Hello from UShadItComing

[GenSeneca]

The US does not resemble Nazi Germany. While Germany during this time passed things such as the Enabling Act and actual did away with rights such as Habeus Corpus, the US has done no such thing. The Patriot Act in no way took away any rights of US citizens, nor did any laws approved by Bush or Congress.

The US is not ruthlessly destroying all political opposition parties as was done by the Nazi party, but rather we have just undergone a change of power in Congress, something that would never have happened in Nazi Germany.

Added to that is the lack of a racial elimination program in the United States such as the one in Nazi Germany that led to the Holocaust.

Sorry for the correction but the Enabling act allowed Hitler to govern without the use of their Congress... Basically making him the legal dictator.

It was the Reichstags Fire Decree that removed the citizens rights, such as Habeus Corpus.

 

[BigRob]

Sorry for the correction but the Enabling act allowed Hitler to govern without the use of their Congress... Basically making him the legal dictator.

It was the Reichstags Fire Decree that removed the citizens rights, such as Habeus Corpus.

Thanks for the correction, I had meant to separate those into different actions, but I did not do a good job of it lol

 

[UShadItComing]

Canada was a large Supporter of the war

http://www.knowledgedrivenrevolution.com/Articles/200602/20060201_CAN_Iraq_War_Support.htm

http://coat.ncf.ca/articles/links/Canada_in_Iraq.htm

So hope you hate Canadians as well.


Blame Canada, blame Canada, it seems that everythings gone wrong since Canada came along, blame
Canada, blame Canada

Your last two paragraphs deserve nothing more than being ignored but I will respond to the beginning. Canadians opposed the current Iraq war and Chretien who was our P.M. at the time made the decision to keep our military out of it. Behind the scenes there could have been Canadian participation to a small degree but it was certainly against the will of the people.

Mor importantly is the fact that we willingly took part in the first Gulf war and that was a huge mistake. I believe that our informal acceptance of that fact was instrumental in keeping us out of a continuation of the destruction of Iraq for the US's illegal, immoral, and evil purposes aimed at economic and political gain.

 

[UShadItComing]

The US does not resemble Nazi Germany. While Germany during this time passed things such as the Enabling Act and actual did away with rights such as Habeus Corpus, the US has done no such thing. The Patriot Act in no way took away any rights of US citizens, nor did any laws approved by Bush or Congress.

The US is not ruthlessly destroying all political opposition parties as was done by the Nazi party, but rather we have just undergone a change of power in Congress, something that would never have happened in Nazi Germany.

Added to that is the lack of a racial elimination program in the United States such as the one in Nazi Germany that led to the Holocaust.

You make some good points Rob in pointing out some of the dissimilarities but you shouldn't have tried to claim that the enabling act and the interference in established Habeus Corpus were not similarities. That wasn't exactly my thrust but it's appreciated nonetheless.

 

[UShadItComing]

Sorry for the correction but the Enabling act allowed Hitler to govern without the use of their Congress... Basically making him the legal dictator.

It was the Reichstags Fire Decree that removed the citizens rights, such as Habeus Corpus.

Are you attempting to draw some kind of comparison between the expansion of executive powers by the Bush regime through the use of signing statements?

Is that what they're called, 'signing statement'? addendums? memorandums? How far would you see that going before it would become an abuse of power which is aimed at circumventing the intent of your constitution?

I'm asking in the sense of a new president, specifically Obama, trying to get away with further abuses of the sort by an escalation of the tactic.

 

[GenSeneca]

I was simply correcting Robs error.

As for your question: Yes, Obama will take abuse of executive power to new levels - far surpassing Bush. Obama's (D), and his skin color, will allow him to trample my constitutional rights and get away with, figuratively speaking, murder.

McCain can't do those things and get away with it, Obama can.

 

[UShadItComing]

I was simply correcting Robs error.

As for your question: Yes, Obama will take abuse of executive power to new levels - far surpassing Bush. Obama's (D), and his skin color, will allow him to trample my constitutional rights and get away with, figuratively speaking, murder.

McCain can't do those things and get away with it, Obama can.

And why can't McCain do that? You seem to be suggesting that being a black man will allow Obama to abuse the office more than a white man. That's troubling to me because you are drawing a distinction between races and that comes off as racist itself. By definition!

Yikes! Perhaps I have misunderstood you? I'm wondering if others would subscribe to your idea that Obama's skin colour would allow him to be more abusive of his powers. Seems to me that BigRob wouldn't subscribe to that notion. Let's ask him. Let's ask Libsmasher too for a laugh at least.

 

[GenSeneca]

It does protect him... Anytime I scrutinize the man - I'm called a racist. I then point out the dangers inherent in that reality and say that he can avoid scrutiny because people are afraid of being called a racist and what happens? You suggest I'm a racist....

Rob, Lib and several people who DISAGREE with me politically will tell you, I'm no racist but my legitimate criticism of Obama has been continuously met by the charge of racism. All you have done here is further prove this despicable tactic to be not only in play but perfectly acceptable by those on the Left.

 

[BigRob]

It does protect him... Anytime I scrutinize the man - I'm called a racist. I then point out the dangers inherent in that reality and say that he can avoid scrutiny because people are afraid of being called a racist and what happens? You suggest I'm a racist....

Rob, Lib and several people who DISAGREE with me politically will tell you, I'm no racist but my legitimate criticism of Obama has been continuously met by the charge of racism. All you have done here is further prove this despicable tactic to be not only in play but perfectly acceptable by those on the Left.

I agree, you are no racist. Your point does have some validity. We have seen many examples of people such as Jesse Jackson who come in and demand different concessions from businesses and if they do not comply they are branded as racist. Race is a power political tool there is no doubt about it.

That said, I do not think Obama (should he win) would simply be able to avoid all attacks or get away with anything simply because he is black. I think the man's policies are terrible and will continue to point out their problems, but Gen has a point when he says he is tired of being called a racist for disagreeing with Obama. I can tell you I have had numerous arguments with people about Obama, and many have ended with me being told I just cannot stand the idea of a black man being President.

I think race relations in this country however are still problematic. I think that the real test to race relations is not if a black man can win the presidency, but if a black man can do all this, and then lose the race, and have people accept for the fact that people did not agree with him on issues, instead of making it a race issue.

All of that said, I do not think that Obama would (if he was elected) be able to do anything and use race to thwart criticism of it. I think Congress and the Judicial Branch would never allow it.

 

[ML2007]

There are two interesting threads beginning to develop on this particular forum. First, UShaditcoming raised a good question when it appears he quoted someone on this blogging sight that called someone a "dick head". Now, based on what Vhlad wrote in the Introduction forum probably answering several of our questions, a good question is does these type personal attackers get kicked off the site for such flagrant misbehavior?

The Second thread UShaditcoming question raised is the United States being influenced by Nazi type Fascism? That begs the question for a definitive answer (How is that for a conundrum?). I will try to join that debate, discussion, or whatever we want to call what we are trying to do here and reply per remark (if it can be done).

 

[ML2007]

I was simply correcting Robs error.

As for your question: Yes, Obama will take abuse of executive power to new levels - far surpassing Bush. Obama's (D), and his skin color, will allow him to trample my constitutional rights and get away with, figuratively speaking, murder.

McCain can't do those things and get away with it, Obama can.

It is here we might ought to discuss the definition of Fascism. Online dictionary defines Fascism as a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition 2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

It sounds to me in your response, GS, that you a leaning toward a fascist concept here. Your statement that McCain cannot get away with those things but Obama can is elevating a race, even though reverse, at the expense of individuals. So, your own fears add to the suspicion of Fascism in America, that which UShaditcoming already alludes. It doesn't really matter who takes our individual rights away from us for the purpose of elevating the state's rights as a collective group, it is against our Constitution. McCain has so far shown he will do nothing but continue what George Bush has already done in usurping our Consitutional rights. Obama has said he will immediately suspend Habeas Corpus. So, just how do you really figure that Obama will be more of a threat than McCain?

 

[GenSeneca]

Gen has a point when he says he is tired of being called a racist for disagreeing with Obama.

Thanks Rob... I knew I would either be branded a racist or a sexist once the Democrats picked their nominee, thats how they designed it. It turned out the sexist card was not nearly as powerful as the race card, so Obama won and his campaign got away with far more sexist comments than Hillary's got away with Racist comments. I know the Hillary supporters can attest to that...

I'd also like to clarify since I think my comment was misunderstood to some degree:

Obama's (D), and his skin color, will allow him to trample my constitutional rights and get away with, figuratively speaking, murder.

There is a combination there and skin color was my secondary concern with the fact that he's a Democrat being primary. Democrats are NOT held under the microscope like Republicans are because we inherintly trust Democrats - they fight for the little guy, they protect our rights, they do things because they have to be done and not for personal or political gain.... at least thats the carefully crafted deceptive perception.

Republicans are demonized and mistrusted, AS IT SHOULD BE, but Americans would be much better served to treat Democrats with the same level of mistrust and hold BOTH PARTIES to the same strict, rigid standard... But I'm a realist and know thats not going to happen.

Now... Obama has the (D) and that provides him with the popular support in the public, the media and in Congress for reasons that should be obvious: Public trusts Democrats, Media LOVES Obama, and members of Congress from both sides are lining up to kiss his ring.

Lets talk about Obama implementing policy....

Rob, you may not see the expansion of the roll of government as being an assault on your liberty but I do. Government was recognized by our founders as a necessary evil and we just keep inviting more evil to the party. My comment about being worse than Bush is based on the reality that Bush did very little to infringe on my rights. The Patriot Act was nothing at all like the Reichstags Fire Decree and it actually replaced MORE intrusive and abusive programs that were kept SECRET under the Clinton administration. <--This goes back to wrongly trusting Democrats because they don't get any where near the same level of scrutiny and we often don't hear about it, or ignore it.

Check out my Voter Fraud thread, its a great example of where our perceptions do not at all reflect the indisputable facts.

OK, Obama now has the Bias on his side, popularity, and he is implementing policy that encroaches on my freedoms - like that of Global Warming Legislation. Well I don't like it and neither do some in Congress who can do something to stop it. Guess who gets called a racist? Guess what happens to the debate when people are allowed to deflect criticism by attacking the character of those in opposition.... There will be only a small contingent of Congressmen that will be representing me and my freedoms while the rest have capitulated in order to not harm their reputation for re-election by defending charges of racism.
----------------------------

9 Trillion Dollar Debt + Obama(disastrous policies) + (D) + Skin Color = Symphony of Destruction

"Just like the pied piper led rats through the streets, dance like marionettes, swaying to the symphony of destruction."

Just contemplate for a moment the rights we would be subject to losing if there were another great depression... Fears of Bush instituting Marshal Law and creating a police state were never realistic fighting a war overseas. Obama taking the reigns of power and running the country into the ground, blaming Bush all the way down, would make the public DEMAND Government "do something" and bring about the Socialist revolution people like Shad are so intent to see happen. He's right when he says the people will demand it, but they will demand it because they have been tricked and become desperate - not because of an affinity to Socialism.

 

[GenSeneca]

McCain has so far shown he will do nothing but continue what George Bush has already done in usurping our Consitutional rights.

I assume you are referring to items such as the PATRIOT Act and FISA. These are done in the open where the public has an opportunity to review the standards and regulations. The Pat. Act has a sunshine clause which guards against long term use and abuse of the Act as well as Congressional and Judicial oversight. FISA has been in place for the last 5 or 6 presidents, there have been few changes to FISA in that time. Bush updated the FISA out of a need for clarification on particular provisions. He did not rewrite the law, he strengthened its ability to hold up in court during oversight hearings.

Bush has added checks and balances in regards to oversight of Executive programs. I am more frightened by programs that I do not know exist, than the ones I can freely read about.

ECHELON:

ECHELON is more of a Civil Rights issue than one of Checks and Balances. The program is composed of intelligence agencies from five English-speaking nations. ECHELON was created during the cold war and has seen many changes in its lifetime. There are rumors it has been used domestically, which is in violation of a 1978 Presidential Executive Order. ECHELON is so secret, I am not positive on what the acronym stands for.

According to some sources ECHELON can capture radio and satellite communications, telephone calls, faxes, e-mails and other data streams nearly anywhere in the world and includes computer automated analysis and sorting of intercepts. The EP committee, however, concluded that "the analysis carried out in the report has revealed that the technical capabilities of the system are probably not nearly as extensive as some sections of the media had assumed"

ECHELON is very secretive so there is little concrete knowledge about the program, all we know for sure is what it does and who controls it. Congressional oversight, if any, is done in secret and off the public books. The differences between the inner workings of the program during the Clinton and Bush administrations are as follows. Under Clinton, ECHELON was revealed to exist in 1998. The program gathered intelligence by "snooping" for key words; bomb, terrorist, hijack, assassination etc. As Technology has advanced, finding and isolating intelligence a great deal faster, which also nets much better results. There have been several foiled terrorist plots, at least one a year, that programs like ECHELON are directly responsible for uncovering.

Clinton was nearing the end of his second term when ECHELON was uncovered, there were already plans to greatly expand the program which went ahead. There have no doubt been many incidents of Civil Rights violations but kept secret as a matter of National Security. There are fewer Civil Rights violations with the new program since TIA* was removed from the ECHELON program in 2004.

TIA: Total Information Awareness

On November 14, 2002 the New York Times published a column by William Safire in which he claimed "[TIA] has been given a $200 million budget to create computer dossiers on 300 million Americans.

Thats a dossier on every single American, real domestic spying and Civil Rights violations on a grand scale. Safire went on to lead the charge in having TIA (part of the IAO) removed. Safire exposed it in 2002, Congress defunded the program in 2003 and it was eliminated from ECHELON in 2004.

The TIA program continues its objective despite being defunded and removed from public scrutiny. 2006 article

IAO: Information Awareness Office

The IAO was, and likely still is, a part of DARPA. The program was taken out of the public in 2003. Because DARPA receives its own budget separate from that of the NSA, IOA likely exists and is secretly funded under the direction of DARPA.
------------------
ML2007,

Welcome to the HOP.

 

[BigRob]

McCain has so far shown he will do nothing but continue what George Bush has already done in usurping our Consitutional rights. Obama has said he will immediately suspend Habeas Corpus. So, just how do you really figure that Obama will be more of a threat than McCain?

George Bush has suspended no constitutional rights for any Americans, for which the constitution was written.

The suspension of Habeas Corpus had clear legal precedence before anything GWB did.

 

[UShadItComing]

I agree, you are no racist. Your point does have some validity. We have seen many examples of people such as Jesse Jackson who come in and demand different concessions from businesses and if they do not comply they are branded as racist. Race is a power political tool there is no doubt about it.

That said, I do not think Obama (should he win) would simply be able to avoid all attacks or get away with anything simply because he is black. I think the man's policies are terrible and will continue to point out their problems, but Gen has a point when he says he is tired of being called a racist for disagreeing with Obama. I can tell you I have had numerous arguments with people about Obama, and many have ended with me being told I just cannot stand the idea of a black man being President.

I think race relations in this country however are still problematic. I think that the real test to race relations is not if a black man can win the presidency, but if a black man can do all this, and then lose the race, and have people accept for the fact that people did not agree with him on issues, instead of making it a race issue.

All of that said, I do not think that Obama would (if he was elected) be able to do anything and use race to thwart criticism of it. I think Congress and the Judicial Branch would never allow it.

Gensen can criticize Obama all he likes Rob but when he bring skin colour into the equation then it becomes a racist tactic. And yes, I understand where you are going with this but you would be wise to not go any further. It's a loser from the start. And even though I understand your comments, there is still no escaping the fact that you have supported Gensen and that reflects on you as badly as it reflects on him. And for that reason I'm very disappointed in you because I thought you were intelligent enough to rise above that. Now you have a choice. You can continue with the same line of thought, you can apologize for your mistake, or you can just leave it where it is. I would suggest you give it some thought before continuing.