DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Personal thoughts from a former Democrat

If the Constitution is flawed, as it was with slavery, then it can, and should, be changed. New Amendments can change previous parts of the Constitution, and that is the avenue to take for making changes, not changing it arbitrarily.

The greatness of this country, and this Constitution, is that it is hard to change the rights contained within, and/or to take away the rights we hold most dear. It can be done, to overturn a gross injustice, but to take away rights is hard to do on purpose.

It is not the role of the Supreme Court to decide what the Constitution says, as far as changing the intent of the document. The people can decide to change the document, but the Court takes away the rights of the people when they decide to change what the Constitution says because of political concerns. When amendments are ratified, then they change the intent, and become the "new" intent, and should be followed by the Court.

You are right in that I did not make that clear in what I said.

40, your argument that a liberal government will take away all the things you worked so hard for is ridiculous. If you are talking about taxation and raising taxes then I'll give you that. The Dems are likely to raise taxes, but also likely to do more for people that need a lift up.

The GOP will raise taxes too. They will also allow big business and 1%ers to sell the country out from below your feet. They will start wars for profit that cost tax payers TRILLIONS. So instead of taxes being spent to make life better they spend to destroy.

Sure they will disguise this disgusting behavior behind self righteous reasoning but at the end of the day they are war mongers and fear mongers. They have killed the middle class in this country and people like you refuse to believe it even though you lived through it.

No BRAINS needed, just blinders.

Wow, that's a pretty high standard..


Who is the black civil rights guy, West, I think his last name is.. I can't remember his first name but he has Don King looking hair.. he called Hillary "the Milly Vanilly of American politics".. her lips are moving about supporting blacks, but her actions are doing nothing.


When her husband was accused of a series of sexual assault and harassment allegations, she never allowed for the fact that these women, who had nothing to gain, might be telling the truth.. instead she participated in horrendous character assassination on the women..

Hillary is a monster, a power hungry monster. She would step on anybody who got in the way of her quest for power whether that person was white, black, female, gay, Latino, disabled.. wouldn't matter. Of all of the viable options left in this race on both sides.. Hillary is so far behind everybody else for me that it's not even funny.... I would vote for Bernie 1000 times before I would vote for Hillary...

Cornel West

i having a hard to figuring out who isn't a power hungry monster in the entire presidential race, besides bernie.

I agree with a lot of the rationale behind your posts, and I couldn't agree with you more on this one.

I don't recall a candidate in my lifetime (b. 1983) who struck me as more sociopathically self-interested than she does.

Edit: I think Cruz gives her a run for her money, and added "sociopathically." Sure, Trump is extremely self-interested, but I think even he has a moral standard higher than Clinton.

That's the guy... his take on Hillary cracked me up.

Yea, if I had to make a list of who just flat out scares me the most as President.. it would go Clinton, Cruz, Trump, Bernie...

I disagree with a lot of the practicality of Bernie's platform, but he doesn't really scare me. I don't think his ideas could ever make it through the legislature (perhaps my famous last words), and I think I have the least anxiety about him being associated with some kind of scandal.

It's kind of funny.. as I sit and contemplate who I am going to hold my nose and vote for... I look at Bernie and think, OK, the dude might get 25% of what he wants.. would that be bad?

Bernie would scare me a lot less if you could guarantee me a republican majority in the house and senate... the thought of Bernie with a sympathetic democratic congress and senate does scare me a lot more.

I've always kind of joked that I'm surprised we haven't had a candidate that would promise he'd take $2 million dollars each from the top 33% of Americans and give $1 million each to the other 67% of Americans. I mean, you're promising $1 million dollars to 2/3rds of the voting population, how could you lose an election?!

Bernie is sort of going that route it seems. But yeah, if you could promise me a republican majority in congress, I'd take him a thousand times over Trump or Hillary. I feel like Trump's first act as President would be to carve his face into Mount Rushmore. I feel like Hillary's first act as President would be to sell us to Canada to guarantee she'd have enough votes to win re-election in 4 years.

This I can agree with 100%. Hilary is the worst of the worst.

AND here is the point that should help you tilt in Bernie's direction, THERE IS ZERO CHANCE THAT HE GETS ANYTHING THROUGH CONGRESS WITHOUT NEGOTIATION and COMPROMISE. It really doesn't matter who controls Congress, even the Dems will want to negotiate the policies. But the good news is that we will be starting the negotiations from the point of view that the MIDDLE CLASS MATTERS.

Absolutely agree.

I think Trump would carve his face into Mt. Rushmore, and Hillary would level Mt. Rushmore to build a giant billboard that says "Clinton '20."

Ok Jeb we'll get around to it..

Swish,

What I get from your long response is that liberal Democrats care for others and Conservative Republicans do not. I find that highly simplistic. Who does not care for their own? Do you not want the best for your family? Would you not do more for your daughter or son than you would for a total stranger? I suspect you would. If you value you son and daughter no more than you would a total stranger whom you have no influence in raising, you may have misguided loyalties in your life.

The soldier being like labor and the officers living off the backs of the common soldier is quite a disturbing analogy. Officers lead men. They help train men as to accomplish the task of war with the best possible chance of survival. Common soldiers are highly trained and disciplined. They are not like your local burger flipper at a fast food restaurant. I do not understand this analogy at all.

I am not becoming a Republican. I am becoming more aware of my rights and freedoms. I do not want to lose them in a vain attempt to save my fellow man. There is an old wise saying, "you cannot help others if you cannot help yourself first." Self reliance is not greed or selfishness. It is through self reliance that you are best able to help those who need help the most. By using the government's authority (granted to it by the people themselves), as a means to restrict individual freedoms and to take from those who have in order to give to those who need, you subjugate the people to the government. A subject mass cannot do anything but serve the masters. They cannot free other subject masses without destroying those who hold authority over them. If you advocate bigger government or more government involvement in the everyday lives of the people, you advocate either tyranny or revolution. Those are the only possible outcomes.

It is not the role of the government to take from one member of society and give to another. That is how we have gotten to where we are now. We have more poverty and a larger wealth gap between the people. If the government can take from me to give to someone in need. It also can take from me and give unto itself. Who decides who is the needy? A thief can give away some of his ill gotten gains in order to win the approval of those he steals from. Even a thief does not give away everything he has taken because then what is the reason for stealing it in the first place?



The one percentage people? Wars for profit? Taxes spent to make life better? The top wealthy people are not wealthy on their own. They have the assistance of the politicians, Democrat and Republican. Wars for profit? This is a meaningless cliche unless you mean the military industrial complex, wait... government spending. Stop taxing to give money to politicians who wrap themselves in the flag, spend trillions on a military as they skim money off the top and get kickbacks off the bottom. When you have a military, it is natural for politicians to find a reason to use it. I do not believe the politicians want or care about the cost of war either in money or men. It is just a way to divert the people from the fact that they have stolen from them already.



The middle class has been destroyed not by capitalism or individualism. It has been destroyed by corrupt cronyism, kleptocrats, nepotism, misguided social engineering, and a misguided belief that all people are equal to all other people without any consideration to cultural differences, social differences, economic differences, and moral differences. Who is their right minds can say that America is corrupt, imperialistic, greedy and then advocate more government control over their lives? It is antithetical to the human condition.



I want to believe that you did not mean to insult me with this comment.

Officers do very little training of anybody in the military, which is why you don't understand the analogy.

NCO's do most of the training. As a matter of fact, up until about the O-3 rank, O-1's and 2's are trained by the platoon sergeant, which in the Army, is typically an SSG or SFC, in the marines i think they call them Gunny's.

so even the enlisted personnel has to train the guy that gets paid more than them. imagine that.


a vain attempt to save your fellow man? the reason we have a country in the first place is because of that! the reason our country is great is because of that!

I'm more than aware of my rights. What's funny is that you say you are, but it doesn't really seem like it.

I don't advocate bigger government in the lives of the people, which is why i vote democrat.

we're the ones pushing weed legalization.

we're the ones asking for equal rights, and won a huge battle last year with gays allowed to be married.

we are the ones saying women should have the right to choose.

so when you say you're aware of your rights, i don't understand why you would leave the party.

both parties are jacked up. everybody has problems. but individual rights?

lets look at the alternative, and when it comes to political parties, right now, there is only ONE alternative.

the party who created the war on drugs.

the party who created the patriot act

the party who is against citizens marrying consenting adults, because of religion.

the party who doesn't believe in the womens right to choose.

So yes, it is rather simple. Republicans don't care for individuals, they only care about big business. which is why you see all the deregulation policies and such to allow businesses to do whatever the hell they want. but i have yet to see a public policy that benefits the individual citizen from the republican party. and if they are indeed out there, those policies are few and far between.

but i see it from the democratic party.

of course i value my family more than anybody else, but when you're talking about the state of the nation in it's ENTIRETY, we have historically been the strongest when we are taking care of the man/woman beside us as well.

and doing that doesn't require neglecting our individual families. that's naive on your part.

Swish,

with all due respect man, your comment about the military being the perfect example of socialism and liberalism almost made me choke. I don't know what military you served in, but nothing could be further for the truth.

There is literally nothing socialistic about the military. The concept of "chain of command" is not built upon the consensus of the enlisted ranks. E1 to E3 has no power or authority. Yeah, your NCO's ARE the back bone, but there job first and foremost is to carry out the mission that is dictated to them from their superiors. When left alone NCO's do some amazing work, but even then, their efforts go to support the mission. It actually scares me that you think the military is a good example of socialism because it is based on a dictatorship. You are given an order, you obey. If you do not, there are consequences.

The military is a bastion of liberalism? In what universe? If it's liberal to believe that you should be able to marry anyone you want to because it's no one's business (which I agree with), why does the military still punish people for adultery? There is no free speech in the military or else you wouldn't be given orders, you'd be given suggestions than asked for your input.

Maybe the U.S. Army operates that way, but the Marine Corps sure as hell isn't a perfect example of "socialism" and "liberalism".

i'm talking about the structure as it pertains to the civilian world.

and as far as it relates to liberalism or socialism,

did you not get bah and bas?

were you not given healthcare and dental that EVERY soldier paid into? Tricare? was the military not about taking care of the man beside you? Only as strong as your weakest link?

did the military not pay out of pocket for schooling and training that way we had better chances of getting promoted?


^^^^^^^^ definitely sounds like socialism to me.

i'm sure it did make you choke, because it's the truth.

the marine corp has a different culture, but guess what?

you guys still paid into healthcare for every soldier. still was given food and clothing by the government.

oh yea, and how could i have forgot about the AER(Army emergency relief fund)? i'm sure the marine corp has something similar.

omg you guys are making this easier, bringing back memories.

TA(Tuition assistance)

most socialist thing out there in the military. it was an allowance we had per year that allowed us to go to school and get our degree, without even TOUCHING the GI Bill.

and it's, like everything else, funded by tax payer money.


socialist.


and with that, good morning DT.

You should check out the Libertarian party...

I haven't gone in depth into researching them yet. School me right quick

less government, more freedoms.

smoke what you want, marry who you want, pay less taxes, handle your own business

Yea, the problem with that is we already saw a candidate like that in rand Paul, but when push came to shove, he caved to typical GOP ideology.

The party sounds nice in theory.

See if your libertarian or not, take the quiz.

Quiz

According to the chart, I'm to the left and up. Liberal libertarian?

It does, if only the party could gain some momentum...That is the entire problem with our 2 party system. They are both terribly corrupt and only concern themselves with maintaining their power and wealth, regardless of what they claim on TV.

I am Conservative Libertarian.

I come up with Centrist.. Leaning to conservative.

More Libertarian with a left lean. I was Libertarian with a right lean.

I like most of what they stand for but they are a bit out there for me on some issues.

1.6 Crime and Justice

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, since only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.

2.10 Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.

It's a great idea, you want to kill yourself thats fine but as soon as you affect others you've crossed the line. Problem is, It's just not that simple. You're free to build your meth lab in your apartment and when it explodes, burning down the building you're in and all of your neighbors are now homeless who pays? They believe in restitution but meth man probably doesn't have the money and the government doesn't help anyone as all charity is private. So those individuals are screwed simply because they lived next to the wrong guy?

Libertarian Platform

i've said that before, how can you commit crimes if you aren't violating the rights of others?

me smoking green doesn't violate anybody's rights. gays getting married doesn't violate anybody's rights.

it makes sense.

It is just a little more complicated than that. If I'm driving down I-95 through South Carolina at midnight, I might not see another car for an hour... so what is wrong with me going 100mph? I'm not going to hit anybody.

With gay marriage I pretty much agree with you.. with weed I pretty much agree with you but drugs have a cost, especially if we end up with a single payer healthcare system... if you smoke a little weed, probably not a problem.. you get into the harder stuff, suddenly you become a drain on my healthcare tax money...

Which has been one of my biggest fears all along, if/when we go to a single payer system, look for things to change. They will have all of the justification they want to start banning and regulating foods and drinks (and other habits) they view as "unhealthy or dangerous" and they will do it under the premise that allowing people to do those things is costing the healthcare system too much money... it's going to happen.

Yep, scares me to death. Back in the '70's, a older fellow was trying to explain to me how in the future, the Gov. was going to control the people through health services and start with the drinkers and smokers and then carry that over to what you eat. I thought he was a nut. I guess I was to young to really see what was going on, but down through the years, I think much of what he was saying has come to pass. Not just with Health care but end of times stuff to. I think he was thinking this would happen years before it did, but I'm shocked that what he did say has come to pass.

All I can say to this is WOW. Really? That is it? Officers do not train. They are ignorant, unskilled, aristocrats? Just have to say WOW.




I do not believe the founding fathers created this country in order to save his fellow man. I am befuddled by this statement. I believe you have mistaken individual liberties, religious liberties, freedoms of association, and economic freedoms for attempting to save my fellow man.



A meaningless statement. Why you made it is unclear? Perhaps you could clarify why you feel that I am unaware of my rights less so than you do?



You are all over the place with this statement. You start by claiming you are against bigger government. Your statement about weed legalization is interesting. Do you feel that is a Constitutional right you have or do you believe that it is a state's rights matter? Perhaps you can enlighten me on your exact opinion concerning weed. Then you go into equal rights, gay rights, and women's rights. Do homosexuals have less rights under the bill of rights than everyone else? Not according to the Constitution. So you mean to say you feel that marriage is not a state issue. It is not a local issue. It is a Federal issue. No bigger government sentiment there at all. (sarcasm) Women and racial rights above and beyond the Constitution means you desire extra Constitutional rights for these parts of society. I do not care why you may want these extra Constitutional rights for these specific groups, the fact that you see them as not being above and beyond the rights over every other citizen betrays your opinion. You do see the government as the giver and protector of rights as it sees fit. I find the Republican party to be repugnant. They do not want me to have my rights and freedoms any more than the Democrat Party has come to take them from me. They just want to be in charge of what and who gets special privileges (rights) under their governance.

so when you say you're aware of your rights, i don't understand why you would leave the party.

both parties are jacked up. everybody has problems. but individual rights?

lets look at the alternative, and when it comes to political parties, right now, there is only ONE alternative.



Each of these could be taken individually but we can start with the War on Drugs. The War on Drugs is a direct result of the War on Poverty started by LBJ, a Democrat. The Patriot Act was a law passed by both a Republican House and a Democrat Senate. It cannot be placed on either party. However, I agree that both parties are responsible for this atrocity of a law. The equality of consenting adults to marry issue? Really? You feel that it is a legal issue to be decided at the Federal level? If so, you have betrayed your bigotry against people of faith by adding the qualifier of "because of religion".



It seems apparent to me that your final statements about caring for your family more than others and then tying it to regulations/deregulation, caring for man or woman beside us and associating this with neglecting your family is telling to me. It tells me that you love your family. It also tells me that you want to include into your family all those in need. You do not seem to wish to associate as the man or women next to you as the business man who runs a business or the CEO of a company. You seem to associate the taking care of the man or woman next to you as the downtrodden, mistreated, laborer who is being screwed by his fellow man in order to enrich the rich and impoverish the poor and working man. It is not about equality for you. It is about getting even. I feel sad reading what you said. I am sorry I brought this topic up now.

You state this, then list a few hot-button social issues...

The democrats have expanded the Patriot Act and increased the amount of information being secretly gathered on the citizens...

they are the ones telling a baker who he has to make a cake for...

they are the ones seeking to take buckets of money from some people so they can give it to other people...

they are the ones who want federal control of education and consistently deny a persons ability to choose a better public education for their kids...

They are the ones who want to force an employer to pay a burger flipper $15/hour...

They are the ones who want to tell you how big of a soda you can order...

they are the ones who want to tell you which kind and how many guns you can own and make you jump through hoops to own them...



So you can say you like the way democrats invade your life better than the way republicans do it.. but don't pretend it's less.

your entire post is hilarious. I'm glad you jumped ship, because you was never really a liberal to begin with.



first off, that never came out of my mouth. i said they do very little training of soldiers. NCO's train soldiers.

so far this discussion is going nowhere, as you can't even read properly.



once again, you didn't even respond to the comment properly. so i'm going to give you a chance to reread what i said.

i said the reason we have a country is because we fought together against the british. if we don't fight together, there is no United states of America. there is no Constitution. There is no victory of WW2 and WW1, there is no victory in the war of 1812.

our country is the strongest when we unite. when everybody is benefiting.



once again, a learn to read problem. i stated that you can have unity and taking care of the man beside you WITHOUT giving up ANYTHING you listed.

it's getting real annoying telling you to pay attention.



nothing more than a shot at you thinking i wasn't aware of my rights. don't get butt hurt now. you hate PC, remember?

anyway, i'm not even gonna quote the rest of this garbage.

first off, you understand nothing as to way racial issues, gender issues and such are a federal issue because it's a civil right's issue.

this is why you're a confusing ass person. you claim you want more individual rights, but then in the same breath cry about gays getting married?

who's rights do they violate? are you saying you're for the government banning same sex marriage?

which means you're saying it's ok that tax paying citizen's shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else?

and extra rights afforded to special groups? you realize that you sound like these racist ass losers back in the 50 and 60's talking about theres nothing in the constitution saying blacks should be allowed equal rights, right?

man go kick rocks. if you're bouncing from the democratic party. peace, we don't want you. there's plenty of people on this board where you can cry about your problems, and complain that your rights are being taken away.

but your reasoning for bouncing is, and will always be a joke to me.

because what he's talking about is straight up anti-government everything.

this is what infuriates me. you guys acting like the government shouldn't be involved in ANYTHING.

once again, since you, DC, and others act like you can't read today, the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.


the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

the democratic party is jacked up.

and one more freaking time

the democratic party is jacked up.

but it's still better than the GOP. hands down better.