Replies

A lot of this crap was started or happening under Bush. Don't think changing parties will fix a damn thing.

Remember Carnivore? That started under the Clintons. And if we hadn't had Al Qaeda do the 9/11 attacks there would not have been the impetus for expanding certain surveillance programs, though government doesn't need a pretext to try to find ways to protect its ass against the people. The Founders saw that once the government had failed in its responsibility to the people it lost its legitimacy and had to go. Of course those in the government will try to maintain their hold no matter what. The Founders knew and wrote extensively about what Mao later summed up as, "Power comes from the barrel of a gun." But even more important than knowing, they put their knowledge into action.

Yeah, short of what the Founders did, changing parties is about the only chance to change anything. How well did Pelosi/Reid/Obama listened to us? If getting control of both houses of Congress and the White House puts in people the other party have elected, there's at least that much more chance of having the means of changing things. But it means getting certain programs defunded. It means not only reducing the rate of growth of the federal government but actually cutting it back. What killed the Roman Empire was out-of-control taxation slavery put in place by greedy folks using the government to promote their own interests over those of society at large. It destroyed industry, agriculture, and social life. In the end, the very government that started tax slavery ended up destroying itself by its own actions along with the society. The more important thing is to spare the society to live in liberty to take care of its own needs in its own way.

How well did Pelosi/Reid/Obama listened to us?

Ha ha, bad edit.

How well did Pelosi/Reid/Obama listen to us?

Anyway, you can see that the way the Left chose here in the U.S. was to take over the mechanism rather than through a violent revolution and this for two reasons: 1. They didn't have the power to take control by violent revolution, 2. Violent revolution would have destroyed all the loot and positions of power and luxury in government they wanted. Sure, the Politburo had it pretty good during the Soviet era, but why go for a bit better than the tax serfs, being relatively better off, when you can go for way better off by taking control of everything instead of breaking it all up first and reigning over ruin?

Better to use the same mechanism and fight them in the trenches of elective office (and through that the repopulation of the bureaucracy and courts with right-thinking folks) and preserve our existing capital.