalization as it were, of America. I use the following to illustrate this point.

Imagine, if you will, that these factions are a totem. At the bottom of the totem is a White Heterosexual Christian male with no disabilities. At the top of the totem is a Black female Homosexual Athiest who is disabled. If you doubt this analysis, simply name one -- just one -- local, county, state, or federal program that is directed toward White male Heterosexual Christians with no disabilities. You can't. Simply change any one of those five criteria, however, and there are programs galore.

So let's examine who wields the power and why.

Women now outnumber men and are the most powerful faction by sheer numbers.

Minorities are the second most powerful faction with Blacks wielding the most power among them. This is because they have the most effective and vocal leaders. That vaunted position won't last, however.

The next most powerful faction are the religions with the Jews wielding the most power; but the Atheists are quickly gaining in influence and, in some cases, wield more influence. The Jews are still gleaning power from the Holocaust (as they should, lest we forget) and the Atheists can knock any religion with impunity -- especially Christianity. In the aspect of politics, however, Atheists wield Constitutionally mandated power granted by activist judges while the Jews hold no such mandate -- thus the Atheists' position at the top of the totem and the most points for religion.

The Homosexual movement comes next as they are vocal, visual, and they also have effective leaders.

Lastly comes the disabled as they are not as numerous, vocal, or represented. Yes, they got sidewalk ramps, parking places, and lower light switches but most people feel that they have been appeased.

So where do you score on the totem? I have weighted each faction or sub-faction on a Binary scale (start with 1, double it, and keep doubling each subsequent result). This prevents any two combinations of factions from scoring the same score thus assuring your unique position on the totem. Here are the scores. Simply add together your faction scores.

If you are not disabled, your score is 0

If you are disabled, your score is 1

If you are Heterosexual, your score is 0

If you are Homosexual, your score is 2

If you are a Christian, your score is 0

If you are a non-Christian, other than Jewish, your score is 4

If you are Jewish, your score is 8

If you are Atheist, your score is 16

If you are White, your score is 0

If you are a minority, other than Black, your score is 32

If you are Black, your score is 64

If you are male, your score is 0

If you are female, your score is 128

My score is 0 as I am a White (0) male (0) Christian (0) Heterosexual (0) with no disabilities (0).

My wife's score is 160 as she is a female (128) Mexican/Yakima Indian (32) Heterosexual (0) Christian (0) with no disabilities (0).

How do you score?

Now most people, without knowing the information I imparted to you at the top of this piece, would say "He is one sick a--, homophobic, racist, mysogenistic, anti-semitic son-of-a-b----."

Labels can sometimes fool you.
Click to expand...
 
jimpeel said:
You obviously have absolutely no concept of political correctness and the order of protected and unprotected classes.

Have I ever posted the totem of political correctness for the Balkanization of America for you? Let me do that for you.

This is from a piece that I wrote on hate crimes legislation, with formatting. The piece was much longer but this is the pertinent part as concerns this discussion.
Click to expand...

image9.jpg


Jim and his newly emerging political party....

Of course those good old boys knew nothing of hate crimes!
 
jimpeel said:
You obviously have absolutely no concept of political correctness and the order of protected and unprotected classes.

Have I ever posted the totem of political correctness for the Balkanization of America for you? Let me do that for you.

This is from a piece that I wrote on hate crimes legislation, with formatting. The piece was much longer but this is the pertinent part as concerns this discussion.
Click to expand...

well gee, jimmy, thanks for the lesson.

so, this means you're finding ways to rationalize your bullshit whining. great.

"the order of protected classes." whoa. that sounds like something a french sociologist would mention. you must really know your shit. maybe i need to go back to school to keep up with you. though it may be hard to figure out which option i should pursue. drafting... or wal-mart toadying, hmm... i wonder which curriculum would be more fulfilling?

:lol2:
 
jimpeel said:
You obviously have absolutely no concept of political correctness and the order of protected and unprotected classes.

Have I ever posted the totem of political correctness for the Balkanization of America for you? Let me do that for you.

This is from a piece that I wrote on hate crimes legislation, with formatting. The piece was much longer but this is the pertinent part as concerns this discussion.
Click to expand...
White Christian Males started with a score of 1000..and the rest are finally starting to catch up, but even with your numbers...they're far behind.
:glasses3:
 
Napolitano Apologizes for Offending Veterans After DHS Eyes Them for 'Rightwing Extremism'

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized to veterans after a report issued by her department said troops returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were at risk for being recruited by right-wing extremists.

A footnote in the report, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," said that while there is no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are planning acts of violence, such acts could come from unnamed "rightwing extremists" concerned about illegal immigration, abortion, increasing federal power and restrictions on firearms -- and singled out returning war veterans as susceptible to recruitment.

The report follows a similar DHS assessment released in January that detailed left-wing threats, focusing on cyberattacks and radical "eco-terrorist" groups like Earth Liberation Front, accused of firebombing construction sites, logging companies, car dealerships and food science labs. The report noted that left-wing extremists prefer economic damage to get their message across.

"Their leftwing assessment identifies actual terrorist organizations, like the Earth Liberation Front and Animal Liberation Front," House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said in a statement issued Wednesday. "The rightwing report uses broad generalizations about veterans, pro-life groups, federalists and supporters of gun rights. That's like saying if you love puppies, you might be susceptible to recruitment by the Animal Liberation Front. It is ridiculous and deeply offensive to millions of Americans."
Click to expand...

The making of malicious, insulting, abusive and offensive accusations against the military has become a distinct pattern of the left. Once the accusation has been publicly made, apologies do no good.
 
catocom said:
revolution is afoot
Click to expand...

Not so much. Fox News trying to promote the laughably named "tea bagging parties" supposedly to protest taxes (the current tax system was put in place by Bush) and pretty much failing is not a revolution. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top