Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire The Real Issue of 2012

Public policy is enacted by essentially two methods: radical comprehensive or incrementally. The former is a draconian shift in policy, such as an outright confiscation of guns. In the latter, gun confiscation is accomplished one little law at a time.

Socialism in American has been and continues to be implemented incrementally. Socialism is the necessary precursor to communism. There are three essential obstacles that must be overcome in order to implement socialism: elimination of private property rights, dissolving the family unit, and ridding America of Marx�s opiate of the masses: religion.

Without religion, the other two are easy to implement. John Locke indentified the right of private property as a natural right. Natural rights flow to us from God. Government has no power to strip anyone of any natural right, for they were given to us by God. Therefore, before we can become a totally socialist state in which we�re completely controlled by government, God has got to go.

Revisionists� propagate the lie that our Founding Fathers created a secular nation. This is an outright lie. Anyone can access primary source documents facilitating knowledge that our Founding Fathers created a Christian nation. Some of our Founding Fathers had gone so far as to predict the demise of their patrimony were our nation to be governed by other than believers in God. And it is the benevolence of Christians that allows others to practice any legitimate religion.

Here�s my point: since at least the 1940�s �even earlier- a forceful subculture within our country has strove to dupe gullible Americans that the First Amendment justifies governmental regulation of religious practices, a fear Jefferson said could never happen in America. His intent of separation of church and state was that religion must be protected from governmental regulation, not vice versa as revisionists� want us to believe. Madison believed that our country was created by the divine hand of God.

Regardless of who�s in power, Republicans or Democrats, we have and are becoming more socialistic. Socialism implicates a lack of freedom. Communism -dictatorial control- follows socialism.

We own nothing that the government does not allow us to own. Therefore, what we own is approved and regulated by the government and that includes our homes.

Think very carefully before this election; however, it might not matter. We might be too far gone for a reversal of years of incremental public policy changes that have facilitated socialism to take root and spawn.

We know Obama is at least a socialist. I think he�s a communist. That leaves the putative Republican nominee. If you believe Romney will restore freedom, yank a lever for him. However, I do not see it. In fact, Republicans have done nothing to impede socialism.

Don�t fall into the trap of a false dichotomy: Obama or Romney. Keep restoration of freedom at the forefront. Who or what is the best path to lead us back to the intent of our Founding Fathers?

New York and California are lost causes. In California, Republicans are greatly outnumbered, and many of the Republicans who reside here are neocons. Neocons will steal our freedoms just as surely as will Obama. In fact, Leo Strauss was as dangerous to freedom as was Marx. Obama will win New York and California�s electoral votes without having to campaign in either state.

If Obama does win, do not blame his victory on the �Paulbots� or other derisive and pejorative names Romney supporters choose to call those of us who want to eliminate socialism and restore freedom. For if Obama wins, it�ll be the result of intransient Romney supporters who are falling prey to the mainstream media created false dichotomy.

We are living in an unprecedented era. None of the medicine given to our ailing and possibly fatally diseased economy is working. Baby boomers and their consumerism led to a tremendous post-WWII economic boom. We do not have such demand. In fact, consumers aren�t consuming for fear of their jobs and because they were burned by consumer credit, not to mention tremendous hits they have taken to their home equity. So it could be that regardless of who�s elected, it won�t much matter. Our economy, which determines governmental action, might not survive.

Finally, don�t forget that under Bush 43, our country lost at least 6 million manufacturing jobs, which paid good salaries that accorded workers ability to live the American dream, and we closed at least 40,000 American factories, most of which reopened in China. And his Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson, threatened us with martial law if congress didn�t pass TARP, which was really a bailout of Bush�s homeboys using taxpayers� money. Don�t think for a New York second that Bush didn�t put Paulson up to threaten us with martial law.

As I see it, if it remains between Obama and Romney, I couldn�t care less who wins. You see, I know that either way we�re going to become more enslaved.

No government is viable unless it can control its people. In our country, politicians use laws to control us. When was the last time anyone has heard of a neocon proposing eliminating any law???


R

It's interesting that you can post that after, essentially, stating that you would have arrested the citizen in ME for open carry.

George

Yeah, it's a real shame none of your mystical neocons have ever suggested rolling back a law like ObamaCare.

Oh.. wait..

Raisuli: Don't agree with much of your posting ESPECIALLY the part where you don't think there would be much difference in a second hussein oblamer term and a first term with Mitt Romney as POTUS!
That contention of yours is bizarre beyond description and in fact causes me concern for your sanity.
The "real issue" of 2,012 is removing and replacing hussein oblamer and earache holder with ANYBODY!
Mitt Romney would be a quantum leap forward in brightening the future of Americas courts, Americas economy and Americas future outlook!
I can't even believe you said regarding the two!
And by the way I am NOT "enslaved" to any extent - more bizarre opinion from yourself, I believe.
Vote Romney/Rubio come November and things will brighten up for you and your outlook, I am sure.
Hold into the wind
VarmintGuy

NH K9,

I would not have arrested him for lawfully carrying a weapon. If I would have arrested him it would have been for delaying an officer in the performance of her/his official duties.

The unknown variable in that scenario was whether the cop has reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. If reasonable suspicion did attach, then the detainee cannot resist, obstruct, or delay.

What do you suppose would have happened to the cop if he had responded to a man with a gun call and did nothing?

Cops cannot legislate law. They are empowered to enforce law enacted by legislatures.


Take care,

R

Did you miss the part where the kid asked the cop if he suspected him of a crime, and the cop said no?

How do you get Rubio? He's not Constitutionally able to be VP or POTUS as neither of his parents were US citizens at the time of his birth. Oh, that's right; it's OK to violate the Constitution as long as it's "our guy" doing it.

Calhoun,

Do you believe that many Republicans do not believe that socialized medicine is necessary?

Don't forget that many Republicans were initially for Obamacare. I heard Republicans say that our health care system was broken, precursor to socialized medicine. It ain't our health care system that's broken. It's stealing from taxpayers to fund it that is.

Unless and until something is done to eliminate the unfunded mandates of Medicare and prescription drug benefits totaling nearly 100 trillion dollars, which is completely unsustainable, politicians on both sides of the aisle will do everything possible to keep a sinking ship afloat.


Take care,

R

Though I agree that the two choices this go round are dismal and catastrophic...

Ron Paul is not the leader of freedom in this country... he's a voicebox that sometimes hits the right key... which is to say he is a politician and nothing more.

Kent

Point conceded due to poor wording on my part. Who delayed the officer, though, is up for debate.



Based on the link you provided to CA code, I will again concede that point. In this AO, it wouldn't fly.



I've done it several times, actually. A "man with a gun" call is generally a scared, flaming liberal that has no idea that open carry is legal. Would you have us check every hunter that gets called in by Mass. imports?

Curious, when you encountered a CCW on a MV stop did you remove the firearm?

My point, though it got lost, is that you sound vehemently opposed to the government continuously adding law upon law to control the citizenry, but have issues with the citizenry standing up for itself when righteous. On its face, those two positions contradict themselves.

George

Yep, I did. In fact, I didn't watch the whole clip. To me it looked like a guy willing to do anything to make youtube.

R

NH K9,

If an officer spots a weapon, s/he is to remove it and unload it or assure it's unloaded thereby rendering it safe. Cops are never to ask anyone to hand them a weapon. Once the call is cleared, the violator is good to go.

Officer safety is paramount. Where firearms are found, it's essential to assure they're not a threat to officers. Not only is this reasonable, I have yet to meet anyone who didn't immediately recognize this concept.

Cops will take weapons from off-duty cops until they assure the motorist is in fact a cop. Once identity is confirmed the gun is returned.


Take care,

R

Raisuli, don't change the subject. You didn't ask about whether many Republicans want socialized medicine.

You wrote "When was the last time anyone has heard of a neocon proposing eliminating any law???"

Here you go.





Yes, many big government and establishment Republicans think socialized medicine is a fix. But there's a much larger portion of the Republican base who understand that over-regulation of the health industry is what got us into this mess.

Support your tea party, kick the big government incumbents out.

The kid asked the cop if he suspected him of a crime and the cop said no, you should go back and watch the entire clip. It may change your mind about the situation. Not that the kid wasn't trying to get his 15min of fame but, the officer had no reason to stop him in the first place.

I often wonder in those situations, why, does the person receiving the call about someone carrying a gun explain to the caller that it is a legal activity. Then ask the specific question of the caller, "is the person engaging in any illegal activity" if the answer is no, then there is no reason to send the cops to harass someone for doing nothing wrong. Technically this is no different than calling the cops on someone for eating an ice cream cone, neither is illegal in any way.

SCORE!

One that I agree with ya on, Mike!

Not to mention all the gun laws, abortion laws, and taxation laws that Republicans are constantly trying to reverse.

This guys soap box gets more and more entertaining every day.

What's next Raisuli?

VarmintGuy,

If you are as free as you think you are, try not paying Social Security taxes so you can invest your retirement money yourself and see if you aren't introduced to a federal prosecutor. Or you might try buying bullets for your varmint gun that are not approved by ATF and see where that lands you. I would not recommend your doing either. It's always a wiser idea to obey the law and try to change it legislatively.

Every single thing you do of every single day you live is controlled in some fashion by some governmental authority. Even the city/county in which you live will control what you're allowed to do with the property you own. If you don't believe me, find out the procedure to modify your home should you decide you'd like a new look for it.


R

Politicians use laws to control us?

Laws are a part of every free society. Laws exist to protect us.

Abuse of laws and power leads to Government control, not the rule of law.

I'm glad I was raised in NH, though I suppose I would have been just fine in the bulk of the Southern states as well.

George

Officer safety is paramount. Where firearms are found, it's essential to assure they're not a threat to officers. Not only is this reasonable, I have yet to meet anyone who didn't immediately recognize this concept.


Do police take an othe to officer saftey or to uphold the law?
I think we need to discuss what is paramount.