Don Surber: "Are we American citizens or are we subjects?" I am going to suggest Obama thinks we are the latter.
posted by Helen at 8:17 AM
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Contributors
Previous Posts
- "You are your child's moral tutor, not that shady ...
- Health care for Clunkers
- Self Help book on Borderline Personality Disorder
- Why I no longer have to worry about finances
- Grand Rounds is up at the Medicine and Technology ...
- PJTV: Psychology and Politics
- The Rorschach exposed
- "Fascists everywhere will love this article, anyon...
- Are gamers really "old," fat and sad?
- "People see a naked woman and they smile," he said...
23 Comments:
"The surface of American society is covered with a layer of democratic paint, but from time to time one can see the old aristocratic colours breaking through." - Alexis de Tocqueville.
To put it simply, to our representatives(or perhaps we should call them "Lords") we are merely subjects...
Except when they're up for reelection soon, then they typically become our "humble" servants once more.
Obama shall remain King for a couple more years
gripe geripe gripe--same old lament heard over and over no matter which party is in power or who is in congress...if you vote, you are a citizen. If you do not like things, vote for change. You can write your congress people, write newspapers, go to demonsrations, and on and on...try that in a lot of other countries and you will soon see if you are or are not citizens.
Yes, Fred, go to demonstrations and be imputed to be Nazi's, bought & paid for astroturfers, teabaggers and right wing terrorists.
Yes, it is easy to see how a kind and loving aristocracy is willing to allow us to be citizens...what's next? rounding us up and shipping us off to Gitmo? rendition?
Hey, here's an idea: listen to we the people.
"Inmates".
"if you vote, you are a citizen"
But I have to win a lottery ticket to ask my congress-critter a question, else I get escorted from the room by Labor Union brownshirts.
Seems like the folks in "1984" (or was it THX1138"? were referred-to as "citizens".
we are all slaves. we earn money which is then taxed, feed, surcharged, adjusted, re-assessed, taxed again and then cut-back so that we have bearely enough to feed, clothe and shelter ourselves and our kids...
...while idiots are filmed making comments after the fact about what they think happened to all our money from the comfort of a tv studio.
get a grip people.
the political system, like the judicial system and the exectutive branch, is designed for the fun and profit of a small group of people.
and we ain`t it.
there are plenty of other games to play, but power and control isn`t one of them.
we could run for office though, if we could live with ourselves...and, you know, make a difference.
Subjest? I like it!
Learning Curve,
Thanks for catching my typo, I fixed it but maybe subjest is more appropriate.
Goto the 3:54 point in this video and you can see Demi Moore pledge to be a "servant to our president."
The left has it all backwards. A servant's heart should be held by the elected not the electorate.
To those of us who still believe in the Constitution, we are citizens. To those who believe in Obama, we are subjects, or perhaps merely objects, things.
An unarmed person is a subject, an armed person is a citizen.
the right to bear arms...right.
try telling a policeman that, or a soldier.
or a judge.
i love it when a constitutionalist talks about our rights as if they are a tangeble device or mechaninsm whereby we can inflict our will on others or entities.
we don`t have rights or freedoms.
we have obligations under law.
ask a state trooper.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serf
and i personally think we`ve progressed no futher than the high middle ages where we worked for the crown in return for protection.....except, we don`t recieve the protection.
dr.alistair is right. Ask a state trooper about your rights and he will tell you that he is your personal messiah and anything he says goes.
@ alistair & hubcap
When you ask the wrong person, don't be surprised when you get the wrong answer.
Rights are not intended to be a mans for inflicting our will on other people. Rights are specific protections under the law.
My right to freedom of speech does not inflict anything on anybody. My right to carry a gun does not inflict anything on anybody. If I have to go to court to enforce my rights, they are still my rights. The fact that a state trooper may wish to abuse my rights does not mean that I don't have them; it means that he is over stepping his authority and should be taken down several notches.
I had not heard this sort of lamenting about lost right before Obama got into office. Does this mean you felt a full citizen when GOP in power? If so, then vote them back in. And demonstrations? don't be intimidated! From what I have seen there are a lot more meanies breaking up health care discussion from those opposed than from those liberals who want a change.
in sum: you do not change things with simply chewing your liver online.
Well, actually, this question was what the first civil war was really about, but you won't hear about any of that in our government schools.
rights are for groups and thier appointed representitives.
the individual gets to shut up and do whatever an armed agent of the government wishes.
trying to assert some mythological "right" will get you tazed, handcuffed and further violated.
simple rule; avoid contact with these people at all costs.
freedoms of speech inflict all sorts of things on other people, annoying points of view for one.
when did you ever go to court to enforce your rights?
wouldn`t that be trying to deprive someone else of thier rights?
Any number of people who have been falsely arrested by overstepping cops have been hauled into court only to have their cases dismissed by the judge. That is going to court to have your rights enforced. It is not a pleasant thing to have to do, but it works. And no, that is not depriving anyone else of their rights at all. With any luck, however, you may get to sue the cop which could be fun.
There is no right not to hear an annoying point of view. (You are in Canada, as I recall, aren't you? Perhaps there is such in Canada, but certainly not in the US.)
Alistair, you would make a very good follower. You clearly believe in following orders, doing what you are told, and not questioning authority at all. The American Revolution would have never gotten off the ground with men like you.
Fred: " From what I have seen there are a lot more meanies demanding answers than those liberals who bite fingers off"
/fixed
hmm. you sure have taken me wrong.
check out www.adventuresinlegalland.com
there are several assumptions in your last statement about the courts recognising when a cop "oversteps" his position and authority.
people have no right given by a court to annoy anyone else. there simply is no position to annoy.
and a person in a conversation insisting on repeating an annoying position is eventially ignored or otherwise shut up.
the freshman and sophomore get it thier head that they have a right to be annoying and ignorant and disrespectful.
granted, the first year away from the oppression of home life can be intoxicating, and the words of the socialist professor further spur them on.
reality hits once they try thier new-found religion in the real world of daily life.
fred, "There is no right not to hear an annoying point of view".
it`s not about rights, which are meta-physical constructs, but about real world actions....where things actually happen.
and i have a policy about annoying people, and thier belief they have the right to annoy me.
would you like to hear it?
Post a Comment
<< Home