• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"Civil War"?

JTHunter2

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
287
Location
Planet Earth
According to Snopes (yeah, right), this was part of a speech given by somebody else. Even if true, it is still an interesting article.

Dr. Jack Devere Minzey, born 6 October 1928, died 8 April 2018, was the Department Head of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein. (Editor's note) This was the last of his works:

Civil War: How do civil wars happen? By Dr. Jack Devere Minzey

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can't settle the question through elections because they don't even agree that elections are how you decide who's in charge. That's the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation was about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it's not the first time they've done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn't really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There's a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don't accept the results of any election that they don't win. It means they don't believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections. That's a civil war.

There's no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn't dissent. It's not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they're the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don't win, what you want is a dictatorship.

Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it's inherently illegitimate The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can't scratch his own back without his say so, that's the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the Constitution, but that's not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. He can use the IRS as his own police force and imprison citizens who speak against him. He can provide guns and money (Fast and Furious) (Iran nuclear deal) to other countries to support his own agenda, and watch while one of America's Ambassador's is dragged through the streets and murdered doing nothing to aid our citizens. His power is unlimited. He's a dictator. But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can't do anything. He isn't even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has 'discretion' to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn't even have the 'discretion' to reverse him. That's how the game is played. That's how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn't yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren't even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn't allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries. The Constitution has something to say about that. Whether it's Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding. Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can't serve in if you're not a member. If you haven't been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren't in the club. And Trump isn't in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren't in the club with him.

Now we're seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.

That's not a free country.

It's not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an 'insurance policy' against Trump winning the election. It's not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It's not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It's not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn't supposed to win did.

Have no doubt; we're in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist socialist Democrat professional government.

Well now Pilgrims and Patriots, having read the above, I suggest two things: forward this very timely, very important analysis to those whom you believe think like you do (and those that don't) and make sure you vote on every Election day!
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
According to Snopes (yeah, right), this was part of a speech given by somebody else. Even if true, it is still an interesting article.

Dr. Jack Devere Minzey, born 6 October 1928, died 8 April 2018, was the Department Head of Education at Eastern Michigan University as well as a prolific author of numerous books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government role therein. (Editor's note) This was the last of his works:

Civil War: How do civil wars happen? By Dr. Jack Devere Minzey

Two or more sides disagree on who runs the country. And they can't settle the question through elections because they don't even agree that elections are how you decide who's in charge. That's the basic issue here. Who decides who runs the country? When you hate each other but accept the election results, you have a country. When you stop accepting election results, you have a countdown to a civil war.

The Mueller investigation was about removing President Trump from office and overturning the results of an election. We all know that. But it's not the first time they've done this. The first time a Republican president was elected this century, they said he didn't really win. The Supreme Court gave him the election. There's a pattern here.

What do sure odds of the Democrats rejecting the next Republican president really mean? It means they don't accept the results of any election that they don't win. It means they don't believe that transfers of power in this country are determined by elections. That's a civil war.

There's no shooting. At least not unless you count the attempt to kill a bunch of Republicans at a charity baseball game practice. But the Democrats have rejected our system of government.

This isn't dissent. It's not disagreement. You can hate the other party. You can think they're the worst thing that ever happened to the country. But then you work harder to win the next election. When you consistently reject the results of elections that you don't win, what you want is a dictatorship.

Your very own dictatorship.

The only legitimate exercise of power in this country, according to Democrats, is its own. Whenever Republicans exercise power, it's inherently illegitimate The Democrats lost Congress. They lost the White House. So what did they do? They began trying to run the country through Federal judges and bureaucrats. Every time that a Federal judge issues an order saying that the President of the United States can't scratch his own back without his say so, that's the civil war.

Our system of government is based on the Constitution, but that's not the system that runs this country. The Democrat's system is that any part of government that it runs gets total and unlimited power over the country.

If the Democrats are in the White House, then the president can do anything. And I mean anything. He can have his own amnesty for illegal aliens. He can fine you for not having health insurance. He can use the IRS as his own police force and imprison citizens who speak against him. He can provide guns and money (Fast and Furious) (Iran nuclear deal) to other countries to support his own agenda, and watch while one of America's Ambassador's is dragged through the streets and murdered doing nothing to aid our citizens. His power is unlimited. He's a dictator. But when Republicans get into the White House, suddenly the President can't do anything. He isn't even allowed to undo the illegal alien amnesty that his predecessor illegally invented. A Democrat in the White House has 'discretion' to completely decide every aspect of immigration policy. A Republican doesn't even have the 'discretion' to reverse him. That's how the game is played. That's how our country is run. Sad but true, although the left hasn't yet won that particular fight.

When a Democrat is in the White House, states aren't even allowed to enforce immigration law. But when a Republican is in the White House, states can create their own immigration laws. Under Obama, a state wasn't allowed to go to the bathroom without asking permission. But under Trump, Jerry Brown can go around saying that California is an independent republic and sign treaties with other countries. The Constitution has something to say about that. Whether it's Federal or State, Executive, Legislative or Judiciary, the left moves power around to run the country. If it controls an institution, then that institution is suddenly the supreme power in the land. This is what I call a moving dictatorship.

Donald Trump has caused the Shadow Government to come out of hiding. Professional government is a guild. Like medieval guilds. You can't serve in if you're not a member. If you haven't been indoctrinated into its arcane rituals. If you aren't in the club. And Trump isn't in the club. He brought in a bunch of people who aren't in the club with him.

Now we're seeing what the pros do when amateurs try to walk in on them. They spy on them, they investigate them and they send them to jail. They use the tools of power to bring them down.

That's not a free country.

It's not a free country when FBI agents who support Hillary take out an 'insurance policy' against Trump winning the election. It's not a free country when Obama officials engage in massive unmasking of the opposition. It's not a free country when the media responds to the other guy winning by trying to ban the conservative media that supported him from social media. It's not a free country when all of the above collude together to overturn an election because the guy who wasn't supposed to win did.

Have no doubt; we're in a civil war between conservative volunteer government and a leftist socialist Democrat professional government.

Well now Pilgrims and Patriots, having read the above, I suggest two things: forward this very timely, very important analysis to those whom you believe think like you do (and those that don't) and make sure you vote on every Election day!
I vote. But that said the article ,and myself also, pretty much discount voting as a means to fix our busted gov since at min one side does not recognize an election as,legitimate.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,473
Location
Northern Piedmont
In this case, the fascist movement has been working on its own civil war since the Wilson administration. I suggest anyone with knowledge of the history of Germany, 1920-1935 compare the parallels to present-day America. How, for example, is "moms demand action" different from Mao's "red guards" or the "Hitler youth" as a political organization designed to promote the fascist designs of the cult leader?
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,237
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
In this case, the fascist movement has been working on its own civil war since the Wilson administration. I suggest anyone with knowledge of the history of Germany, 1920-1935 compare the parallels to present-day America. How, for example, is "moms demand action" different from Mao's "red guards" or the "Hitler youth" as a political organization designed to promote the fascist designs of the cult leader?
Didn't Hitler eliminate the brown shirts when they were no longer useful?
 

bbMurphy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
82
Location
Springfield, VA
I believe that the "Hitler youth" was disbanded after Germany surrendered in '45. "With the surrender of Nazi Germany in 1945, the organisation de facto ceased to exist. On 10 October 1945, the Hitler Youth and its subordinate units were outlawed by the Allied Control Council along with other Nazi Party organisations. Under Section 86 of the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Germany, the Hitler Youth is an "unconstitutional organisation" and the distribution or public use of its symbols, except for educational or research purposes, is illegal." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Youth
I know it's a wiki reference but I couldn't find anything to refute it.
 

Doug_Nightmare

Active member
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Messages
511
I know it's a wiki reference but I couldn't find anything to refute it.
What’s to refute? The way to read a Wikipedia article is to read to each reference citation footnote, and then think on whether the statement is reasonably true or not, and if not then look to the citation, it is authoritative?

I find lots of interesting reading that way, of things that I didn’t know.

In the case of Hitler and the Hitler Youth; years ago I learned to not see only what the lying camera was focused on, in this case the orator, but look behind the focus at the background and at the cultural background. YOU would have been a HY in that historical context.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,473
Location
Northern Piedmont
I heard Larry O'Conner interviewing Pam Coulter yesterday on the radio, and they were both going on and on about how clever Rudy Giuliani was to implement "stop and frisk" in NYC, and how dumb Li'l Mikey is to go around apologizing for it. My reaction was, "What, are you NUTS ???". Has Larry O'Conner joined forces with the fascists?

That policy was implemented in NYC even though it's illegal. Being black and under 25 does not provide reasonable suspicion that the citizen is involved in criminal activity, thus no grounds for the arrest (all levels of detention comprise "arrests", they just have different requirements to justify the "stop"). And if the cop lays hands on the citizen without cause, justification, or legal excuse, that's battery, a crime. And if the cop is armed at the time, that's abduction, since it's committed with force or intimidation.

So Giuliani and Bloomburger both made a fuss at the time they were forced to quit doing it by the courts, that it made a big dent in the incidence of violent crime. O'Conner and Coulter thought that was big stuff.

My thinking was, that's why the "gun control" regulations were implemented in New York. When they disarm the "just plain folks", and prevent ordinary, law abiding and socially responsible citizens from possessing the means of effective self-defense, they create an opening for an increase in violent crime, 'cause for the criminals, it's just like shooting fish in a barrel. That leads to an increase in fear among the citizenry, which creates the opportunity for the creation of the fascists' police state. That's what happened in NYC, and "stop and frisk" is a manifestation of the fascist police state.

Those extreme and illegal measures were only necessary because the fascists made it necessary by keeping people from being able to defend themselves, their homes, and their families.

Now the fascists have taken over Virginia. And the "red shirts" are raising the clamor for a police state here.

I used to say that Virginia was the last bastion of civilization on Earth. I don't say that anymore now that the barbarians have moved in from foreign states with their fascist agenda and have taken over. We can't depend on the legal system any more, because Virginia has gone the way of New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California, and Hawaii. We have to assume that corruption is the norm and that one's status is more important in adjudging behavior than his actions.

I wonder whether we still have a chance. I'm not optimistic, because I've been saying stuff like this for years and warning people that it was coming, but I have yet to inspire anyone to take effective political action. I'm going to the polls on March 3 to vote in the Demo's primary, and I'm going to vote for "democratically socialist" Bernie. I figure he's the most likely to be nominated if we can get some energy behind him and force Li'l Mikey to either bow out or run as an independent, and Bernie's got no chance against Trump in the fall.

If y'all like the Bloomburgers, just stay home on March 3.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,342
Location
White Oak Plantation
And if the cop lays hands on the citizen without cause, justification, or legal excuse, that's battery, a crime. And if the cop is armed at the time, that's abduction, since it's committed with force or intimidation. - User
I suspect that this logic would be rejected out of hand these days by a judge...heck, any and every judge...every time. A civil society demands that our enumerated rights be subordinate to a civil society...
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,473
Location
Northern Piedmont
I suspect that this logic would be rejected out of hand these days by a judge...heck, any and every judge...every time. A civil society demands that our enumerated rights be subordinate to a civil society...
It's not just logic, it's pre-existing law. But I agree with the purport of your comment - tells you a lot about the state of the judiciary, doesn't it?
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,473
Location
Northern Piedmont
It amazes me that there has been zero response to my suggestion that we should vote in the Demo primary on March 3 for Bernie Sanders. Polls out this morning say Bloomberg and Sanders are neck and neck in Va., and that they're leading the pack. And all Bloomberg's done is spend money on advertising. I regard him as a real threat, while Sanders is a buffoon who can fool some folks but can't get elected against Trump. So staying home on March 3 is a vote for fascist police-state gun-grabber Bloomberg.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,618
Location
here nc
It amazes me that there has been zero response to my suggestion that we should vote in the Demo primary on March 3 for Bernie Sanders. Polls out this morning say Bloomberg and Sanders are neck and neck in Va., and that they're leading the pack. And all Bloomberg's done is spend money on advertising. I regard him as a real threat, while Sanders is a buffoon who can fool some folks but can't get elected against Trump. So staying home on March 3 is a vote for fascist police-state gun-grabber Bloomberg.
alas user, the same fallacy was believed during the last election against the buffoon named Donald J Trump...no way he can beat the exemplary Hillary ticket...

and i am a Donald fan!
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,473
Location
Northern Piedmont
I see Bloomberg as the real threat - it is my opinion that he is a lying fascist. His advertising and actions bear that out, again in my opinion. The whole point of his "gun safety" agenda is to obliterate the socially responsible, law-abiding folks' ability to defend themselves, thus creating (yes, intentionally and maliciously acting to create) an environment of more extreme and violent crime, in order to engender fear in the populace, as justification for the creation of a police state. The stop-and-frisk policy is a clear example of that result. He lies in his ads because Obama has not endorsed him. And he lies when he tells people that a law written on paper in a book will do anything to make anyone any safer. His "red shirts" (reminiscent of Mao's, and of the "brown shirts" in Germany and "black shirts" in Italy) are organizing to get Bloomberg elected and I suspect they will resort to violence to get what they want.

So I've been trying to get Bernie nominated - I can't imagine a world in which he could defeat Trump - but I can't get anyone interested. It would appear that Repubs would prefer to have Bloomberg, whom I see as having a real chance of getting elected - not honestly, of course. But can you imagine what this country will be like under Bloomberg?

"Mike will get it done." reminds me a lot of "He made the trains run on time."

Criminal prosecutions for political retribution? You ain't seen nuthin', yet. It'll be the political re-education center for you.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,342
Location
White Oak Plantation
If you want for folks to feel the Bern...remind folks that Doomberg wants to limit (and has limited) the size of your fountain soda...Bernie does not...
 

Va_Nemo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
653
Location
Lynchburg
and i am a Donald fan!
He has no competition of any threat in Va regarding his nomination. So influence the competition for him. Many think Bloomie would be a real threat in the election. So I will do what I can to make sure the dems put up the least competition.

Nemo
 
Top