Bwild:  When we say Americans we usually mean US of America.  When someone says "un-American" they are talking about the US.  That is clear from what Pelosi said.  There is no confusion as to what she meant.

Artful Dodger:those in Mexico and Canada are Americans, same as us here in the USA

Artful Dodger: "Why not just change the law?"

They're getting to that. The plan is to make a North American Union of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, to make the whole thing subservient to the U.N., and to end our sovereignty as a nation.

Czuch:According to a recent "caught on camera" speech by Nancy Pelosi, illegal aliens are "American Patriots."  Those that are breaking the law, the Speaker considers patriots.  I'm not sure how she comes to that conclusion.  Breaking down her speech to its logical conclusion, it's "un-American" to observe and follow the law and "patriotic" to break the law.

This from one of our law makers.  Why not just change the law? 

Time to do it again?

Here are some further guidelines for this forum to follow.
----------
*Quoting other sources is fine but do so in the context of your own argument.  
----------
*Don't flood the board with quotes.  Quotes should support the argument you are making, not BE your argument.
----------
*Avoid the "cut and paste" response.  Simply give your personal analysis and perhaps a link to a supporting article.  "Cut and paste" dueling is a no-no.
----------
*Give proper citation when quoting the work of others.  Iinclude enough information that another person could track down the original source with ease.
----------
*Keep the amount of quoted material down to a minimum.   The rule of thumb is "less is  better."  If an entire post is quoted material, it might get deleted.  Again, make your own arguments.
----------
*Try to include a portion of the post to which you are responding so that people can follow the discussion more easily.
----------
*Keep in mind that people who post here may hold opposing worldviews.  Do not be one who is easily offended or one who insists upon Moderator-enforced politeness at all costs.  
----------
*Use discretion in your posts and and tailor responses appropriately.  
----------
* No 'flaming' - in other words, avoid personal attacks, pettiness, abuse. Respect other users, and if you disagree with them, explain why.  Posts that are considered aggressively offensive will be subject to moderation.
----------
* No personal disputes - if it gets personal, take it offline.
----------
* Learn to let go - don't keep harping on about the same thing, or harking back to previous arguments.
----------
* If someone else's post offends you, don't immediately fight back online. Consider whether they really meant to cause offense. It can be easy to sound rude without meaning to. However, if you really are troubled by the post, don't respond - take it to the moderator in private instead.  (But don't demand action.  If a moderator doesn't see things your way, accept it and move on).
----------
*Do not post in all caps.  This is equivalent to yelling.  Since I hate this sort of thing, it's likely I will delete such posts.
----------
*Avoid lecturing.

*Don't waste time by intentionally being divisive.
----------
*Your freedom of speech here comes with responsibility, the responsibility to speak decently within the parameters of the rules.
----------
If you have a problem with a moderator's action, don't discuss it here.  Send a private message.  (But  again, don't demand.  If the moderator doesn't see it your way, let it go and move on).
----------
*Don't beat a dead horse. If the horse is declared "dead" by the moderator, let it lie.

----------
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."

For the past couple of weeks I've been working on a set of guidelines for this discussion board.  After much consideration, I've finished what I still consider a work in progress.  Many of the ideas came from other sites that carry many forums, including a political discussion forum.

I'm not posting these for feedback.  I'll be frank.  It's not a democracy.  The guidelines are reasonable and consistent with the guidelines of many other political discussion forums.  They are first and foremost guidelines.  That isn't to say that you can ignore them.   But don't fill my box with complaints that so-and-so broke the rule etc.  I read every post.  I don't need advisers.  The globals watch the board very closely too and when then have seen a problem, they have PMd me.  I appreciate their feedback.  But I can't make everyone happy so I don't want an army of advisers.  I think you can understand why.  If  I see a problem, I'll act in what I think is the best interest of the board.

If you've been around since the beginning, you'll note that I have moderated very little.  Only a few posts (that were flamming) had to be zapped.  One off color joke got zapped too. 

The following post will contain the list of guidelines.  Every participant is expected to read them and follow them. 

Happy debating.

The most difficult step, it seems to me, for conservatives....is to recognize that the Bush administration and the Republican party is an enemy of our Republic & the Constitution & Declaration of Independence on which the Republic is founded....that the party is just as Collectivist as the Socialists, though the Collectivism takes a different form.

And the most difficult step, in my opinion, for progressives/liberals, is to recognize that the Obama administration and the Democratic party is an enemy of our Republic & the Constitution & Declaration of Independence on which the Republic is founded....that it embraces the socialist model of Collectivism, and this model is equally subversive to the cause of Liberty, as envisioned & understood by our Founding Fathers & embedded in their documents & debates.

Americans on both the "Left" and the "Right" must come to grips with the fact that both parties reject the principles upon which this nation was founded. And they must turn back to those principles, and rediscover them. Those principles are the hope not only for America, but for the world....not that we can force these principles on anyone or that a One World Republic is desirable, but that the principles themselves are the hope of humanity, for each nation of people to discover & implement for themselves....us being the great Beacon.

The wisdom of our forefathers has been abandoned. It took me a long time to understand just how wise they were, and I am still learning. America truly was the Great Experiment, as expressed in The Federalist #1:

"It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force."

As of this moment, the Great Experiment is failing. We need new Patriots to rise to the occasion.

Charles Martel: I frankly don't know much about George Soros. Looking him up on Wikipedia, here is my quick analysis:

1. He is a progressive, which means he is a Fabian socialist, at least in heart if not in name. He may be very sincere in this. He speaks against totalitarianism, having experienced it. He recognizes the Neo-Con agenda & the Bush administration as being a grave step towards Fascist dictatorship in America.

2. However, by focusing on the "Right," he is missing the point. He supports organizations of the "Left." This causes me to believe he is a Fabian socialist, in which case he holds much common ground with the Fascists. Both believe in Collectivism. Both believe the Government ought to coerce people to "do the right thing." Both believe rights come from the Government, not that they are intrinsic to the individual, and so on.

3. He claims he is for a free market, but who doesn't? A truly free market eliminates governmental coercion from the equation, and a truly Constitutional government does not apportion taxes unequally.

4. As a progressive of the "Left", he is aiming for the same kind of future as are the so-called conservatives of the "Right." He only thinks there is a nicer way to do it. But this future is a Collectivist future, which necessarily leads, in my opinion, to the totalitarianism he supposedly resists. So despite his criticism of the Bush administration, which in my opinion is proper in itself, his solution is equally detrimental to liberty. The same criticism can be leveled at those who now reject the Obama administration. While it also is proper in itself, it misses the bigger picture, that those who do so offer a solution equally detrimental to liberty.

My quick analysis may be way off base. I took a quick glance at Wikipedia, a George Soros website, both more or less favorable, and one unfavorable article.

The Usurper: You make some very good points,,, tell me , if you would , what is your make of someone like George Soros, and his agenda?

The Usurper: I've been interested and watching governments in the UK since I learnt economics at school. Our teacher knew that Maggies' boom and bust policy of economic growth was gonna fail and we'd be knee deep in it. Since then I've watched as opposition parties have said "that's a bad idea" but not changed policy on the "'bad idea' or stopped it.

It's like they just wanna mouth each other off so they can get into power to get the extra monies that come from being in power through 'wages'.
... And they always agree on pay rises for themselves.

(V): In America, Republicans are conditioned to blame Democratic politicians for everything wrong, and Democrats are conditioned to blame Republican politicians.

On this board, I see the pattern repeated on the Republican side, just as among members of my family, I see the same pattern from the Democatic side. It's as if both sides believe that, were all U.S. citizens to convert to THEIR party, everything wrong with America would be set straight.

But you've raised a great point, which is that the politicians of both parties may say different things to get elected, but in office they ACT THE SAME WAY!

The two-party system is an illusion. It is one party with two branches....and that party has abandoned the principles & the laws of the Constitution (our SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND) and is selling America's future.

Czuch: Which government? The one the President controls.. or the one he doesn't?

ScarletRose: It's the same problem over here, thanks to a period when house prices and the selling rules were abused, house prices increased to the point where your average hard working Joe can't afford a decent house, or has taken out a stupid mortgage which is now leaving many in the state where their house could be repossessed. And thanks to negative equity through house prices dropping, they are looking at still being burden by a big debt.

That's why the call for more social housing over here is so big. It would have been sorted some years back but dear ol' Maggie Thatchers government stopped councils from reinvesting money gained from the selling of council properties to long term tenants from being put into building schemes.

Yet, one good thing is now there is a scheme in social housing where people can part rent and part buy their properties. Giving them a reasonable start into the housing system without the high mortgages.

Vikings: And no-one thought to question such a policy on both sides of the political spectrum??? That's what gets me. If all your govs since Carter had been Democrats then I could see a point, but no-one on the Republican side either saw or challenged the 'rules' when in power.

... Strange

But there again, I've seen on this side of the Atlantic the same happen. One side says 'X' is a bad idea but when the get into power they don't change it!!

... Strange world we have.

Though it is a difficult process of confrontation, and sometimes of accusation and counter-accusation, it still bears fruit.

Even if, in the middle of heated debate, it seems that no one's mind or position is influenced by his debating opponents, it can still....in the honest mind...produce thoughtful reflection afterwards.

AD has been researching 9/11. I don't know where his research has led him to this point. But it is a good thing, regardless. Czuch I'm not sure about, although I hope he is at least considering the possibility that handouts to banks & corporations is at least as detrimental to liberty as handouts to the poor.

As for myself, I've been forced to look more closely at the global warming issue, and more generally & importantly, I've been forced to examine my opinions on Individualism vs. Collectivism...to delve more deeply...and I've arrived at some different conclusions than I previously held in my arguments on this board.

Specifically, I discovered the inconsistency of my position, that handouts to the poor are ok, whereas handouts to the rich is not ok. What I learned is that it is the same mechanism at work. The government that has the power to favor certain classes of individuals, be they poor or rich, also has the power to destroy individuals.

(V) and I have generally supported each other, though we certainly don't agree on everything. It is his willingness to examine the issues that most impresses me, and his willingness to enter the fray.

The point of this post is that, debate is a good thing. Discussion is a good thing. Feedback is a good thing. The more of it, the better for all of us.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

— Benjamin Franklin

The so-called "War on Terror," just like the so-called "War on Drugs," is really a War on Liberty. The "USA Patriot Act," the "Military Commissions Act of 2006," and other new laws require that we "give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety."

The answer to 1984 is 1776.

Czuch: "But it all starts with the government.... you cant have bad corporations and monopolies etc, without first having a government that allows all this crap!"

That is true. If we reel in the excesses of the government, the Monopoly Capitalists will be cut off at the source. To do this, we need to return to Constitutional restrains on government and abolish the Federal Reserve.

Czuch: --What is the upside for a bank to become "predators"?--

The upside is that periodically they get to tighten the money flow, call in loans, not allow more loans to cover payments due, and foreclose....thus transferring property up the line.

Here's a whole list of great educational resources on Money & Banking:
http://www.realityzone.com/banking.html


It does come down to greed, including greed from customers, for which they are responsible. That doesn't change the fact that the entire social mechanisms in place are designed to cultivate that greed...that it is in a very real sense programmed in.

You are right in that there is no governmental solution. The solution is for the government to step out of the way, let the competition of the free market decide these issues...and stop bolstering these banks which don't mind getting into financial trouble because they know the government will bail them out. Socialism at EITHER END...for the banks or for the customer....is destructive to liberty.

wanna collect the bonus money from AIG? I say get it from Sen. Dodd
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/recover-aig-bonuses-lawmakers-scramble-undo-protections-approved/

(V): The sub prime loans began under Carter but flourished under clinton

Czuch: Banks bundle good and bad loans together and sell them off to investors , that's how they make their profit

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081004151909AAnGw8X http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/obama-sued-bank-to-force-it-to-give-out-risky-housing-loans-precursor-to-subprime-crisis/
http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/30/obama-sued-citibank-under-cra-to-force-it-to-make-bad-loans/

I mean, what good is it for a bank to give a loan to someone who cannot pay it back? Or to give a 200k loan on a house that is only worth 150k?

What is the upside for a bank to become "predators"?

It all comes down to greed, and it starts with a greedy consumer.

If we drive less the price of gas goes down. Its all a supply and demand thing. Trying to regulate yourself out of any future problems is stupid, IMO.

I dont know where I am headed here... just dont buy the scare tactics that make us socialist because of unfounded fears... its all we hear lately, the sky is falling, but we the government are here to save you... you want something to really be afraid of??? Not global warming or banks or oil companies, it is a government who wants you to give them full reign over your life!

(V): I use debit too.. I travel too much and anymore they don't take cash or checks at hotels..
we did get a loan 2 years back or 1 1/2 for the Trailblazer we bought for my usage.. but, I stuck it out with build your own used for too long.. it made sense to get something more dependable..

I shall have to check into that movie.. I could use a good spark for convo..

As for housing prices.. Geez Louise!! I sometimes will catch those shows on Discover or similar which have House Hunters and a few that I can't quite think of the name.. regardless to my amazement these homes they are looking to buy for a first time buyer are sitting at 330 G's plus.. 1stly.. where are these jobs that those peeps are working at which pay that great to afford such a debt.. and 2ndly, is this what peeps actually pay outside Wyoming?? LOL For what these people buy with 3-400,000.00 Can buy a beautiful ranch out here.. with land!!

Czuch: It's not a bump. We are looking at the possibility of a worldwide recession... The IMF is predicting global growth to fall below zero this year.

As a dude there says "...the worst performance in most of our lifetimes..."

(V): "The banking industry made a practice of talking people into buying homes they couldn't afford."

Doesnt sound right to me either... as far as i know, banks arent even involved much until a person has picked out a home to buy. Except to get pre approved, as far as I know, its usually the people trying to tell the banks that they can afford more house than is really true. So banks are like, sure you want a loan for this house without documentation, okay, pay us a higher fee and higher closing costs and a higher rate and we will do it!

Fine for many, and okay if housing prices are going straight up, but if you have a loan default and the market will not recoup the cost of the home in a sale.. well thats a problem, not to mention some of the appraisers were also jacking the appraisal price up to meet the loan standards as well.

Funny how many times the house asking price and loan amount is something like 200k, and amazing enough, the appraisal comes in at that exact amount! Again, ok when house prices are on the rise, but not so good when they arent and people end up upside down on their house loans.


anyway... what is the solution? Can anything really be done at all? Should we make it not possible to be a bit more creative when prices are on the rise and the economy is good, just to offset when things go south? I am not sure I can buy into that either!

I think it is s symptom of simply the way things are, and too bad so sad....

I know people who were building houses and selling them for a profit before they had even begun construction and even some sold again for a profit when it was being built. Well, if you choose to play that game fine, but those things never last forever, and dont come complaining to me when things go south and you cant even find a buyer years after the construction is complete! Its just the way of the world, all this knee jerk reaction every time we hit a bump in the road, doesnt make any sense to me. Get over it already.. there will always be highs and lows, get over it and move on already.

ScarletRose: Plastic sucks. It's best to stick to a debit card.

The mask is from the film "V for Vendetta"... It's worth a watch if you can, it's plot is based on what would happen if a government became a law onto itself and the leader of it is a fascist dictator hiding behind the church.

(V): Now see.. you scare me at first.. then you come out with Wit.. I must say boy!! I agree with you 100%..

Our people out here in the West.. or most of America get by on the plastic.. I don't favor them myself.. I learned from my father that you can't afford what you can't pay for.. anyways.. back to my original thought.. 10 years ago.. a young couple who just bought the house across the street from me.. have two dear children and two brand new costly vehicles.. such as a full sized truck and a suburban.. I just wonder what their loans looked like.. scary thought.. even more so then your mask..

ScarletRose: Shhhhhh Don't say the word "scary"... If a certain glob was still here, he'd have you banned!!

But the fraud is no more.

(V): That piccie of you is scary.. reminds me of Chuckie..

Vikings: So who started this 'rule' and why was it not spotted that it wasn't working and corrected? And that ACORN is a community program oriented program... How come the banks couldn't just prove their case that bad loans are bad loans?

"The banking industry made a practice of talking people into buying homes they couldn’t afford." I read because of ACORN... I don't get how a bank can be forced into making a bad loan. I'd fight anyone if I was in charge of a bank against such 'rules'.

I goto my MP, my Government, my Prime Minister... I'd go on TV, interviews for paper and radio....

But over here, it was the banks fault. And not all problems in America are due 'rules'... $50 billion dollar frauds don't help.

ScarletRose: NO!!

A thought..

Would you all mind saying what you need to and keep it short.. like in say.. a one sentence format.. that way it is easier and quicker to read..

We dont have to take up arms to revolt, simply an old fashioned strike by the common people is all it would take!

I am so sick and tired of all these washington elitists milking us common folks for all of their power and prestige and money.... I see pelosi and how soaked up she is in her own importance, so smug in her own rightiousness, and complaining when she cant get a jet from the air force....

we really need some term limits or something to keep these people who are there to supposedly work for us, who end up fat cats off our hard work.... I would love to see pelosi et al back in the job market, these life long politicians mess up everything!

The Usurper: The revolt I have in mind holds both government leaders & financial/corporate leaders to the fire.

But it all starts with the government.... you cant have bad corporations and monopolies etc, without first having a government that allows all this crap!

Artful Dodger: They give the fat cats millions in bonus money. That stinks more than a pig farm!

If that is true, then the federal government is the pig farm!

Czuch: "I am almost rady to join Usurper, and hold a peoples revolt against this governemnt of ours!"

I don't advocate taking up arms against my government, which would require more stupidity than bravery. I don't even advocate violating unjust laws, unless push comes to shove. I mean, if they make a law saying I have to shoot my dog, it is time to break the law. But if they make a law saying I have to wear a seat-belt, I'll do it, whether I agree with it or not.

Intelligent "Revolt" requires a real recognition of the dangers we face as a nation & world, and an examination of our own willingness to stand up and be counted for the long haul. It requires a strategy with a true possibility for eventual success. It isn't easy to come up with that kind of strategy.

The best I've seen so far can be found here:

http://www.freedomforceinternational.org/freedomcontent.cfm?fuseaction=strategy&refpage=membership

This is Freedom Force. The author of this strategy supports Ron Paul and is a Libertarian who stands for Individualism, not Collectivism.

(V): well the banks over here were forced to give bad loans, first the door was left wide open by the senate that set it up for the banks to make these loans then the larger banks that are now getting the bailouts were sued by the likes of ACORN forcing them to give these loans. Small banks were not targeted by these groups and therefore did not do business this way and are not in trouble. (I actually had a talk with my bank manager over this)

Vikings: Nope, I disagree on that. Seeing as we've had alot of incidents over here regarding banks, and some inquiries have been made.. and some whistle blowers have blown.

Much of the banks mess is due to their greed and recklessness. Eg.. one of the banks we've had to save over here was due to it ignoring warnings from it's own risk assessment team..... they even bought a bank (or part of) without having a full accounts statement from them.

As for government corruption... that's why need revolution, and in some form it is happening... at least over here thanks to the freedom of information act.

Btw.. one building company went broke yesterday... didn't help that they bought a ruby worth over 10 million pounds just two years ago... No news over if they will sell it to bail out the company, seeing as the business is only short £2 million (approx) technically looking at it is owed £2 million from work done.

Artful Dodger: I agree with you absolutely on this issue.

"True Christian consistency does not consist in stereotyping our opinions and views, and in refusing to make any improvement lest we should be guilty of change, but it consists in holding our minds open to receive the rays of truth from every quarter and in changing our views and language and practice as often and as fast as we can obtain further information. I call this Christian consistency, because this course alone accords with a Christian profession. A Christian profession implies the profession of candor and of a disposition to know and obey all truth. It must follow that Christian consistency implies continued investigation and change of views and practice in conformity with increasing knowledge. No Christian, therefore, and no theologian should be afraid to change his views, his language, or his practices in conformity with increasing light."
--Charles G. Finney, 19th Century Revivalist

I would only add that his point speaks a general truth about intellectual candor, or philosophical honesty, and therefore holds true even if one removes the "Christian" from his statement.

Even over the last couple of months, during the time I've been debating on this board, some of my views have changed. Generally, it is not that I reject the conspiratorial view of many events, such as 9/11 and others. I do not. But it is that I recognize the solution has to be a return to Constitutional principles of liberty and therefore all forms of collectivism must be dethroned.

Vikings:hmmm, maybe.  But not all banks went to the extremes that some banks did.  And they weren't  forced to insure these bad loans like they did.  When the loans went sour, the insurer was liable and of course, they couldn't  pay.  It's a huge mess and I agree that the government screwed up big time.  But the "fat cats" also messed up and here they are almost out of money, so they get help from the govt and what do they do?  They give the fat cats millions in bonus money.  That stinks more than a pig farm! 

Czuch: The revolt I have in mind holds both government leaders & financial/corporate leaders to the fire. It is the unwholesome partnership that is destroying our Republic. Please note there is a great difference between Constitutional Government & Corporate-Controlled Government. And please note also, that there is a great difference between free market Capitalism (the only Capitalism really worthy of the name) and Monopoly Capitalism, where governments collude essentially with economic & corporate cartels, and competition is eliminated. This is an arrangement which is destroying our free enterprise system, which has always been the backbone of the America. That's what we have. And if we blame the government alone without seeing the bigger picture....or vice versa, if we blame the business cartels alone without seeing the bigger picture....then whatever revolt we organize will fall short, for lack of real understanding of the enemy.

Czuch: That's what Glenn Beck is slowly starting to organize

Vikings: I love this point!


Bam gets all hot under the collor about these executive bonuses, but I see he turned a blind eye on all the pork he has signed already! Not to mention the raises they all happily voted for themselves....

I am almost rady to join Usurper, and hold a peoples revolt against this governemnt of ours!

Artful Dodger: I also agree that the money has been squandered. I see (V)'s point, that the business sector must be accountable. But I also see Viking's point, that the government leaders must be accountable. My perspective is that we are looking essentially at a partnership. These business leaders fund the politicians & offer them jobs upon leaving office. While in office, these politicians serve those who put them there. You and I, the voters, are forced to choose between "picked" candidates...not ones we we really want, but ones put forward & funded by the business men. I hope we can all agree that, whatever one chooses to call this process, it is neither Capitalist nor Representative.

Artful Dodger: I somewhat disagree, first of all these banks were forced to make bad loans and then were forced to take bailout money, they were given the money no strings attached, the government wanted them to make more loans but instead they wisely invested it, just like most people would do with a windfall.
secondly, They are being demonized for doing exactly what the government does, frivolously spending money, when the government does it, it does nothing for the economy (ie. wasted fuel for nancy peloci's private plane rides home every weekend), when the banks do it, it puts money back into the economy(ie, buying jets that create jobs)
until the government stops wasting money, I won't complain how corporations spend money