Union of socialist states of America

JKM blog ^ | JKM

[Lukasz]

I could love the girl which I met when she was 20. Now I am meeting her and she is 60. Must I love her still? It depends on her behavior – it is seen on her face. Sometimes I ask myself: how could I even think of loving such a trollop?

I love United States. My United States were founded by the Founding Fathers, which provided them with Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It was federal republic – or rather: the federation of republics - with Rule of Law and Free Market as basic Principles.

After 240 years this Constitution had bed spoiled by so-called „amendments” - turning these republics into centralized d***cracy (I don't like printing dirty words in full). The Will of the People prevails now over the Freedom and over the Law. United States present therefore a typical exemplification of the „O'Sullivan's Law” : „Any organization not planned carefully as a Right-wing with time will change into Left-wing”.

Charles Marx kept to saying: „To introduce socialism into a country it is enough to introduce d***cracy therein” (... and the Stupid Majority will slowly build socialism themselves). Founding Fathers were simply not prudent enough; perhaps the majority in the House necessary to change Constitution should be 80%? Or even 95%?

Majority is competent – perhaps – in choosing men onto some posts. It is not competent in producing Laws. Majority prefers Safety over Freedom (that's why you do have now the Department of Homeland Security – and you don't have a Department of Homeland Freedom...) - and, still worse, it demands that everybody share its position. If majority of men prefer to drive with their seatbelts locked – they want everybody to do the same! Typical communism, of course. All Founding Fathers would be shocked listening to the mere proposal of such a bill! So: I love United States – I do not like Union of Socialist States of America.

How could American people choose a Red for President? You say: it's state education, with the educationists implementing leftist ideas into young heads. You say: it's TV, where left-inclined presenters – and so on. But I have made a simple count.

In the United States – with its Constitution and Bill of Right intact – would not vote: inhabitants of the District of Columbia (Mr.Obama got 92% there) women Negroes men under 23 those who did not pay poll tax

Correct me, if I am wrong: even not taking the last factor into account in the United States Mr.Obama would not get even a single elector! In the Union of Socialist States of America he has won with ease.

So perhaps it is not the American People to blame. Perhaps the American People is no more intellectually and morally spoiled than 240 years ago. Perhaps you should blame those legislators, who for two hundred years were spoiling American Constitution? In fact it is not d***cracy; it is an ochlocracy. And what now?

Now triumphant Democrats will lower the voting age to 16 (as Socialist had proposed in Germany) or grant the voting rights to non-citizens? Why not?

Doing this Mr.Obama would become a really popular hero. Like Mr.Hugh Raphael Chávez of Venezuela

[EagleUSA]

The mindless and careless Democrat voters have no idea what they have done. They will soon learn.

[Rome2000]

I guess this is what happens when you let idiots vote, that why the Founders set it up that idiots couldn’t vote.

4 Constitutional amendments later; Motor Voter and ACORN, coupled with effete apparatchiks at the RNC, have ensured a GOP minority for decades.

Time to let the Republic fall and do it right when we pick up the pieces.

[Old Sarge]

Its Babel Fish are not working good k thanx bai.

[snippy_about_it]

Majority prefers Safety over Freedom (that's why you do have now the Department of Homeland Security – and you don't have a Department of Homeland Freedom...) - and, still worse, it demands that everybody share its position.

If majority of men prefer to drive with their seatbelts locked – they want everybody to do the same! Typical communism, of course. All Founding Fathers would be shocked listening to the mere proposal of such a bill!

So: I love United States – I do not like Union of Socialist States of America.

I understand what this blogger from abroad is saying. Today I am again watching "John Adams" and I am tearful as ever. Our problem now seems to be we are too big to fight back. I am not a believer in the ballot box any longer, it is too corrupt. If we do not take back this country by going to the streets then we will not get it back.

I realize that means we must surely give up our jobs and be willing to risk all we have but I am just as sure that it will all be taken away from us anyway. It's only a matter of when and under what circumstances.

[knarf]

There's a simplicity to tha Babel Fish translation I not only could follow, but fully enjoyed.

I forget the title, and some Freeper is sure to come up with it, but I read a short story about Mr. Kaplan and the (I forget).

Mr. Kaplan was an immigrant in NYC (I think) and attending English classes.

His language and logic was supurb ... I'll go look for that now.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Socialism needs democracy like the human body needs oxygen.

Leon Trotsky (1879 - 1940)

[knarf]

Our two most famous "Prazidents" he listed as "Abram Lincohen" and "Judge Vashington." The principal parts of the verb "to fail" he gives as "fail, failed, bankropt"; those of "to die" as "die, dead, funeral." The opposite of "new" is "second hand," and the comparative degrees of "bad" are "bad," "worse," and "rotten." His wife, he says, suffers from "high blood pleasure." One of Kaplan’s sentences in a business letter to an uncle reads, "If your eye falls on a bargain please pick it up"; and when a classmate presumes to ridicule the sentence, Mr. Kaplan’s triumphant rejoinder is "Mine oncle has a gless eye." When in a burst of eloquence Kaplan uses a "beauriful" word (the word is "megnificent"), an admiring Mr. Bloom asks him after class, "How you fond soch a woid"? "By dip tinking," answers Mr. Kaplan, striding out like a hero.

[vietvet67]

A concerted effort has to be made to educate the public on socialism/marxism, it’s dangers and progression in this country.

Time for the slowly boiling frogs to be educated. To expect them to do it on their own is dangerous.

[VR-21]

"A concerted effort has to be made to educate the public on socialism/marxism, it’s dangers and progression in this country."

Leftist academics thwarted this promptly after WWII. Anyone who opposed socialism or even communism was marginalized. While they (the academic left) prudently avoided calling themselves socialists, they passionately railed against anti-communists. In the late 50's and early 60's "anti-anti communist" was a fairly common term. In Gramsci, fashion people became shy about publicly taking any position against communism, and splenetic criticism of our own country became fashionable.

[OneWingedShark]

>Time for the slowly boiling frogs to be educated. To expect them to do it on their own is dangerous.

You forgot to say it is dangerous, it is most certainly naive and stupid to expect them to learn; the reason that it is dangerous, however, is that uneducated they will either help the assault on patriots, or be willing aides and accomplices to those (the government) who do.

I mean look at how the Government is shoving the voting citizen’s face in a pile of deficate by not stopping/disallowing ACORN. (I realize they are “under investigation”, however, I no longer have faith that the Government will strive for Justice.)

[boxer21]

With the current state of the financial system and a depression looming along with the high possibility of terrorist attacks; Russia already testing Obama re the missle system in Europe along with Sarkozy’s cautious admonition; then add the usual Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan and we have a very large plate full of troubles.

I don’t believe Obama will be able to accomplish much over the next four years. Should he and the Democrat majority become like drunken train engineers, we will have a train wreck that could include major civil strife. If he does not play it cool, that is exactly what will happen. The Union of Socialist States of America may have to wait until his next administration if he should be so lucky.

[yadent]

Might the time for a seperation be had hand. Those commited to freedom and liberty may have to move enmasse to a few selected states, restore the principals of the Constitution and free markets and if need be, succeed. Yes, we could take to the streets, possibly shed some blood or we could peaceably seperate. Education of the ‘takers’ may be possible too but why would they want to give up the promised ‘free things’. Seperation does not have to lead to succession. Those that want to ‘rule’ and be ruled could, those that want to be left alone could also. Hopefully within these same United States. But remember, the United States was founded on succession.

[snippy_about_it]

Might the time for a seperation be had hand.

We tried that once down here. Didn't work out. I'd love to have a go at it though.