Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
spartan max2

Redi: Anarchists have taken over in congress

63 posts in this topic

Just an interesting comment by house minority leader Reid. So I guess if you wanted limited government you must be an anarchist by Reids standards. :td:

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/321835-reid-anarchist-have-taken-over-the-house-senate

Bolded is quote from the article

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Thursday said “anarchists” have taken over Congress.

“We’re diverted totally from what this bill is about. Why? Because the anarchists have taken over,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “They’ve taken over the House and now they’ve taken over the Senate.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Limited government via the Constitution

Personal liberty and responsibility

The ability to take care of one's own self...

All of this is the enemy of the Police/Nanny state...and Reid is their head cheerleader. Funny how folks like him love to build up the gov and spend money "for the good of the people"...If we downsized Gov, he could reach in his pocket and give money to whichever charity he chose and it prob wouldn't be wasted or stolen...imagine that.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Limited government via the Constitution

Personal liberty and responsibility

The ability to take care of one's own self...

It scares the heck out of the nanny state supporters..... :yes:

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dream of the day when people learn what the word anarchist actually means.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dream of the day when people learn what the word anarchist actually means.

it means "anyone I don't like and who doesn't do what I tell them to do" right?

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dream of the day when people learn what the word anarchist actually means.

We have had the conversation before...

Apparently our Senators and Congressmen missed those posts...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Thursday said “anarchists” have taken over Congress.

“We’re diverted totally from what this bill is about. Why? Because the anarchists have taken over,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “They’ve taken over the House and now they’ve taken over the Senate.

and he is 100% correct. They have created a disfunctional government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and he is 100% correct. They have created a disfunctional government.

You don't have to agree with their politics.

But the point is that anarchist is the wrong term. Big time. Its just ignorance.

Edited by spartan max2
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the best description is that extremists have taken control of both party caucuses because of the phenomenon of closed primaries and gerrymandered party-safe districts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to agree with their politics.

But the point is that anarchist is the wrong term. Big time. Its just ignorance.

I think it is very appropriate. They actively are working against the state. By refusing to compromise, to meet, to work, to do pretty much anything related to what a congressperson is elected for. They have no ideas, obstruct by filibuster more than at any time in history, they take more vacation time than any point in history, in fact really do nothing. They repeatedly vote for meaningless bills that have no chance of passage. They obstruct by refusing to approve appointments. The list goes on and on. It can be demonstrably proven that even things they DO support become heinous if the WH then supports their idea.

Anarchism is a political philosophy that advocates stateless societies based on non-hierarchical free associations. Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, or harmful. While anti-statism is central, some argue that anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organization in the conduct of human relations, including, but not limited to, the state system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize people in our government were advocating for a stateless society

Guess I missed those speeches.

Your mind is stuck on a partisan track. most of what you just described is what both parties do. And none of that is anarchy.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an interesting comment by house minority leader Reid. So I guess if you wanted limited government you must be an anarchist by Reids standards. :td:

Rules for radicals.

and he is 100% correct. They have created a disfunctional government.

Perhaps, but not through anarchy...

I think it is very appropriate. They actively are working against the state. By refusing to compromise, to meet, to work, to do pretty much anything related to what a congressperson is elected for. They have no ideas, obstruct by filibuster more than at any time in history, they take more vacation time than any point in history, in fact really do nothing. They repeatedly vote for meaningless bills that have no chance of passage. They obstruct by refusing to approve appointments. The list goes on and on. It can be demonstrably proven that even things they DO support become heinous if the WH then supports their idea.

...Because nobody wants to abolish the state. They want to control it and anarchy is about no control. Do you deny that both sides seek control?

I didn't realize people in our government were advocating for a stateless society

Guess I missed those speeches.

Your mind is stuck on a partisan track. most of what you just described is what both parties do. And none of that is anarchy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my own point is, agree or disagree with the republicans in congress (i disagree with them on just about... well, everything) they sure as hell are not anarchists. i mean, they're part of the state, for anythings sake. anarchism is an actual political philosophy with an actual definition. but people, harry reid included, it looks like, like to throw it around like it's just another empty insult word. "political opponents" is what he's actually saying.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These political goons....like reid...like to throw the word out cause to a lot of couch potatoes and grazing sheep...when someone says "anarchy"...scenes from "Mad Max and The Road Warrior" spring to mind....

and that is just not what it means.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These political goons....like reid...like to throw the word out cause to a lot of couch potatoes and grazing sheep...when someone says "anarchy"...scenes from "Mad Max and The Road Warrior" spring to mind....

and that is just not what it means.

No kidding. That's what they want it to mean.

Rules for radicals.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think its great. What if the government shut down proves we get along fine without them. That this edifice of bureaucracy is just a circle jerk that provides nothing for us. I see many of the people you call obstructionists as protecting me. I want politicians who dissolve old laws no make new ones. I essentially have no representation in my state as my views are too fascist for California. I am grateful for representatives from other states that act in direct opposition to those from my own state.

Edited by travelnjones
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more of the kool aid...

"You need the Gov to feed you, shelter you and protect you"...if you don't, then someone will try to make you feel guilty because someone out there does and you must not bring harm to the other livestock.

Our "farmers" need the livestock to cling close to them for provision and protection...if we stray off a little bit, we find that we really don't need the "farmers" as much as they want us to think they do.

I have long pondered the gigantic scam that is our reality...our economics, our society. I can't really put it into words but suffice to say, I marvel at how they can keep this charade going...or is it an opera? It's drama through and through though. Most of it unnecessary.

Our Fed Gov needs to be drastically reduced and authority returned to the states. The Fed Gov needs to stop gobbling up all the money and let the states have a share to tend to their own needs rather than begging at the alter of the US Congress.

Edited by Jeremiah65
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think its great. What if the government shut down proves we get along fine without them. That this edifice of bureaucracy is just a circle jerk that provides nothing for us. I see many of the people you call obstructionists as protecting me. I want politicians who dissolve old laws no make new ones. I essentially have no representation in my state as my views are too fascist for California. I am grateful for representatives from other states that act in direct opposition to those from my own state.

Shut the government down along with ObamaCare.

What's the worst that could happen?

Newt did it in the 1990s. We survived just fine.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have long pondered the gigantic scam that is our reality...our economics, our society. I can't really put it into words but suffice to say, I marvel at how they can keep this charade going...or is it an opera? It's drama through and through though. Most of it unnecessary.

Thats a hard one, i mean money is only real because we choose it to be. But I happen to like money it makes dealing with people easier for me. Bartering would be terrible for me. Also I don't want to be responsible for my own plumping and electricity. I like the grocery story and don't want to deal with cutting up my own meat. So for easy and comfort I am paying by plugging myself in.

Its almost as if you have to pay something, perhap responsibility, for every time you exercise your own will. freewill is expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's more of the kool aid...

"You need the Gov to feed you, shelter you and protect you"...if you don't, then someone will try to make you feel guilty because someone out there does and you must not bring harm to the other livestock.

Our "farmers" need the livestock to cling close to them for provision and protection...if we stray off a little bit, we find that we really don't need the "farmers" as much as they want us to think they do.

I have long pondered the gigantic scam that is our reality...our economics, our society. I can't really put it into words but suffice to say, I marvel at how they can keep this charade going...or is it an opera? It's drama through and through though. Most of it unnecessary.

Our Fed Gov needs to be drastically reduced and authority returned to the states. The Fed Gov needs to stop gobbling up all the money and let the states have a share to tend to their own needs rather than begging at the alter of the US Congress.

This post im about to make might get alot of critism but idc.

I believe that everyone should

be in a fight

Go hungry for a day

Get high once

Get drunk once

And have to sleep outside once cause you have no were you can stay

because after youv experienced all these things then you come to the realization that I am not made of glass. I can survive and prosper. I am not a fragil human that society wants me to believe.

It is the most liberating realization in the world.

then people will understand that it is in their power to be free. We are one of the only species' that exisit who have free will.

Use it

Edited by spartan max2
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post im about to make might get alot of critism but idc.

I believe that everyone should

be in a fight

Go hungry for a day

Get high once

Get drunk once

And have to sleep outside once cause you have no were you can stay

because after youv experienced all these things then you come to the realization that I am not made of glass. I can survive and prosper. I am not a fragil human that society wants me to believe.

It is the most liberating realization in the world.

then people will understand that it is in their power to be free. We are one of the only species' that exisit who have free will.

Use it

I don't disagree with any part of your post, at all. :tu:

It's sad that there are 30 year olds who need babysitters....I swear, with some people, it's like, Do you need the government to wipe your a$$ too? Really? :no:

People are not taught to be self-sufficient anymore. That's what public school is about. To teach you, that you need the government to take care of you.....

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post im about to make might get alot of critism but idc.

I believe that everyone should

be in a fight

Go hungry for a day

Get high once

Get drunk once

And have to sleep outside once cause you have no were you can stay

because after youv experienced all these things then you come to the realization that I am not made of glass. I can survive and prosper. I am not a fragil human that society wants me to believe.

It is the most liberating realization in the world.

then people will understand that it is in their power to be free. We are one of the only species' that exisit who have free will.

Use it

I've done all those things except sleep outside because I had no place to go. I have though slept outside because I got drunk once, or maybe twice.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shut the government down along with ObamaCare.

What's the worst that could happen?

Newt did it in the 1990s. We survived just fine.

It resulted in a Democratic electoral landslide.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It resulted in a Democratic electoral landslide.

And it would again. I've reached a point where I'm amazed that someone hasn't pointed at the emperor and started laughing...yet... it all has to fall apart eventually because all the rules haven't merely been broken, they've been shattered. THEN people will learn from common experience how fragile they are - or aren't. And oh my..what WILL the politicians do then?
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've reached a point where I'm amazed that someone hasn't pointed at the emperor and started laughing

They'd be arrested and charged with treason if they did it today - and certainly tarred as being racist by the press.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.