• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The number one problem with America...

The only real change will come with a full revolt of the government, which will never happen because Americans are lazy stupid bastards.

Lead the way, webolutionary. We'll be right behind you. Promise.

:p

One person tries to kill everyone in the government they are called a terrorist, five people try and they are called a terrorist cell, million try and they are called freedom fighters.
 
Or we can keep trying to legally improve the system from within without armed insurrection, slow though it may be. I know, it's crazy talk.
 
In the last presidential election people voted for change and won...or I thought they did. :confused:
 
Or we can keep trying to legally change the system from within without armed insurrection, slow though it may be. I know, it's crazy talk.

Yeah that has worked really well the last several decades. :rolleyes:

So, enlighten me. What is so much worse about the last several decades versus the time before that warrants an armed revolt now? Sell me on joining your rebellion, young Skywalker.
 
^ I just picked the last few decades, we are long over due for a new Constitution.

The problem is now we are running out of time before our debt is more than we will bring in, we bail out billionaires so they get more money yet attack the unions doing all the work for the billionaires.

Corporations have too much power, political parties just care about winning, and the supreme court ruled that it's fine if the government wants to take your house and build a Viagra plant that was never built or a CVS, as long as the town gets more money. Rich people from other countries and corporations want to buy US elections! That's fine! That's their freedom of speech right! That's fucking bullshit.



In the last presidential election people voted for change and won...or I thought they did. :confused:

Change you can believe in!

...if you are living in a dreamland.

America still tortures, still has people locked up without trials, still is fighting wars without any plans, still spies on it's people and is still spending too much. However at least now we are spending more of the money in our own country.
 
The only real change will come with a full revolt of the government, which will never happen because Americans are lazy stupid bastards.

Lead the way, webolutionary. We'll be right behind you. Promise.

Well you have a point. An American Revolution will most likely be started on the web first than on the ground. The better connection, the better feed-back. Going state by state wouldn't do it. Going door to door wouldn't do it, but starting a website or chat room, that will gain the most strenght. Its wether in the end it amounts to people getting off the computer to finish it.
 
Our problem is not mistrust in the government, it is the government.

The government is us--we put them there. By your logic, voters are the problem, not government. :)
Well esentially yes, the voters. I'm talking about government entities, but yes the politicians too. I did not vote for the Supreme Court which made corperations people. We do create our own problems though, *caugh* Osama Bin Ladin *caugh* Sadam Husein.
 
Back in the 1700s and 1800s people trusted the government and the government didn't have all of these conspiracies they were performing against the American people.

You can't be serious. There were halfhearted secession movements by New England Federalists and abolitionists, and two more serious secession threats by South Carolina decades before the Civil War ever rolled around.

Our elected officials actually cared and were real people like you and me, not people like Obama or Bush or any of these clowns in Congress.

If by "real people" you mean wealthy university educated (unlike 99% of the country at the time) mostly plantation and slave owning men who gained wealth through marriage and inheritance, then yeah, they're "real people." Adjusted for today's dollars, Washington was by far the wealthiest US president with well over half a billion. You have to wait until you get to #15 Buchanan to get the first one who wasn't an (adjusted) millionaire. Even Lincoln was born middle class (his father was a successful carpenter and farmer), was a highly sought after attorney, married into some money, and lived a decent upper middle class lifestyle before becoming president.

http://247wallst.com/2010/05/17/the-net-worth-of-the-american-presidents-washington-to-obama/2/



Nonsense. The state governments retain plenty of power.



Which begs the question of why you are able to talk so openly about it without a CIA hit squad taking you out as we speak.

I think I'm probably giving you too much credit, but if you're referring to Anwar al-Awlaki, his targeted kill order had to be approved by the National Security Council and the President, and is the first such (official) order against an American citizen given to the CIA in our nation's history, and generated a ton of controversy and a legal battle as a result without him even being assassinated yet. Nor is he being targeted for "knowing too much," but rather because he's a pretty bad dude to put it mildly; and I mean bin Laden level bad.

Now, does that mean the CIA has never intentionally targeted and killed American citizens before, in secret? I don't know for sure, but then neither do you. Hence the whole secret part.



Name one liberal elected official in the federal government who is seriously putting forward a law to ban guns. And I don't mean trying to pass laws on waiting periods, background checks, magazine capacity, and so forth. I mean actually trying to outright ban guns completely.



Oh, it's by the people all right. It's just sometimes many of the people don't vote in their own best interest, and take a knee-jerk stance against things they would otherwise usually support when the debate is not framed with scare words and falsehoods and is actually explained to them reasonably.



It's a bit hard to take your complaints about trolling in other forums seriously when you post stuff like this.



That's cute, but not remotely accurate given the situation in the two countries we're occupying today. No US oil companies secured post-war Iraqi oil contracts, and few tried because they weren't profitable enough. Most of the contracts went to state-owned oil firms from Russia, Japan, Norway, Turkey, South Korea, Angola, China, and Malaysia who were willing to give up favorable returns on their investment in exchange for securing long term drilling rights.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html

Afghanistan wasn't even thought to have major oil deposits until some were discovered last year, and the US Geological Survey helped them discover vast mineral wealth in the country recently which the Afghanis are auctioning off the mining rights to to numerous international bidders, with China being the frontrunner.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/08/20108159431776396.html

We could have been as bad as the cynics suggest and just taken all the oil and mineral wealth we wanted since we were in control of all or most of those countries, but we didn't.

The number one problem with America...

- Americans giving money to every country, but America. We buy most of our products from other countries; give aid to Japan, Haiti, Africa and other places... yet almost nothing to cure homelessness here at home. Do other countries donate to help us? No. Oh, they LOAN the United States of America money, but we have to pay it back... unlike so many countries we have helped. It is time for America to put Americans first, then help others if we can.

If Americans would spend only $64.00 more each year on American products, we could put 200,000 Americans to work.

Apart from being the moral thing to do as the wealthiest nation in the world, and being the best means of actually promoting domestic security, giving out foreign aid is good for the US economy and helps those homeless and jobless people at home you mention.

http://www.devex.com/en/blogs/the-d...n-serve-us-economic-interests-experts-say?g=1

Our problem is not mistrust in the government, it is the government.

As you post on a forum on the internet that wouldn't exist without that government you despise so much.

Government has a lot of problems, no doubt, but I saw your proposals for overhauling it in that thread from a few months ago, and frankly most of your suggestions were at best unworkable and undesirable.
Oh, I'ma sorry massa, Isa no speak up again. How dares I speak out against my sweet Uncle Sam.:rolleyes: Yeah right, that right you speak of, the first ammendment, yeah that right didn't come from the government, it is inalienable. That means it is a natural right. It comes from god, if you don't believe in god, fine it comes naturally.

The thread that I posted a few months ogo was a proposed, revised Constitution and a return to the original Constitution, it's what we are suposed to be doing. I will defend every one of those "changes" that are somehow unworkable even though they have worked in the past. So, yeah I do despise what this country has become, not what is was suposed to be. A Republic, not an Empire.

I despise the fact that we are currently interfering in a civil war without the President even consulting Congress, much less actually declare war. I despise the fact that alleged terrorists are bieng denied Hebieus Corpus.

I despise the fact that there is currently a heath care law that allows Congress to force people to purchase health insurance.

There are a lot of things I do despise about this country, but there are two documents I love, The Declaration and the Constition. That is more important than anything else.
 
Y'know, I don't see why moderates and us liberals are so hot for armed insurrection. If anything the last election demonstrated that the electorate is heavily swayed by conservative populist appeal.

I don't see why a "revolution" would produce anything all that different.
 
Our problem is not mistrust in the government, it is the government.

As you post on a forum on the internet that wouldn't exist without that government you despise so much.

Government has a lot of problems, no doubt, but I saw your proposals for overhauling it in that thread from a few months ago, and frankly most of your suggestions were at best unworkable and undesirable.

Oh, I'ma sorry massa, Isa no speak up again. How dares I speak out against my sweet Uncle Sam.:rolleyes:

I see you remain as disagreeable and reactionary as ever. Nowhere in my post did I tell you to remain silent, so save the drama for your mama.

Yeah right, that right you speak of, the first ammendment, yeah that right didn't come from the government, it is inalienable. That means it is a natural right. It comes from god, if you don't believe in god, fine it comes naturally.

That's fantastic, except my post had jack and shit to do with the First Amendment. I meant the US government, which you despise and would largely defund and disassemble, quite literally created the very internet you're using today to bitch about the government being bad. Hyperbolic and vague rhetoric like "government is the problem" excuses the fact that the government is us, it ignores the contributions and accomplishments of the people made through the government, and it childishly declares that there's nothing to be done to improve it without having another revolution or completely overhauling the entire Constitution.

The thread that I posted a few months ogo was a proposed, revised Constitution and a return to the original Constitution, it's what we are suposed to be doing. I will defend every one of those "changes" that are somehow unworkable even though they have worked in the past. So, yeah I do despise what this country has become, not what is was suposed to be. A Republic, not an Empire.

It was a collection of largely anachronistic, contradictory, impractical, and ignorant proposals that would destroy the nation if they were ever implemented. Thankfully there's zero chance of that ever happening.

Who determines what we are supposed to be doing, exactly? The Founding Fathers? The same guys who realized they couldn't foresee every future development, so they made the Constitution a living document which could grow and change with the times, a fact that you seem to have forgotten in your desire to throw us back to pre-Civil War era law. Just because something worked in the past doesn't mean it's practical today.

I despise the fact that we are currently interfering in a civil war without the President even consulting Congress, much less actually declare war.

Obama notified Congress within 48 hours of the start of operations as required by the War Powers Resolution. Way back on March 1, the Senate voted unanimously for a resolution calling for a no-fly zone from the United Nations. The UN Security Council voted in favor of establishing a no-fly zone+ to protect civilians. The no-fly zone and airstrikes were carried out by the US, France, Britain and other allies. NATO unanimously voted to take over combat operations. The Arab League requested the UN to establish said no-fly zone. The rebels in Libya requested the establishment of the no-fly zone. This thing's been approved out the wazoo.

If Obama had waited for Congress; which was not in session, to vote on the Libya situation the people rebelling in Benghazi would have been slaughtered by the thousands. It was a matter of us having forces in the region who could strike in time to prevent a massacre. Not to mention that Congress might have held it up just because Obama supported it, despite many of them supporting it before he did and then flipping the moment he took their side.

I'd agree with you on this usually, but in this case we interfered to save thousands of lives in immediate danger and we did it with tons of approval both domestically and abroad. It's hardly indicative of imperialist behavior.

I despise the fact that there is currently a heath care law that allows Congress to force people to purchase health insurance.

You're already paying for millions of uninsured people to get health care.
 
America that is non-aggressive. Its actaully a good thing. While they did help in Iraq, thats pretty much the extent of their military campaign, that I know of.

We did not help in Iraq. Unless when you say "help" you mean "tried to talk you out of it".

I seriously hope that isn't a photo of you graduating high school, my opinion of the US education system is low enough as it is.
 
^^

The problem isn't the education system. The problem is that parents don't give a shit anymore. They don't care if their kids sit in front of the TV and absorb a million hours of sex, drugs and money and allow that to replace morals and a good, firm "Listen to your teacher or you can just sit in the corner with nothing but your own thoughts to amuse you". If kids listened to the teacher and did their homework most of the time then every country's school system would be perfect. The problem lies in the parents.

The Japanese or Chinese or German or Russian school system isn't better than ours; it's that the adults of that country aren't afraid to instill discipline in their children. I have yet to meet a rude or dumb person from a foreign first-world country, and the same is true of many (not all) second- and third-world countries.
 
The problem isn't the education system. The problem is that parents don't give a shit anymore. They don't care if their kids sit in front of the TV and absorb a million hours of sex, drugs and money and allow that to replace morals and a good, firm "Listen to your teacher or you can just sit in the corner with nothing but your own thoughts to amuse you". If kids listened to the teacher and did their homework most of the time then every country's school system would be perfect. The problem lies in the parents.

The Japanese or Chinese or German or Russian school system isn't better than ours; it's that the adults of that country aren't afraid to instill discipline in their children. I have yet to meet a rude or dumb person from a foreign first-world country, and the same is true of many (not all) second- and third-world countries.

This nonsense never gets old, I guess. Who needs studies, statistics, and evidence? You've met a few people, which makes you qualified to make broad judgments on the decline of society, apparently. Good to know.
 
CorporalCaptain I am sorry if you think I have a bad image of Canada. I don't actually, I would love to move there, to one of the wooded areas in a log cabin by a lake where I can fish(and release) whenever I want.
I was only joking when I said that Canadians don't fight anyone. Its actually the truth, Canada is the only nation in North America that is non-aggressive. Its actaully a good thing. While they did help in Iraq, thats pretty much the extent of their military campaign, that I know of.

Well you should check again then, because they are actively engaged in combat operations in both Afghanistan and Libya right now.
 
CorporalCaptain I am sorry if you think I have a bad image of Canada. I don't actually, I would love to move there, to one of the wooded areas in a log cabin by a lake where I can fish(and release) whenever I want.
I was only joking when I said that Canadians don't fight anyone. Its actually the truth, Canada is the only nation in North America that is non-aggressive. Its actaully a good thing. While they did help in Iraq, thats pretty much the extent of their military campaign, that I know of.


I of course was completely serious about Canada. I have never trusted Canadians and I never will. I can never forgive them for Celine Dion.
 
Back in the 1700s and 1800s people trusted the government and the government didn't have all of these conspiracies they were performing against the American people.

You can't be serious. There were halfhearted secession movements by New England Federalists and abolitionists, and two more serious secession threats by South Carolina decades before the Civil War ever rolled around.



If by "real people" you mean wealthy university educated (unlike 99% of the country at the time) mostly plantation and slave owning men who gained wealth through marriage and inheritance, then yeah, they're "real people." Adjusted for today's dollars, Washington was by far the wealthiest US president with well over half a billion. You have to wait until you get to #15 Buchanan to get the first one who wasn't an (adjusted) millionaire. Even Lincoln was born middle class (his father was a successful carpenter and farmer), was a highly sought after attorney, married into some money, and lived a decent upper middle class lifestyle before becoming president.

http://247wallst.com/2010/05/17/the-net-worth-of-the-american-presidents-washington-to-obama/2/



Nonsense. The state governments retain plenty of power.



Which begs the question of why you are able to talk so openly about it without a CIA hit squad taking you out as we speak.

I think I'm probably giving you too much credit, but if you're referring to Anwar al-Awlaki, his targeted kill order had to be approved by the National Security Council and the President, and is the first such (official) order against an American citizen given to the CIA in our nation's history, and generated a ton of controversy and a legal battle as a result without him even being assassinated yet. Nor is he being targeted for "knowing too much," but rather because he's a pretty bad dude to put it mildly; and I mean bin Laden level bad.

Now, does that mean the CIA has never intentionally targeted and killed American citizens before, in secret? I don't know for sure, but then neither do you. Hence the whole secret part.



Name one liberal elected official in the federal government who is seriously putting forward a law to ban guns. And I don't mean trying to pass laws on waiting periods, background checks, magazine capacity, and so forth. I mean actually trying to outright ban guns completely.



Oh, it's by the people all right. It's just sometimes many of the people don't vote in their own best interest, and take a knee-jerk stance against things they would otherwise usually support when the debate is not framed with scare words and falsehoods and is actually explained to them reasonably.



It's a bit hard to take your complaints about trolling in other forums seriously when you post stuff like this.



That's cute, but not remotely accurate given the situation in the two countries we're occupying today. No US oil companies secured post-war Iraqi oil contracts, and few tried because they weren't profitable enough. Most of the contracts went to state-owned oil firms from Russia, Japan, Norway, Turkey, South Korea, Angola, China, and Malaysia who were willing to give up favorable returns on their investment in exchange for securing long term drilling rights.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948787,00.html

Afghanistan wasn't even thought to have major oil deposits until some were discovered last year, and the US Geological Survey helped them discover vast mineral wealth in the country recently which the Afghanis are auctioning off the mining rights to to numerous international bidders, with China being the frontrunner.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia/2010/08/20108159431776396.html

We could have been as bad as the cynics suggest and just taken all the oil and mineral wealth we wanted since we were in control of all or most of those countries, but we didn't.



Apart from being the moral thing to do as the wealthiest nation in the world, and being the best means of actually promoting domestic security, giving out foreign aid is good for the US economy and helps those homeless and jobless people at home you mention.

http://www.devex.com/en/blogs/the-d...n-serve-us-economic-interests-experts-say?g=1

Our problem is not mistrust in the government, it is the government.

As you post on a forum on the internet that wouldn't exist without that government you despise so much.

Government has a lot of problems, no doubt, but I saw your proposals for overhauling it in that thread from a few months ago, and frankly most of your suggestions were at best unworkable and undesirable.
Oh, I'ma sorry massa, Isa no speak up again. How dares I speak out against my sweet Uncle Sam.:rolleyes: Yeah right, that right you speak of, the first ammendment, yeah that right didn't come from the government, it is inalienable. That means it is a natural right. It comes from god, if you don't believe in god, fine it comes naturally.

The thread that I posted a few months ogo was a proposed, revised Constitution and a return to the original Constitution, it's what we are suposed to be doing. I will defend every one of those "changes" that are somehow unworkable even though they have worked in the past. So, yeah I do despise what this country has become, not what is was suposed to be. A Republic, not an Empire.

I despise the fact that we are currently interfering in a civil war without the President even consulting Congress, much less actually declare war. I despise the fact that alleged terrorists are bieng denied Hebieus Corpus.

I despise the fact that there is currently a heath care law that allows Congress to force people to purchase health insurance.

There are a lot of things I do despise about this country, but there are two documents I love, The Declaration and the Constition. That is more important than anything else.

You do realize that the 1st admendment was only supposed to be for speaking out against the governement, its not naturally or spiritually given, if that was true every citizen in a government system in the world would be able to speak.
IF your religious, you wouldn't want to go to the original constitution, seeing how the original founding fathers weren't devote. Both The Declaration(which was copied like you wouldn't believe) and the original constitution didn't want religion to be any part of the government. Jefferson copied the declaration(only changing a little) from an atheist who was against religious people being in charge of a government office. So, I think you might want to do some more reading on these things you hate because some of your info isn't quite up to date.

They declared the part of the health care legislation that said all americans had to get insurance to be unconstitutional, so that part was erased. No need to be mad there.
 
CorporalCaptain I am sorry if you think I have a bad image of Canada. I don't actually, I would love to move there, to one of the wooded areas in a log cabin by a lake where I can fish(and release) whenever I want.
I was only joking when I said that Canadians don't fight anyone. Its actually the truth, Canada is the only nation in North America that is non-aggressive. Its actaully a good thing. While they did help in Iraq, thats pretty much the extent of their military campaign, that I know of.

Well you should check again then, because they are actively engaged in combat operations in both Afghanistan and Libya right now.

I never really cared much for checking on Canadian military operations. My memory is bad, I thought they were with us in Iraq, oops.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top