Within the next three to five years, the Chinese will invade and occupy the United States of America and set up prison camps wherein us regular Americans will be tortured because… well, because we’ll be tortured for some reason. Don’t interrupt.
One of these camps will be in a tiny Southern Utah town with less than one-hundred residents, but don’t let that fool you. For this is no ordinary town. No, sir, this is the town where we shall stand up and fight back and redeem the Constitution and pluck it from the hands of the godless conspirators who have defiled it with their foreign ways and their kung pao shrimp and cheaply-made Happy Meal toys and Mulan with the lucky cricket and the way they talk funny because our Founding Fathers would never talk like that because if the Bible was written in English then that’s good enough for me.
Phew.
While I have added some thinly veiled racist details that take some artistic license with the whole concept, the substance of this pinheaded prophecy did not originate with me. No, it came from a woman who believes she has more access to God’s purposes than a schmo like you. It seems she had a vision of herself in this Chinese prison camp in her small town, and, in the vision, she was pregnant, so all this rigamarole must therefore be fulfilled during her premenopausal years.
By my calculations, this woman is now pushing 50, so either we are going to have an Abraham and Sarah sort of situation, or else the Chinese had better hurry up.
I thought of this prophecy as I was driving my small children to school yesterday morning and unwisely left the radio station tuned to Glenn Beck, self-appointed soothsayer of the sound waves. The Mighty Beckster was holding court with a woman who was complaining about the harassment her daughter suffers at the hands of ragged, impolite protesters as she makes her way to her Wall Street office.
Our Mr. Beck, ever the voice of reason in these troubled times, calmly reassured her that things were going to get much, much worse and that a Civil War between regular Americans like her and all them dark-skinned folks living in the inner cities was just around the corner and would probably launch by summertime – Labor Day at the latest – and so don’t forget to log on and see Glenn Beck’s internet television channel on December 8 in order to receive further instructions on how to fend off the coming apocalypse. I’ll be sure to be there myself unless something else – anything else at all – is happening that day.
We Mormons bring it on ourselves, really. We have the audacity to claim that God continues to speak today as he did to prophets of old, so we shouldn’t be surprised when a few volunteer prophets step up and fill the void. And the message of the self-appointed volunteers is always far more exciting and compelling than the message of the boring-but-real ones. A generation tutored by Hollywood expects prophets to prophesy of Chinese death camps and race wars. They tune out when the real prophets emphasize loving your neighbor, performing acts of service, and the importance of faith over fear.
Regardless, that’s what real prophets do. The people that I sustain as Prophets, Seers, and Revelators haven’t said word one about invading Sinohordes in Southern Utah or brewing inner city secession. I don’t have to tune in on December 8, because I tuned into LDS General Conference on October 1, and the people I truly trust to pass along God’s message were singing a far different tune than the lunatic wails of the Beckian fringe.
Christ’s injunction to beware of false prophets is based on the assumption that there will be true prophets, too. But those who believe in true prophets should not consider themselves exempt from the warnings against false ones, and they, especially, should have zero tolerance for any such prophet who cloaks him or herself in the culture of the Restored Gospel to perpetuate their hooey.
Stallioncornell's Blog 
Let’s put Beck aside for the moment, because while he’s done some good work in exposing the Marxist machinations of the modern Democratic party, I think we can both agree that he’s a poor communicator.
In your opinion, what are these OWS 99%’rs attempting to do, what is their purpose, their ultimate goal?
I have no idea, and I don’t think they do, either.
And I don’t agree that Glenn Beck is a poor communicator. I think he’s an excellent communicator. I think what he communicates, however, is hooey.
I disagree. I think they do.
It’s on their signs, and in their rhetoric.
http://weaselzippers.us/2011/11/18/pic-of-the-day-56/
http://moonbattery.com/?p=4599#comments
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1920&bih=887&q=OWS%20communist&gbv=2&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=4800l7263l0l7512l13l12l0l0l0l0l142l1135l6.6l12l0&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi
There is a reason that communist agitators like Van Jones are leading this pack. These disease ridden, drug addicted, useful idiots are thankfully meant to be the foot soldiers in their Cloward-Piven strategy.
At what point do we start taking these people at their word?
Folks want to call these things paranoid conspiracies, yet the smelly OWS herds and leftist government officials openly state these things. The YouTube videos of them praising communist philosophy and revolutions, and wanting to work towards a similar goal are prolific. It’s quite simply no longer a secret except to those who may restrict themselves to the Jurassic Media for their news consumption.
I take them at their word, sure. They’ve got a lot of words. But the idea that they have a cohesive, unified goal or a plan and/or power to achieve it is kind of silly. Van Jones and Cass Sunstein and every other Glenn Beck bugaboo Marxist doofus are not on the verge of taking over this country, and the vast majority of the hippies who show up to these squalor-ridden sit-ins are not taking orders from them. They do not have the American people behind them, and, ultimately, these ragged, ratty protests are not helpful to their scattered, everything-but-the-kitchen-sink cause.
I think you’re right, but I don’t think we ought to take it any less seriously.
The hippie wannabes and has-beens that comprise the majority of these smell-ins, aren’t much more than a public nuisance.
The real danger is in the government officials, elected and appointed officials alike who move towards this sort of thing. It’s in the schools, that are actively training young people to adopt Marxist ideology on a daily basis.
They may not be a danger now. But frankly McCarthy didn’t go far enough, because there may come a time when they are as they increase in numbers and reach their tentacles further into our governmental infrastructure.
At some point, thought has to be given to either arresting these people for treason, protesters and officials alike, or simply submit to their eventual tyranny.
At what point are we going to stop being so afraid of communism? I mean communism a’la 1950’s duck-and-cover under your public school provided desk…
At the point it doesn’t always become a nightmarish living hell.
http://www.holodomorct.org/history.html
But hey, there’s plenty of communist nations out there.
Why don’t you move to one, where the communism you aren’t afraid of is already in place?
So people who don’t think scruffy protesters are going to take over the world ought to move to Cuba? Quite a leap there, don’t you think?
You mentioned McCarthy earlier, and I think it’s worth mentioning that, for all the vilification he received, Joe McCarthy wouldn’t have cared less about a bunch of communist hippies waving signs in a park. He was concerned about a real conspiracy – people pretending to be Americans working at the highest level of government who were actually paid agents of a foreign power.
It’s not a conspiracy when everybody can recognize who you are and what you stand for.
I must have misread the tone of his comment. I read it as though he were one of the clueless Occupados clamoring for the kind of government that generations of immigrants from all over the world came to America to escape from.
I always like to ask them why they don’t move to the type of nation where the policies they support are already in place, because they never have a rational answer.
You mentioned McCarthy earlier, and I think it’s worth mentioning that, for all the vilification he received, Joe McCarthy wouldn’t have cared less about a bunch of communist hippies waving signs in a park.
Which is one of the reasons why when I mentioned him I said that he didn’t go far enough.
He was concerned about a real conspiracy – people pretending to be Americans working at the highest level of government who were actually paid agents of a foreign power.
One could argue that many of the activist organizations that have produced high level government officials like the disgraced Van Jones have been paid agents by Soros money. Does Soros represent a foreign power?
It’s not a conspiracy when everybody can recognize who you are and what you stand for.
But the only reason that some have begun to, is because personalities like Beck and others in the modern media have begun to peel back the layers of the onion.
Regardless, I ask again, when are these people going to be arrested and tried for treason?
Is it really necessary for these people to be “in the highest level of government who were actually paid agents of a foreign power” for that to happen?
I think it’s a reasonable question.
The Mighty Beckster was holding court with a woman who was complaining about the harassment her daughter suffers at the hands of ragged, impolite protesters as she makes her way to her Wall Street office.
Just as a point of reference, she may have been referring to this:
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/11/17/good-news-ows-mob-chants-follow-those-kids-at-children-trying-to-go-to-school-near-wall-street/
a Civil War between regular Americans like her and all them dark-skinned folks living in the inner cities
I don’t know how you can listen to his radio show, the’s intolerable on the radio. But I’ve endured his television program from time to time, and I can say that I’ve never heard him make a racist statement like this.
Sure the left regularly accuses him of making racist statements. But then, they call just about anything they disagree with racist, so their accusations of racism have no real meaning.
In fact Beck has devoted entire shows to black conservatives.
I mention this because I don’t know how Beck could insinuate this, when it was shown that the OWS crowd was overwhelmingly white:
http://biggovernment.com/jpollak/2011/11/04/racism-occupy-activists-clash-after-internal-survey-shows-occupywallstreet-81-2-white-1-6-black/
Contrast this with the Tea Party, and they’re beat, if only slightly:
http://minx.cc/?post=300237
So I can’t say that you’re wrong, but perhaps you’re misinterpreting what Beck may have said?
You’ve got a point. Beck never specifically said dark-skinned folks, no, and I do think much of the race baiting of the Tea Party is crap. But I didn’t misunderstand his solemn statements about this summer’s civil war, which will not be north vs. south, but, instead, inner city vs. suburbs.
Question: what’s the racial makeup in a war of inner cities v. suburbs?
Remember, Beck is the genius who announced Obama’s “deep-seated hatred of white people,” and, while he’s been forced to apologize for it, you can’t find other Tea Party minions who are willing to cross that particular line.
In regards to the racial make up of cities vs. inner cities, come on. This is a similar kind of race baiting that the left engages in when anyone calls Obama out on his blatantly Marxist ideology.
“You hate socialists so you’re a racist” = “You hate inner city people so you’re a racist.”
I’ve lived in the inner city myself, and I’m phosphorescent.
What it sounds like what he’s getting at is the fact that the communist Democrats are pushing the politics of envy, and promoting the notion of class warfare. Real class warfare.
In regards to Obama’s possible racism, it may have been an unpopular statement for Beck to make, but when we look at the facts, I have to wonder how wrong may Beck really have been?
Every sermon that Obama has sat through over the course of 20 years preaches Black Liberation Theology.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=796
You can’t get much more racist than that. How much of this and the influence of his racist Marxist father have rubbed off on little Obama?
I don’t know, but there are times when I ask these questions myself.
This is why i think Beck is a poor communicator. He’s a great showman to be sure, fun to watch.
But his antics and his weeping, and his over the top preachiness obscure some of the serious information he has revealed. Information that has done some good. Like the exposure to the fringe kook Van Jones and George Soros for instance.
Perceptions matter, and Beck – not the Tea Party as a whole, mind you, but Beck specifically – has repeatedly proven more willing to push the racial envelope and add race as an element into political discussions than his cohorts. Rush, Hannity, Levin et al – how may of them have announced that we are in a “race war?” See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flS8uyKMzYU
Beck predicts “race riots” if Obama loses. http://newsone.com/nation/thegrio1/obama-spark-race-riots-if-not-re-elected/.
And keep in mind that Beck is all Nazis all the time – it’s hard to avoid concluding that Beck still sees the world in racial terms.
I’m of the opinion that race is nothing more than a cosmetic construct and that only fringe extremists even consider race as an element in their relationships with other people. I think it’s repugnant when pinheads like, say, Maxine Waters and Al Sharpton go there, but it’s repugnant when pinhead Beck goes there, too.
See, even if an inner city is filled with phosphorescent people – and as a former South Central L.A. guy during the riots, I’m hip to inner city phosphorescence – how is Beck’s call to his mostly lily white, suburban audience to beware of inner city people going to be received? Or, more specifically, how does Beck hope it will be received?
You note the OWS protestors are largely white, which is true. So how and why does Beck jump from OWS to inner cities as the source of civil war? How do you even get to civil war from OWS? Didn’t our last civil war have something to do with race, as I recall it? How does one avoid the idea that race is in an element in Beck’s unique kind of bilious, rhetorically irresponsible bushwah?
You and I may not feel at war with any race, but you can bet that there are some who are at war with us. It’s politically incorrect to talk about it, but the fact of the matter is there are plenty of racist African Americans who fancy themselves in the midst of a racial war against whites.
This was four blocks away from my house:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0812/Wisconsin-State-Fair-mob-attack-Police-seek-hate-crime-charges
This is unfortunate because I don’t really give a hoot about a person’s race. For me, it’s all about behavior and content of character.
I agree with you in some respects. I generally feel that race is an incorrect term biologically speaking, because if we were different races we wouldn’t be able interbreed. The fact that we can indicates one race; the human race.
I’m also of the mind that racism (including the variety I linked to in this post) ought to be designated as a mental illness by the APA; perhaps it might be treatable.
But it isn’t that way for the types of characters I linked to above though.
So I don’t know that predicting race riots in the face of an Obama loss was all that outrageous, particularly in view of instances such as this:
So is it a racial envelope, or a behavioral envelope that he’s pushing?
I think you’re stretching it when you say that Beck is all Nazis all the time. Unless he is on his radio show, I just don’t see the reality of that accusation.
how is Beck’s call to his mostly lily white, suburban audience to beware of inner city people going to be received?
It depends on whose watching him. If it’s one of our communist Democrat drones, they will view it as racist, always. But then, he could make love to Oprah Winfrey on live television in prime time, and they would still call him racist. So their perceptions don’t really amount to more than a hill of stinky hippie beans.
Or, more specifically, how does Beck hope it will be received?
Can’t read his mind, I have no idea. But considering a good portion of the OWS violence is occurring in inner cities, it may be a wise suggestion.
So how and why does Beck jump from OWS to inner cities as the source of civil war?
See above. But I’m just guessing, as I haven’t heard the broadcast myself.
Didn’t our last civil war have something to do with race, as I recall it?
So all civil wars are race based?
How does one avoid the idea that race is in an element in Beck’s unique kind of bilious, rhetorically irresponsible bushwah
By ignoring the emotionally based hyperventilating and flatulation emanating from the fringe left.
So if I provide you some links of Klan rally videos, what would that prove? Obviously there’re people on the fringes that are always at war with reasonable people over issues of race or class or whatever we had for breakfast. Most of these fringe types thrive on attention, and Glenn Beck is more than willing to give them far more attention than they deserve.
So if I provide you some links of Klan rally videos, what would that prove?
Try and find some from within the last decade. The Klan is nearly extinct thankfully. Black Panthers and Black Liberation Theology; not so much.
Obviously there’re people on the fringes that are always at war with reasonable people over issues of race or class or whatever we had for breakfast. Most of these fringe types thrive on attention, and Glenn Beck is more than willing to give them far more attention than they deserve.
I think if you had small isolated instances, a few major personalities you could safely categorize these as fringe elements. But Stallion, when that instance happened at the Wisconsin State Fair, it wasn’t 2 or 3 fringe dudes. It was a pack of 50 to 100 black teens who targeted white fair goers specifically because of their race. These kinds of numbers make placing them in the fringe far more difficult.
Placing these individuals in the fringe becomes even more problematic, when these packs of youths designate a day as “Beat Whitey Night.”
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5719520/beat_whitey_night_at_the_iowa_state.html?cat=17
Try to find a Klan equivalent in recent memory.
And the curriculum at today’s universities are all too happy to stoke those racist flames amongst black youth, as they teach them how the white man has stolen everything from them, and make it more difficult for them to live the way they want to. Pick up a modern sociology textbook sometime, it’ll sicken you.
You’ve got a point in that Klannish racism is, thankfully, acknowledged as socially unacceptable by the vast majority of Americans, while the kind of racism shown in your links is somewhat fashionable.
But racism, left or right, is not illegal. Violence is. You can’t punish them for what they think; only what they do.
Well, they’re doing quite a bit. Between “Beat Whitey Night,” the riots at my own State Fair, riots at Juneteenth day, riots at our Mayfair Mall, and on and on, multiple arrests have been made.
The bottom line here I think is that avoiding these areas is, unfortunately, sage advice for the time being.
The minute they start getting violent, then lock ’em up. Got no problem with that.
Since I don’t listen to him, I just wanted to ask about the self appointed prophet thing. Does GB actually say that he gets his info from God, as a prophet would, or is he stating his opinion and because he is religious we attach the “self appointed prophet” label to him? The difference between the two matters quite a bit. The first would be quite disturbing, the other is perhaps more a problem of perception.
Does he announce himself as a prophet, seer, and revelator a la Thomas S. Monson? No. But at the same time, the religious implications of his statements are not just inferred – they are unmistakable, and he makes it clear that God has sent him to warn the people of impending calamity.
Take this article, written on October 29:
“He has redeemed me, and I serve him, but it will put you in uncomfortable places, places you will spend most of your days begging him not to have to sent you to… My job is to ring the warning bell. Trouble is coming. Trouble is coming… Plan, pray and obey. Be standing where you’re supposed to stand. God is coming. The God of Abraham is alive, and he is coming.” (See http://www.jacksonsun.com/article/20111030/NEWS01/110300328)
Everything Beck does is couched in religious language, and if it isn’t God directing his doomsday message, then who is it that gave him the job to ring the warning bell?
JJ, in response to your comment above about Marxists infiltrating the world, I start to get very skeptical when people start talking about “tentacles” and the like. Whose tentacles are they? Post-Soviet Union, there is no effective centralized Communist conspiracy committed to the overthrow of the United States. There will always be people with bad ideas, and they need to be confronted and defeated in the arena of ideas, as well as at the ballot box.
The way to defeat OWS, therefore, is not to sound a warning cry that they’re on the verge of world domination, but rather to demonstrate how inherently ridiculous they are and watch them collapse under their own intellectually incoherent weight.
I don’t know about the world, but definitely in the United States.
I can totally understand why you’d be skeptical, particulalry because the Jurassic Media just doesn’t do a very good job on covering this kind of information.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/seton-motley/2009/08/28/video-fcc-diversity-czar-chavezs-venezuela-incredible-democratic-revol
This is just one instance but if you’re really interested there are plenty of others. Both locally and on the national level.
Post-Soviet Union, there is no effective centralized Communist conspiracy committed to the overthrow of the United States.
There is:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/theclowardpivenstrategypoe.html
Start YouTubeing good ol’ Francis Fox Piven, and realize that she is representative of nearly every professor in higher education.
And they’re only getting bolder.
If they’re getting bolder, then they’re not a conspiracy. They are open and public about their intentions, which means the American people can see them for what they are and reject them outright.
And it’s worth noting that even if they’re getting bolder, they’re certainly not getting the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons.
What do the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons have to do with the conversation?
Also, what difference does it make if it’s a conspiracy or out in the open?
The problem is the Democratic left’s efforts to socialize/communize America, secret or not.
What do the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons have to do with the conversation?
Unlike hippies, the Soviets could blow up major American cities. That made their opinions considerably more dangerous than those of rabble rousers living in tents.
Also, what difference does it make if it’s a conspiracy or out in the open?
Again, its not just the covert nature of communists; it was their capacity for destruction. A covert communist working for the U.S. State Department who sells nuclear secrets to the Soviet Union is kind of a big deal. Communists who waves signs in a park are not.
The problem is the Democratic left’s efforts to socialize/communize America, secret or not.
Fine, but that’s a problem that needs to be addressed in the court of public opinion. It’s no crime to advocate communism. It is treason, however, to actively work toward the violent overthrow of the American government.
I can’t decide whether to give this an AEEEEEEEE-men or an AHHHHHHHH-men!
So… Amen!
(ps, i haven’t heard about this lady’s crackpot vision – is there a website for it on the internets???)
Nope, but you might want to consult a prominent family associated with one of your previous employers, if you know what I mean.
Wow…… there are still people afraid that the ‘Commies are coming’ and we need to be scared to death that they will be taking over the U.S.
….. and there is even someone who still says: go live in a communist country if you don’t agree with me about something.
Oh well, it just proves that all the cuckoos in America are not in clocks.
….. and there is even someone who still says: go live in a communist country if you don’t agree with me about something.
So why don’t you?
Because the country would be much poorer without him, intellectually speaking. POUNDS taught me just about everything I know about American government.
What, people who disagree with us need to be deported now?
That’s not at all what I implied.
POUNDS may have taught you everything you know about American government, but he also apparently knows how to misrepresent a statement.
I did not in any way suggest that those who disagree with me ought to be deported. That notion is entirely manufactured, and I’m guessing that POUNDS was aware of this when he wrote his comment.
Rather what I am suggesting, is that those who seek to “progress” the nation towards a socialist/communist utopia, perhaps ought to freely take it upon themselves to move to a nation where the policies they support are already in place.
It makes perfect sense that they would be happier there. Just think; nothing to protest.
They’re unable to actually answer the question rationally, and merely echo it back with dripping sarcasm, as the intellectual giant POUNDS just did.
POUNDS said nothing about deportation. I did. All POUNDS did was essentially restate what you said to WhiteEyebrows, which you’ve admitted was a “trigger happy” response.
But I didn’t say anything about deportation, which means that POUNDS restated a comment that I never wrote.
I must have misread the tone of his comment.
I think so. It was a pretty innocuous statement
I always like to ask them why they don’t move to the type of nation where the policies they support are already in place, because they never have a rational answer.
Well, that makes sense, although the comment that elicited your love-it-or-leave it response didn’t advocate any policy.
[McCarthy] didn’t go far enough.
McCarthy advocated criminalizing treasonous behavior that actually threatened the security of the nation, not thoughtcrime. Should it be illegal to advocate communism? Doesn’t the First Amendment get in the way of criminalizing opinions we don’t like?
One could argue that many of the activist organizations that have produced high level government officials like the disgraced Van Jones have been paid agents by Soros money. Does Soros represent a foreign power?
No. He’s a nasty rich dude who has made his Leftist positions well known. He is not a nation of millions with nuclear weapons pointed at our cities that is paying people to acquire defense secrets in order to violently overthrow the government. Quite a difference there, I think.
But the only reason that some have begun to [recognize the communists] is because personalities like Beck and others in the modern media have begun to peel back the layers of the onion.
Nonsense. The people Beck is “exposing” have announced to the world that they’re communists. How are you “exposing” someone when they’ve already told you who and what they are?
Regardless, I ask again, when are these people going to be arrested and tried for treason? Is it really necessary for these people to be “in the highest level of government who were actually paid agents of a foreign power” for that to happen?
Yes. Again there is a big difference between a loudmouthed hippie and Julius Rosenberg.
I think it’s a reasonable question.
And that’s where you’re wrong. But I give you a virtual hug anyway.
Oh, and I virtually hug your monkey.
My monkey is off limits. In fact, it is treason to hug my monkey.
Well, that makes sense, although the comment that elicited your love-it-or-leave it response didn’t advocate any policy.
You’re right. I was a bit trigger happy. That happens these days.
McCarthy advocated criminalizing treasonous behavior that actually threatened the security of the nation, not thoughtcrime. Should it be illegal to advocate communism? Doesn’t the First Amendment get in the way of criminalizing opinions we don’t like?
Who said anything about thought crime?
I’m talking about those who openly work towards communism in the United States through activism both without and within positions of governmental power. I’m not against criminalizing opinions I don’t like, rather that’s the arena of those who support legislation such as the Fairness Doctrine or it’s cyber-twin Net Neutrality. There’s nothing wrong with having an opposing viewpoint. There is something wrong however, when taking action against the United States, with intentions to topple the government. These people are the enemy; of the domestic variety.
He is not a nation of millions with nuclear weapons pointed at our cities that is paying people to acquire defense secrets in order to violently overthrow the government.
Again, he didn’t go far enough. His concerns didn’t go far enough.
Nonsense. The people Beck is “exposing” have announced to the world that they’re communists. How are you “exposing” someone when they’ve already told you who and what they are?
Not in the least. How many people had even heard the names Van Jones, George Soros, Trumka, Stern, SEIU, Acorn, Storm, Weather Underground, and others before Beck’s program? I’m guessing not too many. Remember, the Brian Williams and other spokesmen from the Jurassic Media never report on these types of things. So there is a sizable segment of the population for whom these personalities, organizations, and efforts have in fact been exposed.
Fortunately, the Jurassic Media no longer controls the gates of information, so their adjusted narratives are becoming less meaningful by the minute.
Yes. Again there is a big difference between a loudmouthed hippie and Julius Rosenberg.
Perhaps. But when that loud mouthed hippie becomes engaged in activism and enters positions of governmental and educational power, that line erodes.
And that’s where you’re wrong.
Not hardly. I hope folks will come to their senses and we’ll live to see personalities like Van Jones and Francis Fox Piven (who are now more than just loud mouthed hippies) breaking rocks because they are in fact levying war against the United States from within.
If the violent behavior of the Occupado crowd doesn’t convince you of that, maybe listening to what these lunatics have been planning since Woodstock will:
Yes, that link shows that the Weather Underground was plotting to overthrow the government. They even committed acts of violence to do so, so they were thrown in jail. (They should probably still be in jail, but that’s another issue.) That’s the way the system is supposed to work.
We got confused above about which “he” we were talking about with regard to the “he” who is not a nation of millions with nukes. I was talking about Soros; it looks like you were talking about McCarthy.
We have to define what “working toward communism” means for this discussion to make any sense. It is, in fact, possible to hold leftist views and even advocate socialist positions and still not want to rip up the Constitution. Leftists in America have a more elastic view of that document, but they still want three branches of government, basic constitutional protections, and elected representation instead of an oligarchical dictatorship.
Personally, I’m convinced that Obama doesn’t want to turn us into the Soviet Union; he wants to turn us into Western Europe, where socialism exists side by side with representative republicanism. There are serious problems with that plan, as evidenced by the current debt crisis over there, but I think those who advocate such are simply misguided, not traitors, and advocates of same should not be locked up.
Sorry…… I didn’t mean to “stir the pot” that much.
It’s harder for me to convey humor (or know how people are responding to it) when I can’t see the faces.
So, I’ll settle this dispute…. I’m off to Cuba….. (or maybe Vermont).
Is gambling legal in Vermont? If not, I’m thinking you won’t be there long…
JJ, you say that “POUNDS restated a comment that I never wrote.”
You wrote, in response to White Eyebrows:
“But hey, there’s plenty of communist nations out there.
Why don’t you move to one, where the communism you aren’t afraid of is already in place?”
POUNDS wrote:
“….. and there is even someone who still says: go live in a communist country if you don’t agree with me about something.”
No mention of deportation, except by me in a later comment.
Is POUNDS’ restatement not accurate?
Ahh, my mistake. Forgive me, I’m in the middle of studying Japanese so I’m not giving the conversation my full attention as perhaps I should, and I’ve half forgotten the specifics of what was written days ago.
POUNDS statement is accurate on the matter of “go live” as opposed to “deportation.”
Where he’s inaccurate, is where he suggests that I say this because folks disagree with me, in a general sense. Rather than saying move because you disagree with me, I’m offering them a suggestion that perhaps if they move they might be happier in a political climate more to their liking, much in the same way that some asthmatics move to the southwest for drier air.
There is a significant difference between forcible deportation and freely electing to move, I’m suggesting the latter.
So apparently it was your statement about deportation that was incorrect, though I still love your monkey.
Again, you’ve crossed a treasonable, simian line there. Why don’t you move to Borneo if you love monkeys so much?!
Borneo is on the list.
“…preparations by Democratic operatives for the 2012 election make it clear for the first time that the party will explicitly abandon the white working class.”
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/the-future-of-the-obama-coalition/#