azmodeus13 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Just started a new web blog for conservatives - please come by and take a look - just 2 months old and over 20000 hits already. http://dirtyrottenscoundrels.wordpress.com We have also started a conservative ning site for our activism group. Less than a week old. Come and join us for free - help us stop socialism. http://logchoice.ning.com Thanks for taking a second to come by! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I am not sure if you here to debate any of the content of that website, but, yeah, I would definitely disagree with some of its content. (AmeriCorps -- the new Brownshirts? Seriously?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azmodeus13 Posted July 14, 2009 Author Share Posted July 14, 2009 I would imagine you would debate the socialization of America, the fact that Obama has called for a public security force to rival the military in power and funding, the move towards a world government when government leaders are calling for it all over the world and even printing a world currency that was introduced at the G8 summit. It's ok if you disagree with me. I would just hope that wasn't the only thing you saw. And if the militarization of youth in combat boots, chanting slogans, saluting with a hauntingly similar move to the white power or black power one fist raised, standing and exercising in a military formation, dressed in a uniform doesn't bother you at all especially with the nationalization of industries, soon to be energy and health care on top of autos, insurance, banks - I'm glad you're so secure. What he is doing is factual - the ghosts of the past aren't created by me - they are brought up because of the similarities. Let's talk 1 trillion yearly budget deficit. Let's talk massive new taxes. Let's talk a housing bubble being created by a program started by Carter, expanded by Clinton, expanded by the Rino Bush, testified to by Barney Frank as being sound a little over a year before it collapsed. Let's talk a seriously corrupt couple of programs that has caused over 16 trillion in wealth loss (housing and stock market) due to that housing bubble and no investigation by the "for the people" government. Overlook everything and zoom in on the one thing you can pick on. Did you find your way to the communist news paper I linked to in the same article? The one that is planning 9.5 steps for a "Progressive Decade" that declares capitalism as evil in the same breath it is endorsing just about everything Obama supports? Just curious if that was the ONE thing you stuck on. Have a great night - peace - out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 And if the militarization of youth in combat boots, chanting slogans, saluting with a hauntingly similar move to the white power or black power one fist raised, standing and exercising in a military formation, dressed in a uniform doesn't bother you at all especially with the nationalization of industries, soon to be energy and health care on top of autos, insurance, banks - I'm glad you're so secure. Personally, I have no issue with the Boy Scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twist Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Typical. Historically – people don’t get this. During Hitler’s Nazism (national SOCIALISM) reign, during Mussolini’s fascist reign, during Wilson’s Progressive (recognize that party name?) reign, during Bismarck’s reign, there was corporatism. You can tell what is coming down the road – people don’t see this clearly, but it happens every time. If you are worried about corporatism I wonder why you limit yourself to attacking democrats. You don't like the WAY they go about instituting business-government ties? Our system is rife with government-business collusion to the detriment of the people in general. The fact that you only criticize one side makes you an aid to the very thing you hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Az, a word of advice. No one is going to see what you want them to see. What you want them to see has no effect whatsoever. They'll see what they'll see - and when you drop things like comparisons to Hitler and Mussolini, that's what they're going to see. I want to emphasize this, because it's true about virtually every topic - being right isn't enough. (I don't think that you are, but my reaction isn't going to change now if, years down the road, Obama has a little mustache and we're invading Canada.) When it comes to getting the reaction you desire, what's much more important is understanding why people have any given reaction, and how to communicate so they'll have the one you want. What you say is outweighed by how you say it. Mentioning Hitler will generate certain reactions. It doesn't matter if you want them. It doesn't matter if you can say "I told you so" in ten years. The cause and effect don't change. If you want to change the effect, change the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Keep up the good fight. Mind you, the tailgate tends to lean to the left. Your new site will go over like a fart in church here. But you are right on many counts. Best wishes with the site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I would imagine you would debate the socialization of America, the fact that Obama has called for a public security force to rival the military in power and funding... Alright. Sorry -- this became a long post. Definitely a point of debate. You are talking about AmeriCorps, of all things. Do you even know what these peple do? They plant trees, rebuild paths, and help people with houses, among a host of other programs. You are acting as if they are running around and training with weapons: It's a community-volunteer organization. Such fear mongering is a total misrepresentation of this organization. What Obama original discussed was the need for a civilian infrastructure to take the place of some military duties out in the field. This is why we have private contractors bidding for work that the military does not or should not perform (such as IT infrastructure, construction personnel, etc.). It had nothing to do with radicalizing a bunch of teenagers into goose-stepping paramilitarists. the move towards a world government when government leaders are calling for it all over the world and even printing a world currency that was introduced at the G8 summit. I used to be more into the "Global government" conspiracy, but I then realized that these organizations can barely organize themselves, let alone a world conspiracy. There are simply too many competing elements for global governance. China suggested a move away from the dollar, but I didn't see any serious discussions about a world currency. Anyway, as it is, we basically have a global currency, via the dollar and all of the credit systems. I don't think we need one to have some sort of economic/financial centralization. It is already here, in my regards. It's ok if you disagree with me. I would just hope that wasn't the only thing you saw. Those were the first things I saw, aye. After that, I didn't look too far into the site for anything else. And if the militarization of youth in combat boots, chanting slogans, saluting with a hauntingly similar move to the white power or black power one fist raised, standing and exercising in a military formation, dressed in a uniform doesn't bother you at all especially with the nationalization of industries, soon to be energy and health care on top of autos, insurance, banks - I'm glad you're so secure. Again, that is an over-the-top exaggeration of AmeriCorps. As it is, it's made up of hundreds of different organizations, so it is not even centralized enough to form such a domestic paramilitary force. Here is some pictures of AmeriCorps volunteers. I know, some of them are a bit scary, so brace yourself: Scary, eh? With this next image, I thought, "Aha, now those look paramilitary!" but then the caption said that it was a local H.S. color guard opening up an AmeriCorp event. Dang them and their color guard and flags. Uh-oh -- one of the Brownshirts with that fascist, Nancy Pelosi! Quit smiling. More goose-stepping. I noticed the background says "Growing Together Garden." Socialists! Quit that smiling! Look mean - you have some goose stepping to do! BTW, these are some of the first images I grabbed off of Google. What he is doing is factual - the ghosts of the past aren't created by me - they are brought up because of the similarities. I would challenge the "factual part," my friend. Let's talk 1 trillion yearly budget deficit. Let's talk massive new taxes. Let's talk a housing bubble being created by a program started by Carter, expanded by Clinton, expanded by the Rino Bush, testified to by Barney Frank as being sound a little over a year before it collapsed. Let's talk a seriously corrupt couple of programs that has caused over 16 trillion in wealth loss (housing and stock market) due to that housing bubble and no investigation by the "for the people" government. Discussion of budget deficits and national debts are fine. I am all for that. But we haven't had any massive taxes, even though people acting as if our taxes have been raised. They haven't. I also wouldn't blame the housing bubble on Carter -- that's a little bit much. Yes, I know the GOP wants every failure to somehow be traced back to him, but someone signing an ARM mortgage is not the fault of that former president. Republicans fully supported deregulation (along with some Democrats as well). This is why we had a Black Market crash in 1987 and a Savings & Loan scandal during the next year or so. This is why people such as ® Phill Gramm supported deregulation in the early years of the Clinton administration. These boom or bust bubbles didn't have BECAUSE of regulation, after all. Overlook everything and zoom in on the one thing you can pick on. Did you find your way to the communist news paper I linked to in the same article? The one that is planning 9.5 steps for a "Progressive Decade" that declares capitalism as evil in the same breath it is endorsing just about everything Obama supports? It doesn't take a communist to see that capitalism has experienced some severe blows over the last year, does it? Capitalism is not the end all to everything. That is why we have anti-trust laws and why this is not an anarcho-capitalist society. That is why we have public roads, utilities, and emergency services. And the CPUSA is a democratic socialist groupl they are hardly the commies of the old 20th century. Did you actually read what they said in that article (other than the first part)? None of it is terribly radical and nor is it a endorsement of the Obama policies, either. It is basically an article which outlines their modern movement (capitalism is evil and war is an outgrowth of it; the need for historical dialectalism; the American dream is broken for home ownership; the US needs more public transport; consumerism is madness; debt is slavery; Commercial advertising is a war against man). It isn't the most radical list of positions I have ever heard, if you ask me. Libertarians, though, won't be happy with their assessment of that ideology. Heh. Just curious if that was the ONE thing you stuck on. Have a great night - peace - out! Have a great night as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 These boom or bust bubbles didn't have BECAUSE of regulation, after all. They didn't happen because of deregulation, either, but that's another talk for another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 They didn't happen because of deregulation, either, but that's another talk for another thread. Correct, another thread. But certainly some deregulation, or lack of regulation, compounded the problem. The state of Florida alone admitted that they had over 10,000 convicted felons as licensed mortgage brokers during the last three years of the bubble. When the state regulator was asked how that could possibly be...he responded that his office wasn't given enough money to do thorough background checks. As if it takes a secretary more than five minutes to do at least a basic criminal background check on candidates. Even more insane? I believe that state regulator still has his job. And his salary is paid by our tax dollars.:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 They didn't happen because of deregulation, either, but that's another talk for another thread. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Personally, I have no issue with the Boy Scouts. Me neither. I was raised through the whole system -- Cub Scouts, Webelos, and Boy Scouts -- and it is much more "paramilitary" than AmeriCorps. But it is still a fine American civilian institution. (That reminds of the scene from Red Dawn where the Cuban describes the Eagle Scouts as a "paramilitary" group.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Conservative doesn't mean spending huge amounts of money on an unconstitutional war, acting as the global police, and creating a large amount of federal programs that take away rights and powers reserved for state governments. The Obama administration has yet to hold a candle to what the Bush administration did to totally mess up this country and snuff out small government. National socialism can be reached from both ends of the spectrum. The Bush administration torturing prisoners, holding people without trial, passing legislature so the government has more freedom to spy on their people, nationalizing certain testing requirements in schools, and starting a full blown war based on false pretenses wasn't exactly moving away from socialism any more than Obama. It's funny, I see so many people who call themselves conservatives and seem to understand that socialism and big government is not something they want, and I think "we may have something here". Then you mention around them how BOTH parties are to blame for the track we're on now and you get a bunch of people trying to back pedal and justify what the republicans have been doing for the past 8 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Sigh... more of the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I have a problem when local law enforcement wears military style clothing and jack boots, you know they're armed and all. But that's the law and order right so you don't have a problem with that, huh? I prefer my sheriff to be of the Andy Taylor variety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Here is some pictures of AmeriCorps volunteers. I know, some of them are a bit scary, so brace yourself:Scary, eh? Ok, that made me laugh out loud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Ok, that made me laugh out loud. You're just now laughing? What kills me is that these "conservatives" are just now interested in the deficit and how its baaaaaad. Where were they under Reagan, GHWB, Clinton (for most of the years), and Dubya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box76 Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 To think Americorps is what Obama had in mind when he wanted a national civilian army is just plain dumb. In his own words it will be just as big and equally as funded as our own military. Putting pictures up of old ladies and gardens is such a failed attempt to grasp the reality of WHY Obama would want such an army? It is unconstitutional to create such a force and a little research into this subject would lead any concerned American to question the motives behind this seemingly well thought out plan.Anyone see Rahm Emanuel's interview about this very subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 To think Americorps is what Obama had in mind when he wanted a national civilian army is just plain dumb. In his own words it will be just as big and equally as funded as our own military. Putting pictures up of old ladies and gardens is such a failed attempt to grasp the reality of WHY Obama would want such an army? It is unconstitutional to create such a force and a little research into this subject would lead any concerned American to question the motives behind this seemingly well thought out plan.Anyone see Rahm Emanuel's interview about this very subject? Well, it was the OP website which talked about AmeriCorps being the second coming of the Brown shirts. If AmeriCorps isn't what Obama has in mind, he better start whipping those slackers into shape, right? Enough with the gardens! I am sorry the pictures were not mean enough for your purposes. But you can go ahead and pretend that the high school color guard are AmeriCorps volunteers drilling with their rifles. Seriously, though, I don't know where this supposed "civilian national security force" will come from. The irony is that the same conservatives who are bemoaning this "Obama Force" are the same ones who don't bat an eye to authoritarian police tactics, use of the military within national borders for law enforcement, or the expansion of the domestic surveillance program. That's all good, until, "OMG, OBAMA IS FORMING AN ARMY!" Plus, I think Obama would have a hard time finding $500 billion to fund such a civilian force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 You're just now laughing? What kills me is that these "conservatives" are just now interested in the deficit and how its baaaaaad. Where were they under Reagan, GHWB, Clinton (for most of the years), and Dubya? Eh. Call me a spineless moderate, but I've tired of ideological ****ing contests. The picture was funny though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Eh. Call me a spineless moderate, but I've tired of ideological ****ing contests. The picture was funny though. After reading the article describing AmeriCorps as basically Brown Shirts, I got a chuckle, too, once I saw the images of the volunteers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Here is some pictures of AmeriCorps volunteers. I know, some of them are a bit scary, so brace yourself: Scary, eh? The lady in back with the red coat and sunglasses does scare me some. ...Okay, a lot. She scares me a lot. :paranoid: . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 I fear after viewing those photos that I may have been subverted. Is there anywhere I can cleanse my mind? To the OP,, good luck with your new blog. It seems as if you're open for debating your views, and that's good. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrabR Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 did not take you long to pull out the old Hitler card It seems to be a conservative these days means to blame everything bad on Carter and Clinton and everything Good to Reagan. To be a democrat is to blame everything bad on tyhe Bushs and everything good on Kennedy We need a third party they both are the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.