1 of 3
1
Nut job judge in Texas
Posted: 22 August 2012 07:12 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/texas-judge-warns-possible-civil-war-president-obama-230545603.html

A county judge in Lubbock, Texas, as justification (in part)  for a small tax increase, wants to be able to hire a few more deputies, because he predicts that Obama will try to hand over U.S. sovereignty to the UN.  He says this may result in all out civil war, and he wants to be able to stand down UN troops that come to Lubbock.

Stupidity abounds in Texas.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 07:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6159
Joined  2009-02-26

Has anybody noticed that the “conservative far right” are always “predicting” what Obama will do, rather that citing what he has or has not done?

There is always a claim of an Obama “secret agenda” and “he is secretly more radical than he pretends to be”, based on conjecture without any evidence.
No one seems to care about Romneys “open agenda” of trying to hand over the country’s wealth to the rich. Then we always hear a modifier like “he is secretly more of a moderate than he pretends to be”, based on conjecture without any evidence.

Adlai Stevenson once said “when republicans stop lying about democrats, democrats will stop telling the truth about them”.. cheese

[ Edited: 22 August 2012 07:38 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 08:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

sedition |siˈdi sh ən|
noun
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

treason |ˈtrēzən|
noun (also high treason)
the crime of betraying one’s country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government : they were convicted of treason.
• the action of betraying someone or something : doubt is the ultimate treason against faith.
• ( petty treason) historical the crime of murdering someone to whom the murderer owed allegiance, such as a master or husband.

It is a the very LEAST, grounds for removal from office… gulp

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 09:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6159
Joined  2009-02-26
asanta - 22 August 2012 08:44 PM

sedition |siˈdi sh ən|
noun
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

treason |ˈtrēzən|
noun (also high treason)
the crime of betraying one’s country, esp. by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government : they were convicted of treason.
• the action of betraying someone or something : doubt is the ultimate treason against faith.
• ( petty treason) historical the crime of murdering someone to whom the murderer owed allegiance, such as a master or husband.

It is a the very LEAST, grounds for removal from office… gulp

I have long maintained that the republicans have engaged in sedition against Obama’s presidency. From the day he took office they have explicitly stated their intention to block all programs proposed by the Obama administration. Even when the Dems were in majority, they found a way (filibuster) to prevent legislation from even being voted on.

I remember one specific quote, “we will do everything in our power to bring this president down” If that is not seditious speech what is?

 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 10:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04

Obstructing this President has clearly been the number one priority of the Republicans in Congress. If that means blocking any possible gains for the economy, so much the better for them, as a weak economy is almost always blamed on the President,  Also, cutting public service jobs in Reublican States, not good for employment numbers but good for Republicans blaming the President.  Unfortunately, such blatant tactics for the purpose of gaining political power to the detriment of the interests of the people, do not, IMO, meet the level of sedition or treason.  Likewise, the judge espousing crackpot ideas about the President, though potentially fomenting the civil unrest that he is accusing the President of potentially being responsible for, is protected free speech. 

This is not to say that it would make me sad to see the lot of them go the way of the Rosenbergs.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 11:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04

At least the Rosenbergs, who were legally deemed to be traitors, were likely supporting a higher ideal than a sheer quest for power, or as in the case of the judge, trying to get a little more tax money and/or responding to some paranoid delusional ideation.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 August 2012 11:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6159
Joined  2009-02-26
TimB - 22 August 2012 10:08 PM

Obstructing this President has clearly been the number one priority of the Republicans in Congress. If that means blocking any possible gains for the economy, so much the better for them, as a weak economy is almost always blamed on the President,  Also, cutting public service jobs in Reublican States, not good for employment numbers but good for Republicans blaming the President.  Unfortunately, such blatant tactics for the purpose of gaining political power to the detriment of the interests of the people, do not, IMO, meet the level of sedition or treason.  Likewise, the judge espousing crackpot ideas about the President, though potentially fomenting the civil unrest that he is accusing the President of potentially being responsible for, is protected free speech. 

This is not to say that it would make me sad to see the lot of them go the way of the Rosenbergs.

I agree with your analysis, but I believe there is a fundamental ethical principle involved as well as a legal requirement (by oath) of the people’s representatives to always act in the people’s best interest, regardless other motive.
Obstruction is a nice word for political sabotage against the best interests of the nation’s population and IMO meets the implied definition of Sedition.
From the moment that Obama was elected to US president by popular vote, the republicans promised to make political war on Obama, but not from popular demand, but from prejudice.
The lack of respect towards this president is remarkable. In my life I have never seen such borish actions from politicians and representatives of a small minority which is determined to “bring him down”

a) a cry from the congress during an Obama Address to Congress, “YOU LIE!”

b) a SCOTUS member shaking his head in disapproval, during a speech before Congress, when Obama made a logical argument against unlimited confidential financial contributions. That was blatant display of disapproval by a Supreme Court Judge. Disrespectful.

c) knowingly and purposefully spreading blatant untruths about the occupant of the highest office by “recognized political leaders and serving representatives”, thereby “undermining confidence” without just cause. This is a blatant show of disrespect for the Holder of the Highest office.

IMO, this is a completely different ethical priority than “speaking factual untruths”, without apology when proven untrue, than say the famous supreme court case of Hustler v Falwell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell
At least Larry Flynt could claim Freedom of the Press and parody induced emotional damage is purely subjective.  Nobody got hurt except some emotions. I hate Rush Limbaugh, but he describes himself a comedian. So, “lie and distort all you want to Rush, you have the right”; “just never run for office”.

In the interest of the people, a very high standard of ethics can be demanded from their representatives. Political sabotage (in theist terms, bearing false witness) should be considered at least as borderline conduct and insidiously affects the practical administrative function in a Democratic Republic.

If you boil a frog slow enough, it will never know it is being cooked to dead. Long live Democracy!.... downer

[ Edited: 23 August 2012 12:18 AM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 06:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04
Write4U - 22 August 2012 11:31 PM
TimB - 22 August 2012 10:08 PM

Obstructing this President has clearly been the number one priority of the Republicans in Congress. If that means blocking any possible gains for the economy, so much the better for them, as a weak economy is almost always blamed on the President,  Also, cutting public service jobs in Reublican States, not good for employment numbers but good for Republicans blaming the President.  Unfortunately, such blatant tactics for the purpose of gaining political power to the detriment of the interests of the people, do not, IMO, meet the level of sedition or treason.  Likewise, the judge espousing crackpot ideas about the President, though potentially fomenting the civil unrest that he is accusing the President of potentially being responsible for, is protected free speech. 

This is not to say that it would make me sad to see the lot of them go the way of the Rosenbergs.

I agree with your analysis, but I believe there is a fundamental ethical principle involved as well as a legal requirement (by oath) of the people’s representatives to always act in the people’s best interest, regardless other motive.
Obstruction is a nice word for political sabotage against the best interests of the nation’s population and IMO meets the implied definition of Sedition.
From the moment that Obama was elected to US president by popular vote, the republicans promised to make political war on Obama, but not from popular demand, but from prejudice.
The lack of respect towards this president is remarkable. In my life I have never seen such borish actions from politicians and representatives of a small minority which is determined to “bring him down”

a) a cry from the congress during an Obama Address to Congress, “YOU LIE!”

b) a SCOTUS member shaking his head in disapproval, during a speech before Congress, when Obama made a logical argument against unlimited confidential financial contributions. That was blatant display of disapproval by a Supreme Court Judge. Disrespectful.

c) knowingly and purposefully spreading blatant untruths about the occupant of the highest office by “recognized political leaders and serving representatives”, thereby “undermining confidence” without just cause. This is a blatant show of disrespect for the Holder of the Highest office.

IMO, this is a completely different ethical priority than “speaking factual untruths”, without apology when proven untrue, than say the famous supreme court case of Hustler v Falwell.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustler_Magazine_v._Falwell
At least Larry Flynt could claim Freedom of the Press and parody induced emotional damage is purely subjective.  Nobody got hurt except some emotions. I hate Rush Limbaugh, but he describes himself a comedian. So, “lie and distort all you want to Rush, you have the right”; “just never run for office”.

In the interest of the people, a very high standard of ethics can be demanded from their representatives. Political sabotage (in theist terms, bearing false witness) should be considered at least as borderline conduct and insidiously affects the practical administrative function in a Democratic Republic.

If you boil a frog slow enough, it will never know it is being cooked to dead. Long live Democracy!.... downer

Those are good points, Write. I have never seen such organized and purposeful sabotaqe of a President from his 1st day in office, by the opposing party in my lifetime.

I did not vote for George W. Bush, but I was supportive of him early in his tenure until I realized that he, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were leading us down the road to ruin.

The new extremist Republicans don’t appear to give a damn about ethics, statesmanship, or the actual best interests of the American people. So in effect, they are seditious traitors.  I just don’t think that they can be held legally accountable.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 10:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

I’m reading all of these US history books now(Oxford Press series) and one of the things I’m learning is this: aint nothing changed. Politicians, Judges and news outlets have been lying all along. People, Judges and politicians have been trying to wreck presidents since Adams.
I think we went through a relatively tame period(say…1945 to 2000 or so.). Now we are experiencing politics as they have been in America forever. Rough and slimy.
We are just contrasting this renewal with the relatively calm and sane past half-century.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 10:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4576
Joined  2008-08-14

Oh and by the way, that relatively calm period was the most prosperous time in our history. It was when progressivism had it’s greatest chance of taking hold. Some of it did. Now the reactionaries are coming back. Hence the deplorable output from Congress and politicians.
If the economy keeps slipping, it will be a reactionary heyday. You all aint seen nothing yet.
Reactionaries are defined in my vocab as: people or the minions of these people who see that the size of the pie that has to be divied up and shared is getting smaller. Rather than work to increase the size of the pie, or reduce their own share proportionately, they oppress people to keep their portion the same.
Religion has historically been one of their main power bases with this. Religion definitely keeps the sheeple from questioning authority.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 01:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4858
Joined  2007-10-05
TimB - 22 August 2012 07:12 PM

A county judge in Lubbock, Texas, as justification (in part)  for a small tax increase, wants to be able to hire a few more deputies, because he predicts that Obama will try to hand over U.S. sovereignty to the UN.  He says this may result in all out civil war, and he wants to be able to stand down UN troops that come to Lubbock.

Stupidity abounds in Texas.

Lubbock, Texas is about the least likely place for these non-existant UN forces to invade. The U.S. has by far the world’s strongest military and the most advanced weapons. Fort Hood, the largest military training facility in the world, is a bit more than 300 miles from Lubbock. Deploying troops from Ft. Hood to Lubbock would take only a few hours once they were assembled and loaded onto transport. Dyess AFB is about 160 miles from Lubbock. that is maybe 20 minutes by jet. Lackland AFB in San Antonio could have fighter jets in Lubbock within two hours. And this redneck thinks seven deputies will make a difference?  hmmm

Also note the story says the local sheriff denies he discussed this with the judge, and the judge, of course, says his comments were taken out of context.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 02:56 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3253
Joined  2011-08-15

I’m reading all of these US history books now(Oxford Press series) and one of the things I’m learning is this: aint nothing changed. Politicians, Judges and news outlets have been lying all along. People, Judges and politicians have been trying to wreck presidents since Adams.
I think we went through a relatively tame period(say…1945 to 2000 or so.). Now we are experiencing politics as they have been in America forever. Rough and slimy.
We are just contrasting this renewal with the relatively calm and sane past half-century.


Thanks, Vyasma. This is exactly how I intended to reply. Mud slinging politics began with the creation of the major parties beginning with Washington. Antifederalist newspapers vilified him and the Federalists as attempting to create a monarchy with Washington as king. They cried “no King George” and even fomented a mob at his house, which BTW he stared down to silence it. Same thing with Jackson. They accused him of marrying a woman who wasn’t divorced calling the first lady to be a whore! He fought two duels, one with a Senator from Missouri (ironic) and almost died. Likewise Harrion and Van Buren fought each other in the most mud slinging campaign to date. Van Buren called Harrison a red neck drunk (not literarily) while Harrison labeled Van Buren a liar who couldn’t give a straight answer to any political question. Also before the War members of Congress carried pistols and knives into the chambers and started fist fights in the cloak rooms. One member off the House beat the crap out of a Senator from NY who had made an off the cuff remark about the Reps. Cousin. 

I think the hoopla today is based on the racist feelings that still exist in the US. This after all is our first minority pres ( it’s about time)
and the FOWBs are about to explode. It’s new and therefore suspect. We now need a minority woman to ascend to the highest office, who is qualified of course. Afterwards, when this is a non issue we can get back to the business at hand, namely saving the planet.

 

Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 06:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6159
Joined  2009-02-26

TimB,
The new extremist Republicans don’t appear to give a damn about ethics, statesmanship, or the actual best interests of the American people. So in effect, they are seditious traitors.  I just don’t think that they can be held legally accountable.

If a workplace hires a qualified black person and a few of the employees vow to “get rid” of this black person by spreading false rumors, inuendos, and untrue allegations, all without cause but from prejudice, there are legal remedies such as harrassment and equal rights laws which can be brought to bear.

If the nation elects (hires) a qualified black person as president and a few politicians vow to “get rid” of this black person with the same tactics (as described above), why should there be no legal recourse possible?

Have you heard the latest outrage?

A BRAND NEW CASE has been filed asking State officials to REMOVE Barack Hussein Obama from the 2012 presidential ballot, because he DOES NOT meet the state’s eligibility requirements — this time, in Pennsylvania!

http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2012/02/obama-ballot-challenge-pennsylvania/

Ive got to admit, these people have guts.

[ Edited: 23 August 2012 06:02 PM by Write4U ]
 Signature 

Art is the creation of that which evokes an emotional response, leading to thoughts of the noblest kind.
W4U

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 August 2012 06:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04
Write4U - 23 August 2012 06:00 PM

TimB,
The new extremist Republicans don’t appear to give a damn about ethics, statesmanship, or the actual best interests of the American people. So in effect, they are seditious traitors.  I just don’t think that they can be held legally accountable.

If a workplace hires a qualified black person and a few of the employees vow to “get rid” of this black person by spreading false rumors, inuendos, and untrue allegations, all without cause but from prejudice, there are legal remedies such as harrassment and equal rights laws which can be brought to bear.

If the nation elects (hires) a qualified black person as president and a few politicians vow to “get rid” of this black person with the same tactics (as described above), why should there be no legal recourse possible?

Have you heard the latest outrage?

A BRAND NEW CASE has been filed asking State officials to REMOVE Barack Hussein Obama from the 2012 presidential ballot, because he DOES NOT meet the state’s eligibility requirements — this time, in Pennsylvania!

http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/2012/02/obama-ballot-challenge-pennsylvania/

Ive got to admit, these people have guts.

Wrong organ.  They don’t have guts.  Guts implies courage.  They have an excess of bile.  Bile is a bitter acidic fluid sometimes associated with anger. 

In a nutshell, they are racist pigs.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 August 2012 07:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4400
Joined  2010-08-15

Nut job judge in Texas


sorry about the redundant post I started last night.
red face

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 August 2012 08:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04
citizenschallenge.pm - 24 August 2012 07:02 AM

Nut job judge in Texas


sorry about the redundant post I started last night.
red face

That’s ok. Heinous actions by Republican leaders, also, seem to be rather redundant, these days. So perhaps getting the word out about them should be redundant as well.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 3
1