America: Write Your Own History

[mrrandomplayer]

Pliped- Note what he said about Tyrants in sheeps clothing. That implies that he believes they were terrible leaders who didn't follow the Constitution. He didn't say anything about them being legitimately elected or not.

I'm pretty sure arresting the leaders of a party that had some members trying to assassinate the president and some members committing voter fraud is constitutional. Banning the party is also legal because it is illegal to state a wish for or like of the assassination of a government official. I'm not saying that all of the communists are bad, it's just that the actions of some and the rabble-rousing of others makes the arrests legal.

 

[DKVM]

I'm pretty sure arresting the leaders of a party that had some members trying to assassinate the president and some members committing voter fraud is constitutional. Banning the party is also legal because it is illegal to state a wish for or like of the assassination of a government official. I'm not saying that all of the communists are bad, it's just that the actions of some and the rabble-rousing of others makes the arrests legal.

I didn't say anything whatsoever about arrests. I was only defending his wording in using Tyrants in sheeps clothing being his opinion. He never said anything about them being legitimately elected. Pliped's reply was that they were legitimately elected when Yudishtira never mentioned anything about them being elected or not. I wasn't commenting on the arrests being legal or not. I wasn't commenting on Wilson being a tyrant or not. I was pointing out that Yudishtira never questioned them being elected.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

I didn't say anything whatsoever about arrests. I was only defending his wording in using Tyrants in sheeps clothing being his opinion. He never said anything about them being legitimately elected. Pliped's reply was that they were legitimately elected when Yudishtira never mentioned anything about them being elected or not. I wasn't commenting on the arrests being legal or not. I wasn't commenting on Wilson being a tyrant or not. I was pointing out that Yudishtira never questioned them being elected.

Sorry about the vagueness, I was responding more to Yudishtira's claim:

Furthermore, it is entirely in keeping with the spirit and even the letter of the Constitution (the real purpose of the Second Amendment), to take up arms against tyrants in sheep's clothing, such as Wilson and Harding.

About Harding and Wilson being tyrants in sheep's clothing because they arrested the leaders of a party that had some members trying to assassinate the president and some members committing voter fraud and banned the party because it is illegal to state a wish for or like of the assassination of a government official. Wilson took an oath to "Protect and preserve the Union", and preventing extremists like the fraud-makers and assassins from committing such acts can very easily be interpreted as "protecting and preserving the Union", and thus acting constitutionally.

 

[GreekAnalyzer]

Davis
Where can I take the political compass test?

 

[CaterpillarKing]

Www.politicalcompass.org


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[GreekAnalyzer]

Huh. According to this I'm right in the center. I always thought of myself as a libertarian.
Economic Left/Right: -0.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.26

 

[CaterpillarKing]

I was like 0.5, -2.26 or so. I see myself much farther right


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[Spirictum]

I was impressed by my far revolutionary spirit, but it actually makes sense. College has indeed changed me a lot. I think I took this test somewhere between 6-8 years ago and luckily I have just found it on my computer. Back then I was almost as Libertarian as I am now, but a lot less leftist, but still to the left. I don't have the numbers just the pic

 

[adhiraj.bose]

I predict the collapse of the democratic party.

 

[CaterpillarKing]

Yeah, America will be a mostly socialist and communist state


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[adhiraj.bose]

The best thing about this election is, the way I see it, it is win-win for Communists. Even if Stanley Bruce gets elected, the pro-worker part of his programme would be enough to keep out conservative capitalism from America. America has only two choices now, either it keeps to welfare, and find ways to deepen and expand on it over time, or it turns hard communist. With a large and influential Communist opposition Free market and the like is out of the question.

 

[Yudishtira]

I'm pretty sure arresting the leaders of a party that had some members trying to assassinate the president and some members committing voter fraud is constitutional. Banning the party is also legal because it is illegal to state a wish for or like of the assassination of a government official. I'm not saying that all of the communists are bad, it's just that the actions of some and the rabble-rousing of others makes the arrests legal.

The above quote is included solely for context. I don't wish to engage the criminal capitalists or their lackeys in debate. I address myself to the courageous, honest people of America, who think for themselves, and thus wish to be free permanently of their criminal capitalist oppressors.

Arresting those suspected of involvement in any murder or assassination attempt is of course quite proper.

Imprisoning them indefinitely without trial is utterly tyrannical.

Arresting the leaders of a party (and banning the party) because a party member or associate is suspected of a crime is likewise tyrannical.

Pliped- Note what he said about Tyrants in sheeps clothing. That implies that he believes they were terrible leaders who didn't follow the Constitution. He didn't say anything about them being legitimately elected or not.

Thank you comrade DKVM. Wilson gave no sign when elected that he was - or was to become - a tyrant. It is perfectly possible for a tyrant to either
i) be elected by deceit in not showing their true colors; or
ii) become tyrannical subsequent to election

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

-moved-

 

[Pliped]

We have had presidents elected through their party votes rather than by having the majority of personal votes before and there was no mention of this is government style, so I would be surprised if there was a change this time just because it was a communist who had the most personal votes.

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Bruce got all the party votes in the end, it's just that during the Socialist Convention, who to be nominated was debated and people eventually settled on Bruce.

 

[adhiraj.bose]

Well I was just thinking that unless contrary is stated, the system we're running here in game would be the same as the USA in the real world. And the votes we garner as players would correspond to number of seats divided in proportion. That way, the side with a substantial number of votes would be able to influence the house of representatives and senate. In this case the Communists have around 36% of the votes, that would mean Communists are 36% in the house of representatives and proportional number in the senate. This would make it difficult to pass some laws which require 2/3rd majority.

[Note : I have only a cursory idea of how the US political system works. So if I made a mistake in understanding someone who knows better could correct me]

 

[GreekAnalyzer]

Our Congress is elected in separate elections. So the Communists would have however many representatives are elected in the other elections. Also (sadly) we don't have a proportional system.

 

[TheNoob]

I don't really know how I feel about Bruce becoming president, but I'll be willing to give him a chance. Hopefully he'll actually do something to calm the radical groups attacking each other.

 

[Moai_Spammer]

bruce won through the good ole hanging chad eh?

as long as he's better than bush, i'm happy

 

[CaterpillarKing]

Oh no real politics! It is a shame that Foster lost but I'm glad it was to Bruce.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk