Romney in 2012?

[BJohnsonPP]

Our government is not a company.  Our government cannot generate a profit or make investments -- it can only spend.  To drive the point home even more clearly I will clarify the significance of my statement so that it reads "They are basing the numbers on spending money that the children of people that haven't even been born yet haven't even made.".  That shift in perspective shines a light on the severe and dangerous ignorance of your casual dismissal of "so what?".  "It is only indentured servitude that remains with any and all offspring of those alive today, so what?".  Doesn't quite sound as reasonable as you wish to portray it now, does it?  It is funny that when you apply your same 'budget and estimate" calculations and you consider who is paying and how much and how long that it reveals it for what it actually is, and that is slavery of the most insidious form.

After all that typing, you still get a big whopping "so what?" from me. Our government is not a company and it is not a household. It can't be compared 1 to 1 with either of those things. It doesn't get paid for the work it does, it collects taxes from us to pay for things we all collectively use. That is the nature of it. It does, however, create budgets just like a company or a household based on the money it expects to have coming in. That's how you create budgets. At this point, I'm repeating myself. Bringing up the children ("Oh no, will someone please think of the children!!") falls flat. Again, there's more to being a citizen of a country than just living in it.

What is actually funny is that you're talking about people building this country (below) and slavery (above) as you're talking to a black man. Actual slavery is slavery in it's most insidious form not people getting paid for what they do. So please, spare me.

Ignorance?  People built this country, not the government.  We are a people with a government and not a government with a people.  All of these things you indicate were built by people and paid for by people and their existence does not rely upon any government (but don't try to confuse people and move the goalpost so that it appears I am entirely against all taxes as if you will pay attention to the particulars of my post you will see the stipulation I made of "this much".  I believe in the duties stipulated in The Constitution and also I believe that local governments can go as far beyond this as isn't a violation of The Constitution and that people can thus "vote with their feet").

This is the beginning of the paragraph you're responding to:

Your argument against taxation or the amount of taxation falls flat.

Explain to me how I moved the goal post again?

The money I earn is mine, and you were right to suspect that I would focus in on that.  As part of the spirit and letter of The Constitution, we are born free and if it as you suggest -- that we owe our government at birth -- then it could not be so.  I am not as helpless as you, it appears.  It could all come crumbling down tomorrow and I will persist where it seems you will wither into decay and immediately become dust.  You see I am not dependent upon the government (I suppose you are to have your ideology) but it seems that it (and those that think like you) is dependent upon me.

Don't call me ignorant or naive when you are basically admitting here that without me you would be helpless -- all the while insulting me for calling into question the waste of my taxes.

What a load of self righteous crap. If it all comes crumbling down and you've been hunting and/or camping at least once, then yeah, you'd have it over me, otherwise no. Again, you eat up these lies 'cause they flatter you not because they have any basis in reality. Again, I'm just repeating myself, EVERYTHING you took advantage of to get where you are was absolutely because of all of us collectively. You did NOT do it all yourself. Show me the bridge you built by yourself. Show me the roads you built by yourself. Show me those libraries and schools with wings dedicated to you. Show me! You damn sure used them I bet. You are the old person at the tea party rally and Craig T Nelson on Glenn Becks show looking like an ignorant fool. That is absolutely you. Explain to me how you got anything you have WITHOUT utilizing any of those things. There isn't a damn thing you've done by yourself.

Only in a tyrannical government can they contrive some notion of "not taking money from people" is an expense.  Based on such reasoning I can say that "not robbing my neighbors is costing me money".  Do you realize the implications of your statement and reasoning?

  Figure out the relationship between citizens and this government and neighbors and neighbors then try to make sense next time.

Do you even realize that this same CBO said that the elimination of these tax cuts would lead to an even more dire contraction of the economy with a loss in federal revenue greater than the amount of the tax cuts?  When you are robbing Peter to pay Paul and then borrowing some more from Luke and Mark you have to look deeper into the numbers than your simplistic and naive methodology.

Do you even realize that this same CBO said the same thing about spending cuts? Look deeper into the numbers than your simplistic naive methodology.

Again (once more repeating myself), I brought up numbers on paper. What we could afford and why we can't afford it now. Unlike you, I'm not a keyboard economist but I do a little Monday morning quaterbacking though. We can't go to extremes in either direction. The exact path to take eludes even the people that get paid to analyze this stuff and offer their suggestions. Pardon me if your critique of a plan I didn't even provide doesn't move me.

"...to bribe people like you into voting for them again"?  Do you mean that they will give me money, food, a home, medical, etc and I don't have to pay any taxes?  That is a bribe and that is the liberal/democratic strategy...

No, providing you with a whole new world to live in separate from the real one to where you think you're not taking and you're doing it all on your own is the type of bribe I'm talking about. That's the conservative/republican strategy. Flatter, (brain)wash, rinse, and repeat.

[Abrupt]

Our government is not a company.  Our government cannot generate a profit or make investments -- it can only spend.  To drive the point home even more clearly I will clarify the significance of my statement so that it reads "They are basing the numbers on spending money that the children of people that haven't even been born yet haven't even made.".  That shift in perspective shines a light on the severe and dangerous ignorance of your casual dismissal of "so what?".  "It is only indentured servitude that remains with any and all offspring of those alive today, so what?".  Doesn't quite sound as reasonable as you wish to portray it now, does it?  It is funny that when you apply your same 'budget and estimate" calculations and you consider who is paying and how much and how long that it reveals it for what it actually is, and that is slavery of the most insidious form.

After all that typing, you still get a big whopping "so what?" from me. Our government is not a company and it is not a household. It can't be compared 1 to 1 with either of those things. It doesn't get paid for the work it does, it collects taxes from us to pay for things we all collectively use. That is the nature of it. It does, however, create budgets just like a company or a household based on the money it expects to have coming in. That's how you create budgets. At this point, I'm repeating myself. Bringing up the children ("Oh no, will someone please think of the children!!") falls flat. Again, there's more to being a citizen of a country than just living in it.

What is actually funny is that you're talking about people building this country (below) and slavery (above) as you're talking to a black man. Actual slavery is slavery in it's most insidious form not people getting paid for what they do. So please, spare me.

And looking at our national debt and the staggering unfunded liabilities it is quite evident that the government is incapable of formulating a budget.  In fact the current Democratic controlled senate has not submitted a budget in three years -- so don't come at me speaking about budgets.  I don't know how you do it, but when I calculate a budget I allow for a large percentage of "unknown liabilities and expenses" and this is something our government never does as it always assumes the attitude of "deal with it later".  The issue of the children of children is not unwarranted as they are spending money now of the children of the children of people not even born yet -- that would be like me taking out a loan and signing the name of my unborn son's unborn daughter.  We owe the spirit of our country, not the federal government as you seem to have confusion about this.  I served my country honorably in the military because I wanted to and not because I owed some obligated debt.  While I have a greater admiration for others that served in the military, I do not feel resentment or any other negativity towards those that choose not to.   The nature of freedom is to live without debt or obligation and as our country is based upon freedom it's citizens must be capable of living such a life. 

I don't care if you are black/brown/white/purple/orange/green, so don't play any race card with me as it will not work since I don't possess this liberal guilt.  My ancestors gave their lives fighting against slavery and we won the civil war.  I am not asking for you to thank them or give them your gratitude but I am certainly telling you that I don't feel sorry for you and I don't feel sorry that my ancestors lost their lives in freeing an enslaved people.  Actual slavery is not insidious at all, it is direct and obvious and only possible because of the weakness of the spirit of the one enslaved (note:  I don't mean that last part to sound insulting as it might seem upon first reading.  Consider what I said and you will realize that nobody has to be a slave, regardless of how compelling the coercion used against one is.  Nobody, likely, would choose to be a slave, but their are some that when put into such a situation might not choose to be free.  While such methods and manners of torture and coercion are possible to break the spirits of men so that they conform to a master, such can never be absolute beyond the willingness of the enslaved.  Again I say this not as a slave but as a free man who understands what lengths would be necessary to enslave me -- and I ask you, "what would it take to make you bend your knee to a master?").  That is where I see us now and while I so despise your opinion of the relationship between us citizens and our government.  We are the masters and our government is the servant and you seem to think it the other way around.  I don't see the government being capable of enslaving me with a gun to my head (can never know though till the act as brave words are just that), but I damned well know that they will not get me with an offering of some libraries and paved roads.

Ignorance?  People built this country, not the government.  We are a people with a government and not a government with a people.  All of these things you indicate were built by people and paid for by people and their existence does not rely upon any government (but don't try to confuse people and move the goalpost so that it appears I am entirely against all taxes as if you will pay attention to the particulars of my post you will see the stipulation I made of "this much".  I believe in the duties stipulated in The Constitution and also I believe that local governments can go as far beyond this as isn't a violation of The Constitution and that people can thus "vote with their feet").

This is the beginning of the paragraph you're responding to:

Your argument against taxation or the amount of taxation falls flat.

Explain to me how I moved the goal post again?

Mainly because of your lead-in of "against taxation" where even in your above counter you stipulate the secondary additional of "the amount of taxation".  Why include both if you are not wishing the readers to perceive both as a possibility?  Subtle trick of debate but it is one that is effective upon the minds of the inexperienced and it is one that I will not allow to be suggested of me -- even if you follow up with a secondary.  You are arguing circular and stating that the success of one is owed to the government and that the failings of the government to perform its duties requires a greater debt from those that find a way to succeed in spite of the ineptitude and incompetence and interference of this same government. 

The money I earn is mine, and you were right to suspect that I would focus in on that.  As part of the spirit and letter of The Constitution, we are born free and if it as you suggest -- that we owe our government at birth -- then it could not be so.  I am not as helpless as you, it appears.  It could all come crumbling down tomorrow and I will persist where it seems you will wither into decay and immediately become dust.  You see I am not dependent upon the government (I suppose you are to have your ideology) but it seems that it (and those that think like you) is dependent upon me.

Don't call me ignorant or naive when you are basically admitting here that without me you would be helpless -- all the while insulting me for calling into question the waste of my taxes.

What a load of self righteous crap. If it all comes crumbling down and you've been hunting and/or camping at least once, then yeah, you'd have it over me, otherwise no. Again, you eat up these lies 'cause they flatter you not because they have any basis in reality. Again, I'm just repeating myself, EVERYTHING you took advantage of to get where you are was absolutely because of all of us collectively. You did NOT do it all yourself. Show me the bridge you built by yourself. Show me the roads you built by yourself. Show me those libraries and schools with wings dedicated to you. Show me! You damn sure used them I bet. You are the old person at the tea party rally and Craig T Nelson on Glenn Becks show looking like an ignorant fool. That is absolutely you. Explain to me how you got anything you have WITHOUT utilizing any of those things. There isn't a damn thing you've done by yourself.

What lies am I eating up?  You say this as if you suggest I am being fed something by someone when what I give you is coming from me and of me.  You are the one that seems to put into your belly the food and drink that the liberals provide you.  Whether you perceive what I said as crap or not it is the truth -- I can persist without the help of anyone.  That doesn't mean I would want to, it just means that I know I could and to you tell you the truth I already have done that (Homeless and not even one penny in my pocket -- but I did make use of these beloved roads of yours as I clearly remember how much it burned and hurt to walk on since I didn't own a pair of shoes.  I received not a single penny in help from the government, but also I didn't ask either.  Maybe that was pride or this arrogance you hint at with your above reference to self flattery.  You can make your own mind up about which or fabricate another reason since you seem to think you understand even anything about me).

These roads and schools and libraries and such things you continue to bring up -- that debt was paid long ago and it cannot be both a gift and a debt at the same time.  With your reasoning one would describe syphilis this way "The gift that keeps giving".  Again with your socialistic "collectively" argument.  That point is entirely moot at best since we would each have the exact same benefits and opportunities and that only the truly exceptional would rise above.  From that sort of argument we can easily deduce that everyone should pay the exact same 'amount' of taxes and not just percent and it would reason then that the rich should pay no more than the poorest in dollar amounts (I know that isn't what you are arguing so you seriously need to rethink the implications of your ideology).  Furthermore all the wrong and crime would also be a product of this government benevolence so at the best possible case (from your position) it could only be "a wash" with nobody owing the government anything nor it owing us.

Only in a tyrannical government can they contrive some notion of "not taking money from people" is an expense.  Based on such reasoning I can say that "not robbing my neighbors is costing me money".  Do you realize the implications of your statement and reasoning?

  Figure out the relationship between citizens and this government and neighbors and neighbors then try to make sense next time.

The government is our servant and owes us.  Our neighbors are our equals and do not owe us and we do not owe them.  When the servant dictates to the master there is a problem and that is what we have in our government today.  I was a soldier and a servant to my country. I did not tell my country who to fight or who to defend against, it told me (I was administrative and not combat so do not picture me blood covered and gung ho fighting from a trench in a life or death struggle as I would not want to be suggesting that and although I served honorably in the capacity as they called me to I would feel dishonest to not clarify as others here have already felt compelled to belittle me for merely being a 'secretary' as I think it was that they put it).

Do you even realize that this same CBO said that the elimination of these tax cuts would lead to an even more dire contraction of the economy with a loss in federal revenue greater than the amount of the tax cuts?  When you are robbing Peter to pay Paul and then borrowing some more from Luke and Mark you have to look deeper into the numbers than your simplistic and naive methodology.

Do you even realize that this same CBO said the same thing about spending cuts? Look deeper into the numbers than your simplistic naive methodology.

Again (once more repeating myself), I brought up numbers on paper. What we could afford and why we can't afford it now. Unlike you, I'm not a keyboard economist but I do a little Monday morning quaterbacking though. We can't go to extremes in either direction. The exact path to take eludes even the people that get paid to analyze this stuff and offer their suggestions. Pardon me if your critique of a plan I didn't even provide doesn't move me.

I did as you did, brought up numbers on paper.  Our same government that decides what we can afford and not afford also decides what to take from people.  If I robbed my neighbors I could afford a lot more than I can afford now, but it would be foolish of me to calculate a budget based upon that and then go out and spend the money and not rob them and then blame them for it.  Think about it, you already suggest that you believe we owe our government for the roads and schools and libraries and other things.  Who pays for these things?  It is the rich that do and the same people you seem to feel should be obligated to pay even more.  If somebody offered to help me I would certainly not hold them up for even more money and I would not blame them if they suddenly chose not to help me anymore.

"...to bribe people like you into voting for them again"?  Do you mean that they will give me money, food, a home, medical, etc and I don't have to pay any taxes?  That is a bribe and that is the liberal/democratic strategy...

No, providing you with a whole new world to live in separate from the real one to where you think you're not taking and you're doing it all on your own is the type of bribe I'm talking about. That's the conservative/republican strategy. Flatter, (brain)wash, rinse, and repeat.

No man is an island argument?  I never said a man was so you can abandon that approach.  You cannot equate a reduction in extortion to a bribe, but you could well consider welfare and food stamps and other such charities as a bribe.  The top 5% of wealth earners in the US pay 65% of the federal income tax and the bottom 50% of wealth earners pay 0%.  Those numbers, while significant in their own do not even represent the whole truth of the disparity.  Those top 5% also provide jobs and opportunities to countless thousands of others.  They pay for your beloved roads and libraries and such other things.  The bottom 50% contribute nothing to these things and yet they use them just the same and also additional resources not used by the top 5%.  When someone running for offices says they will raise the rates on those that actually pay and give more 'free' stuff to those that will not -- well what the hell is that except a bribe?  At 51% paying nothing democracy is dead and freedom is lost except for those with the honor and integrity to recognize right from wrong and not put a price on their dignity.

The world you allude to from your viewpoints is distorted and upside down and I cannot imagine how anyone could ever come to think that way.

[mrsbluesmith]

Thank you, patty4me! The man is talking about opening 800,000 jobs to illegal immigrants.  Really? Where are these jobs? Man, I am tellng you the direction we are heading is either really scary or very promising.

I'm going to move to another country, become a legal citizen there, then sneak back here as an illegal imigrant and get myself one of those 800,000 jobs (Are there even that many jobs available in the US?). 

[BJohnsonPP]

@Abrupt, we're not speaking to each other at this point (well, we never were). I don't know why I keep getting involved in these types of conversations when they go nowhere. We're not actually trying to come to some kind of understanding or even just a conclusion. I'm just going to respond to some points that stand out to me instead of all the quoting.

1st, I didn't play the race card. What you did is what conservatives typically tend to do and that is play the race card card. I mention race, you ignore whether the mention is relevant or not and just say "you're playing the race card!". You brought up slavery and people building the country. You honestly don't see why race would come up to me? Honestly? If you brought up abortion or voting rights, you're telling me you don't see why someone you're debating, if you didn't know it at the time, would bring up the fact that they are a woman? (race too actually 'cause it also applies here).

2nd, "We owe the spirit of our country"? That means absolutely nothing. How do you repay that? Saluting the flag? Saying the pledge of allegiance every day? Screaming "support our troops" while being fine with putting them in unnecessary wars and not doing anything to actually support them? That is the absolute least you can do if you can call that doing something at all. Giving back to our country means actually giving back. I have zero confusion about what our government is. Our tax dollars don't go to it to say "job well done" 'cause that certainly isn't the case. We employ our government to take care of business on behalf of the country. I have no problem with cutting off their pay for doing a poor job, I do have a problem with cutting off money for the business they have to take care of. You see the difference?

3rd, You mentioned your service. Thank you for that. That is giving back to our country. You did however take part in socialism though. What I meant by you eating up lies you've been fed is that you want so badly to believe you do everything on your on and you just don't. We have a balance between individualism and collectivism. Not liking that doesn't change it. Individualism doesn't trump everything, you just want to believe it does when reality says different. Our military protects taxpayers and freeloaders alike because the safety of our country as a whole trumps the fact that some people will get over. Our police departments, our military (and their healthcare), education, infrastructure...all socialized. Would you rather us hire a military only when needed? Should we all have our own private security details instead of police? Should those with money be the only ones allowed an education? I'm sure your answer is no to those questions so why pretend that this isn't the truth? We as a group provided these things for each other so that we can pursue what makes us happy as an individuals.  

It is not a debt or servitude as you want to characterize it. If you own your home, do you let it crumble or do you continue to maintain it as long as you own it? If you pass it on to your kids, should they maintain it or say you already paid for it and you're the one that screwed it up so lets not put more into it? You can allow a house to crumble, you can't allow that for a country. Because of that, if it is a debt, it absolutely has not be paid off because the nature of this "debt" can and will never be paid off if you want to keep this country. It's passed down from generation to generation in whatever condition and each generation must attempt to repair its condition no matter how badly those before them damaged it.

Last, Do you look at a chess board and determine who's winning by how many pieces they've captured? If so, you're probably a horrible chess player. Having to be a slave is about much more than a willingness to bend or how strong you are. There are many variables to be considered. I'm sure there were slaves much stronger than you. It's really easy to speak about something you'll never deal with. Some of those slaves that bent their knees are the reason you or I will never have to. You as an individual may have resisted and died. You as an individual may have broken free and lived in hiding (if you want to call that living or freedom). Yay for you and your individualism   . It, however, took groups of people, (black and white, free and unfree) and a head of government to actually end slavery so they could all pursue individual happiness.

I'm sorry, but I had to throw this in... You'd be the slave, after benefiting from everyone's sacrifice so you could finally come out of hiding, talking about "Who's this Harriet Tubman person? What do you mean Lincoln freed the slaves? I freed myself!".

[Abrupt]

@Abrupt, we're not speaking to each other at this point (well, we never were). I don't know why I keep getting involved in these types of conversations when they go nowhere. We're not actually trying to come to some kind of understanding or even just a conclusion. I'm just going to respond to some points that stand out to me instead of all the quoting.

While I disagree with your premise (I was and am trying as I am best capable to speak to you) I do agree with the gist of your conclusion (that an understanding might be impossible) -- but this I come to based solely that you suggest it here of yourself.  I believe what we have here is a clash of two different ideologies or social systems or viewpoints that are so foreign from each other as to be incapable of spanning the distance between.  That, in itself alone, is fascinating to me.  I understand your approach in response and agree to the reasoning behind it.

1st, I didn't play the race card. What you did is what conservatives typically tend to do and that is play the race card card. I mention race, you ignore whether the mention is relevant or not and just say "you're playing the race card!". You brought up slavery and people building the country. You honestly don't see why race would come up to me? Honestly? If you brought up abortion or voting rights, you're telling me you don't see why someone you're debating, if you didn't know it at the time, would bring up the fact that they are a woman? (race too actually 'cause it also applies here).

I find it quite interesting that you would see this exactly opposite as I do.  I never brought up race and I still see no relevance to this topic.  You are no more a slave now than I am.  We both had ancestors that were slaves and in both cases were enslaved by our respective peoples as well as others and in both cases likely fought and died to free their own people as well as others.  We are not these people but instead we are ourselves.

2nd, "We owe the spirit of our country"? That means absolutely nothing. How do you repay that? Saluting the flag? Saying the pledge of allegiance every day? Screaming "support our troops" while being fine with putting them in unnecessary wars and not doing anything to actually support them? That is the absolute least you can do if you can call that doing something at all. Giving back to our country means actually giving back. I have zero confusion about what our government is. Our tax dollars don't go to it to say "job well done" 'cause that certainly isn't the case. We employ our government to take care of business on behalf of the country. I have no problem with cutting off their pay for doing a poor job, I do have a problem with cutting off money for the business they have to take care of. You see the difference?

It means everything.  You honor the memory of the good of the country and you strive to uphold the spirit of its intent.  To each person you honor this spirit as you see fit but the ultimate cost was paid already in blood so that we would be free.  The debt we owe is that we all remain free.  Since a debt of freedom cannot be forced or coerced to be repaid it must be done so entirely voluntary (anything else defiles the spirit of the gift and achieves the exact opposite effect).  Giving back is just that -- giving.  If someone takes something from me they cannot claim it to be a gift from me to them.  You should have courage and not be afraid of "cutting off money for the business they have to take care of" because if our ancestors had applied this reasoning then it is possible that neither of us would be free today -- but that is not what we are discussing here, though.

3rd, You mentioned your service. Thank you for that. That is giving back to our country. You did however take part in socialism though. What I meant by you eating up lies you've been fed is that you want so badly to believe you do everything on your on and you just don't. We have a balance between individualism and collectivism. Not liking that doesn't change it. Individualism doesn't trump everything, you just want to believe it does when reality says different. Our military protects taxpayers and freeloaders alike because the safety of our country as a whole trumps the fact that some people will get over. Our police departments, our military (and their healthcare), education, infrastructure...all socialized. Would you rather us hire a military only when needed? Should we all have our own private security details instead of police? Should those with money be the only ones allowed an education? I'm sure your answer is no to those questions so why pretend that this isn't the truth? We as a group provided these things for each other so that we can pursue what makes us happy as an individuals.  

It is not a debt or servitude as you want to characterize it. If you own your home, do you let it crumble or do you continue to maintain it as long as you own it? If you pass it on to your kids, should they maintain it or say you already paid for it and you're the one that screwed it up so lets not put more into it? You can allow a house to crumble, you can't allow that for a country. Because of that, if it is a debt, it absolutely has not be paid off because the nature of this "debt" can and will never be paid off if you want to keep this country. It's passed down from generation to generation in whatever condition and each generation must attempt to repair its condition no matter how badly those before them damaged it.

Thank you, it was my pleasure to serve.  Some of these things are indeed indicated within The Constitution and are thus part of our country (military/interstate highways/etc).  These things as such require money and are subject to lawful taxation.  There are many things that are taxed now that are not part of The Constitution (healthcare/welfare/etc -- and do not try to imply that the preamble to The Constitution gives power to these as it does not) and the federal government has circumvented its obligations to actually force servitude from the states in other parts (federal highways will only be paid for if the States comply to the restrictions and demands of the federal government in areas such as speed limits, etc).  These things are tyrannical and they tend to be easy to spot as they are almost always described with prefaces such as "for the greater good" or "for the good of us all", etc.  These are forms of slavery that are not often recognized and I don't know how people have become numb to the sensations of such bindings placed upon them (gradual over time is most likely the reason).

Again, we are born free.  The debt we owe is to ensure that we and our progeny remain free.  A debt of freedom cannot be paid in slavery, but one can voluntarily serve as they see fit.

Last, Do you look at a chess board and determine who's winning by how many pieces they've captured? If so, you're probably a horrible chess player. Having to be a slave is about much more than a willingness to bend or how strong you are. There are many variables to be considered. I'm sure there were slaves much stronger than you. It's really easy to speak about something you'll never deal with. Some of those slaves that bent their knees are the reason you or I will never have to. You as an individual may have resisted and died. You as an individual may have broken free and lived in hiding (if you want to call that living or freedom). Yay for you and your individualism   . It, however, took groups of people, (black and white, free and unfree) and a head of government to actually end slavery so they could all pursue individual happiness.

I'm sorry, but I had to throw this in... You'd be the slave, after benefiting from everyone's sacrifice so you could finally come out of hiding, talking about "Who's this Harriet Tubman person? What do you mean Lincoln freed the slaves? I freed myself!".

No slave bends their knee from choice, only a free man does that.  Everyone that bends their knee, though, and declares "I am doing this by choice", is not.  Often they don't recognize the bindings that hold them to this posture and it is only when these bindings are cut and the action performed that freedom is maintained and they become their own master.

Do not try to delude the discussion by alluding to the advantages or organization over disarray.  That is tactics and strategy and has no bearing on the discussion at hand.  Of course a 5 man phalanx is stronger than 5 men with spears at holding a line, but 5 men with spears can scout far superior to a 5 man phalanx so these things are not the same.

A nation that is comprised of citizens that are not free, is not a free nation -- even if it repels every other conquering nation as it has already been conquered from within.

[healthfreedom]

iT IS REALLY TOO BAD THAT SO MANY PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND THAT OUR GOVERNMENT HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER BY PEOPLE WHO HATE AMERICA. ROMNEY AND OBAMA IS ON THE SAME TEAM. SO WAS GOERGE BUSH, CLINTON, HERBERT BUSH, AND CARTER. ALL NEW WORLD ORDER. ONLY GOD CAN HELP AMERICA NOW.

[sigmapi1501]

iT IS REALLY TOO BAD THAT SO MANY PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW OR UNDERSTAND THAT OUR GOVERNMENT HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER BY PEOPLE WHO HATE AMERICA. ROMNEY AND OBAMA IS ON THE SAME TEAM. SO WAS GOERGE BUSH, CLINTON, HERBERT BUSH, AND CARTER. ALL NEW WORLD ORDER. ONLY GOD CAN HELP AMERICA NOW.

Conspiracy, Devine intervention, and ALL CAPS.... the crazy trifecta. Well done.

[healthfreedom]

Mitt Romney or Obama? What great choices! But, too bad; SAME TEAM. Both of these men are playing on the same team, and their agenda is to destroy this great country. The american public have been deceived. America has to go down in order for the new world order to appear fully. TRUST GOD!!! He is our only hope and escape from the coming dark days in America and the world.

[falcon9]

America has to go down in order for the new world order to appear fully. TRUST GOD!!! He is our only hope and escape from the coming dark days in America and the world.

I would and will oppose any theocracy by any means necessary.

“Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.”
-– Thomas Jefferson

“The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”
--– John Adams

[Falconer02]

I would and will oppose any theocracy by any means necessary.

You and me both, brutha. Let's hope people like Healthfreedom stop getting into political offices.

Also, epic argument above between Abrupt and Bjohnson. Good read! I vant to see moar.

[mrsbluesmith]

Has anyone read the book: "Liberty and Tyranny" by Mark Levine?  I'm not taking a stand one way or the other, I just thought it was a very interesting read. 

[hawkeye3210]

Mitt Romney or Obama? What great choices! But, too bad; SAME TEAM. Both of these men are playing on the same team, and their agenda is to destroy this great country. The american public have been deceived. America has to go down in order for the new world order to appear fully. TRUST GOD!!! He is our only hope and escape from the coming dark days in America and the world.

Please enlighten us more....

[constance312003]

Looking better ever day.  Hope he picks a conservative vice president.

[sigmapi1501]

Looking better ever day.  Hope he picks a conservative vice president.

You mean you hope he picks a white man that Hates gays, right?

[trucktina]

Yes, I think he's the one this time.