info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Civil War: a Smattering of Ignorance by Jack Minzey
37 views
Skip to first unread message
raykeller
Jun 6, 2018, 11:49:38 AM6/6/18
to
A
Smattering of Ignorance
A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the long line of books and treatises which he had written.
Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
This is the last of his works:
Civil War
How do civil wars happen?
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 is 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 [the judge] says 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. 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 Democrat professional government.
A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the long line of books and treatises which he had written.
Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
This is the last of his works:
Civil War
How do civil wars happen?
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 is 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 [the judge] says 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. 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 Democrat professional government.
Nicodemus
Jun 6, 2018, 4:44:36 PM6/6/18
to
"raykeller"cross posting pig
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote in news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am trying to figure out what that smattering of ignorance is? What
side of his argument do you agree with and what side do you disagree?
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote in news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me:
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
side of his argument do you agree with and what side do you disagree?
Winston_Smith
Jun 6, 2018, 6:32:23 PM6/6/18
to
On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, Nicodemus (insert insult here) wrote:
>"raykeller"cross posting pig wrote
>
>> A Smattering of Ignorance
>I am trying to figure out what that smattering of ignorance is? What
>side of his argument do you agree with and what side do you disagree?
Try a search engine instead of "trying to figure".
http://www.worldcat.org/title/smattering-of-ignorance/oclc/601647
A smattering of ignorance. A series of essays on Oscar Levant's
various life experiences, his early days, his studies (which included
years of lessons with none other than Arnold Schoenberg), his
encounters with famous musicians and show business personalities, such
as Harpo Marx, and above all, his relationship with George Gershwin
and his family.
>"raykeller"cross posting pig wrote
>
>> A Smattering of Ignorance
>I am trying to figure out what that smattering of ignorance is? What
>side of his argument do you agree with and what side do you disagree?
http://www.worldcat.org/title/smattering-of-ignorance/oclc/601647
A smattering of ignorance. A series of essays on Oscar Levant's
various life experiences, his early days, his studies (which included
years of lessons with none other than Arnold Schoenberg), his
encounters with famous musicians and show business personalities, such
as Harpo Marx, and above all, his relationship with George Gershwin
and his family.
Steve from Colorado
Jun 6, 2018, 7:48:30 PM6/6/18
to
On 06/06/2018 09:49 AM, raykeller wrote:
> *
> *A Smattering of Ignorance*
>
> /A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
> long line of books and treatises which he had written.//
> //
> //Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.//
> //
> //Professionally, Jack was head of the Department of Education at
> /
> /This is the last of his works:/
>
> *Civil War*
> *Have no doubt, we're in a civil war between conservative volunteer
> government and a leftist Democrat professional government.**
> *
> *
I nominate this for best post of the year so far.
--
”Why should freedom of speech and freedom of press be allowed? Why
should a government which is doing what it believes to be right allow
itself to be criticized? It would not allow opposition by lethal
weapons. Ideas are much more fatal things than guns. Why should any man
be allowed to buy a printing press and disseminate pernicious opinions
calculated to embarrass the government?" -- Vladimer Lenin
globalgulag.us
> *
> *A Smattering of Ignorance*
>
> /A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
> long line of books and treatises which he had written.//
> //
> //Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.//
> //
> //Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.//
> books, most of which were on the topic of Education and the Government
> /
> /This is the last of his works:/
>
> *Civil War*
> government and a leftist Democrat professional government.**
> *
> *
I nominate this for best post of the year so far.
--
”Why should freedom of speech and freedom of press be allowed? Why
should a government which is doing what it believes to be right allow
itself to be criticized? It would not allow opposition by lethal
weapons. Ideas are much more fatal things than guns. Why should any man
be allowed to buy a printing press and disseminate pernicious opinions
calculated to embarrass the government?" -- Vladimer Lenin
globalgulag.us
PaxPerPoten
Jun 6, 2018, 10:54:19 PM6/6/18
to
>
--
It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard
the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all
ages who mean to govern well, but *They mean to govern*. They promise to
be good masters, *but they mean to be masters*. Daniel Webster
Steve from Colorado
Jun 7, 2018, 9:36:54 AM6/7/18
to
I want a link.
For those who will question it-Snopes stated this-and indeed, the much
longer
variation is found here:
Friday, January 26, 2018
This Civil War - My South Carolina Tea Party Convention Speech- Posted
by Daniel Greenfield
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2018/01/this-civil-war-my-south-carolina-tea.html
[snip] Now Trump comes into office and starts enforcing immigration laws
again. And California announces it’s a sanctuary state and passes a law
punishing businesses that cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement.
So what do we have here?
It’s illegal for states to enforce immigration law because that’s the
province of the Federal government. But it’s legal for states to ban the
Federal government from enforcing immigration law.
The only consistent pattern here is that the left decided to make it
illegal to enforce immigration law. ...
---
[S
nopes snip
] ....
the essay attributed to Minzey is actually a shortened version of a
speech delivered by Daniel Greenfield (a conservative author whose work
can be found in publications such as FrontPageMag.com) at the South
Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention in January 2018: ...
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-jack-minzey-modern-civil-war/
Also, the Haddonfield, New Jersey Republican Club had this . . .
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1677664915653838&id=572648049488869
!Jones
Jun 7, 2018, 11:03:08 AM6/7/18
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 07:36:51 -0600, in talk.politics.guns Steve from
Colorado <S...@cocks.net> wrote:
> the essay attributed to Minzey is actually a shortened version of a
>speech delivered by Daniel Greenfield (a conservative author whose work
>can be found in publications such as FrontPageMag.com) at the South
>Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention in January 2018:? ...?
I'd refer these people to: "How Democracies Die" by Steven Levitsky
and Daniel Ziblatt
It's on Amazon; however, I suggest your local library.
For those of us with an aversion to actually *reading* something,
there's a C-span video:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?440037-1/how-democracies-die
Jones
--
Quod si non verum est, non dicere est.
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 07:36:51 -0600, in talk.politics.guns Steve from
Colorado <S...@cocks.net> wrote:
> the essay attributed to Minzey is actually a shortened version of a
>speech delivered by Daniel Greenfield (a conservative author whose work
>can be found in publications such as FrontPageMag.com) at the South
>
>https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-jack-minzey-modern-civil-war/
>
>Also, the Haddonfield, New Jersey Republican Club had this . . .
>
>https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1677664915653838&id=572648049488869
Good work! You nailed that one.
>https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-jack-minzey-modern-civil-war/
>
>Also, the Haddonfield, New Jersey Republican Club had this . . .
>
>https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1677664915653838&id=572648049488869
I'd refer these people to: "How Democracies Die" by Steven Levitsky
and Daniel Ziblatt
It's on Amazon; however, I suggest your local library.
For those of us with an aversion to actually *reading* something,
there's a C-span video:
https://www.c-span.org/video/?440037-1/how-democracies-die
Jones
--
Quod si non verum est, non dicere est.
Byker
Jun 7, 2018, 8:33:27 PM6/7/18
to
"raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote in message news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me...
> A Smattering of Ignorance
>
> A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
> long line of books and treatises which he had written.
>
> Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
>
> Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
>
> This is the last of his works:
>
> Civil War
>
> How do civil wars happen?
Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
Here's his latest screed:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
BY ROBERT REICH
6/6/18
Imagine that an impeachment resolution against Trump passes the House. Trump
claims it’s the work of the “deep state.” Fox News’s Sean Hannity demands
every honest patriot take to the streets. Right-wing social media call for
war. As insurrection spreads, Trump commands the armed forces to side with
the “patriots.”
Or it’s November 2020 and Trump has lost the election. He charges voter
fraud, claiming that the “deep state” organized tens of millions of illegal
immigrants to vote against him, and says he has an obligation not to step
down. Demonstrations and riots ensue. Trump commands the armed forces to put
them down.
If these sound far-fetched, consider Trump’s torrent of lies, his admiration
for foreign dictators, his off-hand jokes about being “president for life”
(Xi Xinping “was able to do that,” he told admirers in March. “I think it’s
great. Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day."), and his increasing
invocation of a “deep state” plot against him.
The United States is premised on an agreement about how to deal with our
disagreements. It’s called the Constitution. We trust our system of
government enough that we abide by its outcomes even though we may disagree
with them. Only once in our history—in 1861—did enough of us distrust the
system so much we succumbed to civil war.
But what happens if a president claims our system is no longer trustworthy?
Last week Trump accused the “deep state” of embedding a spy in his campaign
for political purposes. “Spygate” soon unraveled after Republican House
Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy dismissed it, but truth has never silenced
Trump for long.
Trump’s immediate goal is to discredit Robert Mueller’s investigation. But
his strategy appears to go beyond that. In tweets and on Fox News, Trump’s
overall mission is repeatedly described as a “war on the deep state.”
Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now
In his 2013 novel A Delicate Truth, John le Carré describes the “deep state”
as a moneyed élite—“non-governmental insiders from banking, industry, and
commerce” who rule in secret.
America already may be close to that sort of deep state. As Princeton
professor Martin Gilens and Professor Benjamin Page of Northwestern
University found after analyzing 1,799 policy issues that came before
Congress, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a
miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public
policy.”
Instead, Gilens and Page concluded, lawmakers respond to the policy demands
of wealthy individuals and moneyed business interests.
Gilens’ and Page’s data come from the period 1981 to 2002, before the
Supreme Court opened the floodgates to big money in its “Citizens United”
decision. It’s likely to be far worse now.
So when Trump says the political system is “rigged,” he’s not far off the
mark. Bernie Sanders said the same thing.
A Monmouth Poll released in March found that a bipartisan majority of
Americans already believes that an unelected “deep state” is manipulating
national policy.
But here’s the crucial distinction. Trump’s “deep state” isn’t the moneyed
interests. It’s a supposed cabal of government workers, intelligence
personnel, researchers, experts, scientists, professors, and journalists—the
people who make, advise about, analyze, or report on public policy.
In the real world, they’re supposed to be truth-tellers. In Trump’s
conspiracy fantasy they’re out to get him—in cahoots with former members of
the Obama administration, liberals, and Democrats.
Trump has never behaved as if he thought he was president of all Americans,
anyway. He’s acted as if he’s only the president of the 63 million who voted
for him—certainly not the 66 million who voted for Hillary or anyone who
supported Obama.
Nor has he shown any interest in unifying the nation, or speaking to the
nation as a whole. Instead, he periodically throws red meat to his
overwhelmingly white, rural, and older base.
And he has repeatedly shown he couldn’t care less about the Constitution.
So what happens if Trump is about to be removed—by impeachment or even an
election?
In early April, Sean Hannity predicted that if impeachment began, “there’s
going to be two sides of this that are fighting and dividing this country at
a level we’ve never seen”—“those that stand for truth and those that
literally buy into the corrupt deep state attacks against a duly elected
president.”
Last summer, Trump consigliore Roger Stone warned of “an insurrection like
you’ve never seen,” and claimed any politician who voted to oust Trump
“would be endangering their own life.”
A second civil war? Probably not. But the way Trump and his defenders are
behaving, it’s not absurd to imagine serious social unrest. That’s how low
he’s taken us.
http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-second-american-civil-war-opinion-958450
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote in message news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me...
> A Smattering of Ignorance
>
> A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
> long line of books and treatises which he had written.
>
> Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
>
> Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
>
> This is the last of his works:
>
> Civil War
>
> How do civil wars happen?
Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
Here's his latest screed:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
BY ROBERT REICH
6/6/18
Imagine that an impeachment resolution against Trump passes the House. Trump
claims it’s the work of the “deep state.” Fox News’s Sean Hannity demands
every honest patriot take to the streets. Right-wing social media call for
war. As insurrection spreads, Trump commands the armed forces to side with
the “patriots.”
Or it’s November 2020 and Trump has lost the election. He charges voter
fraud, claiming that the “deep state” organized tens of millions of illegal
immigrants to vote against him, and says he has an obligation not to step
down. Demonstrations and riots ensue. Trump commands the armed forces to put
them down.
If these sound far-fetched, consider Trump’s torrent of lies, his admiration
for foreign dictators, his off-hand jokes about being “president for life”
(Xi Xinping “was able to do that,” he told admirers in March. “I think it’s
great. Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day."), and his increasing
invocation of a “deep state” plot against him.
The United States is premised on an agreement about how to deal with our
disagreements. It’s called the Constitution. We trust our system of
government enough that we abide by its outcomes even though we may disagree
with them. Only once in our history—in 1861—did enough of us distrust the
system so much we succumbed to civil war.
But what happens if a president claims our system is no longer trustworthy?
Last week Trump accused the “deep state” of embedding a spy in his campaign
for political purposes. “Spygate” soon unraveled after Republican House
Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy dismissed it, but truth has never silenced
Trump for long.
Trump’s immediate goal is to discredit Robert Mueller’s investigation. But
his strategy appears to go beyond that. In tweets and on Fox News, Trump’s
overall mission is repeatedly described as a “war on the deep state.”
Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now
In his 2013 novel A Delicate Truth, John le Carré describes the “deep state”
as a moneyed élite—“non-governmental insiders from banking, industry, and
commerce” who rule in secret.
America already may be close to that sort of deep state. As Princeton
professor Martin Gilens and Professor Benjamin Page of Northwestern
University found after analyzing 1,799 policy issues that came before
Congress, “the preferences of the average American appear to have only a
miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public
policy.”
Instead, Gilens and Page concluded, lawmakers respond to the policy demands
of wealthy individuals and moneyed business interests.
Gilens’ and Page’s data come from the period 1981 to 2002, before the
Supreme Court opened the floodgates to big money in its “Citizens United”
decision. It’s likely to be far worse now.
So when Trump says the political system is “rigged,” he’s not far off the
mark. Bernie Sanders said the same thing.
A Monmouth Poll released in March found that a bipartisan majority of
Americans already believes that an unelected “deep state” is manipulating
national policy.
But here’s the crucial distinction. Trump’s “deep state” isn’t the moneyed
interests. It’s a supposed cabal of government workers, intelligence
personnel, researchers, experts, scientists, professors, and journalists—the
people who make, advise about, analyze, or report on public policy.
In the real world, they’re supposed to be truth-tellers. In Trump’s
conspiracy fantasy they’re out to get him—in cahoots with former members of
the Obama administration, liberals, and Democrats.
Trump has never behaved as if he thought he was president of all Americans,
anyway. He’s acted as if he’s only the president of the 63 million who voted
for him—certainly not the 66 million who voted for Hillary or anyone who
supported Obama.
Nor has he shown any interest in unifying the nation, or speaking to the
nation as a whole. Instead, he periodically throws red meat to his
overwhelmingly white, rural, and older base.
And he has repeatedly shown he couldn’t care less about the Constitution.
So what happens if Trump is about to be removed—by impeachment or even an
election?
In early April, Sean Hannity predicted that if impeachment began, “there’s
going to be two sides of this that are fighting and dividing this country at
a level we’ve never seen”—“those that stand for truth and those that
literally buy into the corrupt deep state attacks against a duly elected
president.”
Last summer, Trump consigliore Roger Stone warned of “an insurrection like
you’ve never seen,” and claimed any politician who voted to oust Trump
“would be endangering their own life.”
A second civil war? Probably not. But the way Trump and his defenders are
behaving, it’s not absurd to imagine serious social unrest. That’s how low
he’s taken us.
http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-second-american-civil-war-opinion-958450
Gunner Asch
Jun 8, 2018, 9:36:28 AM6/8/18
to
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 19:33:21 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>> How do civil wars happen?
>
>Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>Here's his latest screed:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
Id have to say that Reich got it utterly wrong.
>> How do civil wars happen?
>
>Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>Here's his latest screed:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
Its the Democrats that are pushing the US towards a civil war. A
civil war that they cannot win..and one that will cause millions of
Democrats to be simply extinguished like vermin.
(VBG)
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
raykeller
Jun 8, 2018, 11:46:04 AM6/8/18
to
On 6/8/2018 6:36 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 19:33:21 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
>>> How do civil wars happen?
>>
>> Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>> Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>> violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>> his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>> Here's his latest screed:
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
>
> Id have to say that Reich got it utterly wrong.
He got it completely right, you lying chiseling dole-scrounging cocksucker.
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 19:33:21 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>
>>> How do civil wars happen?
>>
>> Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>> Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>> violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>> his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>> Here's his latest screed:
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
>
> Id have to say that Reich got it utterly wrong.
--
Mark Wieber is a dole scrounger, a congenital liar, and a chiseler.
!Jones
Jun 8, 2018, 2:11:27 PM6/8/18
to
x-no-idiots: yes
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:46:04 -0700, in talk.politics.guns raykeller
<i'll_stick_my_2_cm_cock_in_Wieber's_ass_in_3_2_1@I_is_a_looser.con>
wrote:
It is unlikely that America would have a "civil war", per se. Heck,
the whole country is nothing but cheeseburger-fed fat-bottoms with
guns and guns won't fight a war any more than they prevent crime.
One of the preconditions for civil war is regional cohesion and we
don't have that. Even in "deep red" country, all that means is a
slight majority. In 1860, the South was almost unanimously united
behind their wants.
In 1860, there was still a memory of states being (more or less)
independent entities; today, that memory has faded over five or six
generations.
So, no; a civil war is pretty much out of the question. What we might
see is what I would term "societal disintegration" which would
essentially be school shooters on a large scale. Right now, we're
seeing one a week or so; what if we enacted strong gun control and it
sudenly jumped to fifteen or twenty a day? That would certainly
trigger confiscation and a call to arms by the gunners... and all of
the gunners might run outside and start shooting at anything that
moved.
But that's not a civil war.
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:46:04 -0700, in talk.politics.guns raykeller
<i'll_stick_my_2_cm_cock_in_Wieber's_ass_in_3_2_1@I_is_a_looser.con>
wrote:
the whole country is nothing but cheeseburger-fed fat-bottoms with
guns and guns won't fight a war any more than they prevent crime.
One of the preconditions for civil war is regional cohesion and we
don't have that. Even in "deep red" country, all that means is a
slight majority. In 1860, the South was almost unanimously united
behind their wants.
In 1860, there was still a memory of states being (more or less)
independent entities; today, that memory has faded over five or six
generations.
So, no; a civil war is pretty much out of the question. What we might
see is what I would term "societal disintegration" which would
essentially be school shooters on a large scale. Right now, we're
seeing one a week or so; what if we enacted strong gun control and it
sudenly jumped to fifteen or twenty a day? That would certainly
trigger confiscation and a call to arms by the gunners... and all of
the gunners might run outside and start shooting at anything that
moved.
But that's not a civil war.
Steve from Colorado
Jun 8, 2018, 3:15:40 PM6/8/18
to
On 06/07/2018 06:33 PM, Byker wrote:
> "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote in message news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> A Smattering of Ignorance
>>
>> A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
>> long line of books and treatises which he had written.
>>
>> Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
>>
>> Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
>>
>> This is the last of his works:
>>
>> Civil War
>>
>> How do civil wars happen?
>
> Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
> Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
> violence" as a "political strategy"
It seems the former US Labor Secretary believes that Americans have such
> "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote in message news:pf8vqh$544$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> A Smattering of Ignorance
>>
>> A few days ago Jack Minzey sent what was to be the final chapter in the
>> long line of books and treatises which he had written.
>>
>> Jack passed away Sunday, 8 April 2018.
>>
>> Professionally, Jack was head of the Department 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.
>>
>> This is the last of his works:
>>
>> Civil War
>>
>> How do civil wars happen?
>
> Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
> Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
> violence" as a "political strategy"
short term memories that we have forgotten all the Antifa thugs who were
assaulting Trump supporters at Trump rallies before the election and who
later rioted and disrupted conservative speakers at Berkeley and in
Seattle and other venues. It seems that these Antifa thugs just
appeared out of nowhere as soon as Trump won the Republican nomination
and then the national election. Reich is a liar.
>and quietly inciting a conflict between
> his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
and perhaps Robert DeNiro with the President.
> Here's his latest screed:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
>
> BY ROBERT REICH
> 6/6/18
>
> Imagine that an impeachment resolution against Trump passes the House.
> Trump
> claims it’s the work of the “deep state.” Fox News’s Sean Hannity demands
> every honest patriot take to the streets. Right-wing social media call for
> war. As insurrection spreads, Trump commands the armed forces to side with
> the “patriots.”
>
> Or it’s November 2020 and Trump has lost the election. He charges voter
> fraud, claiming that the “deep state” organized tens of millions of illegal
> immigrants to vote against him, and says he has an obligation not to step
> down. Demonstrations and riots ensue. Trump commands the armed forces to
> put
> them down.
collusion" and state laws that rightfully required proper voter ID in
order to vote "lost" Hillary the election -- rather than blaming her
"super delegate" shenanigans (which stole the rightful nomination from
Bernie Sanders) and Bangazi. Robert Reich wants to spin a yarn of "what
if" instead of just telling it like it is.
>
> If these sound far-fetched, consider Trump’s torrent of lies, his
> admiration
> for foreign dictators,
> his off-hand jokes about being “president for life”
> (Xi Xinping “was able to do that,” he told admirers in March. “I think it’s
> great. Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day."), and his increasing
> invocation of a “deep state” plot against him.
dozen Republican lawmakers at a charity baseball game early on in
President Trump's administration is very real, despite Mr. Reich's
attempt to make it all look silly and paranoid. If the assassination
attempt on those Republican congressmen had succeeded, an impeachment
vote would have been possibly successful. The "so-called" deep state
coup would have succeeded had some very brave and competent cops not
shot the Bernie supporter at the baseball game.
>
> The United States is premised on an agreement about how to deal with our
> disagreements. It’s called the Constitution. We trust our system of
> government enough that we abide by its outcomes even though we may disagree
> with them. Only once in our history—in 1861—did enough of us distrust the
> system so much we succumbed to civil war.
the Military Commissions Act and the National Defense Authorization Act
without even reading what was in them -- acts which nullified the Bill
of Rights and Constitution and handed the Chief Executive dictatorial
powers -- it's disingenuous of Robert Reich to bring up the
Constitution, as if it were being respected by the criminals in Washington.
>
> But what happens if a president claims our system is no longer trustworthy?
of pretend, Robert Reich should point at the real culprits.
>
> Last week Trump accused the “deep state” of embedding a spy in his campaign
> for political purposes.
> “Spygate” soon unraveled after Republican House
> Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy dismissed it, but truth has never silenced
> Trump for long.
Baldwin, Madonna, or some late night "comedian" with each talking point.
>
> Trump’s immediate goal is to discredit Robert Mueller’s investigation.
In Trump’s
> conspiracy fantasy they’re out to get him—in cahoots with former members of
> the Obama administration, liberals, and Democrats.
than Fox openly hate the President and endlessly attack him; along with
Silicon Valley CEO's and what pass for major newspapers around the
country. Maxine Waters, Hillary Clinton, Wasserman-Shultz, Jerry Brown,
activist judges, and other "leaders" have worked endlessly to thwart the
President's agenda and engage in character assassination from day one of
the President's administration.
>
> Trump has never behaved as if he thought he was president of all Americans,
> anyway. He’s acted as if he’s only the president of the 63 million who
> voted
> for him—certainly not the 66 million who voted for Hillary or anyone who
> supported Obama.
the person whose ideas they like -- and they expect their man (or woman)
to implement and carry out the policies they campaigned on. We can only
hope that President Trump will build "that wall" and end DACA and bring
back jobs that vanished under unfair trade deals made by past
presidents. Those of us who voted for Trump don't expect or want him to
turn into Hillary.
>
> Nor has he shown any interest in unifying the nation, or speaking to the
> nation as a whole. Instead, he periodically throws red meat to his
> overwhelmingly white, rural, and older base.
Black president -- only to have him empower the SPLC to race bait white
Americans and "train" police departments around the country to see white
Americans as racists, bigots, and haters. Eric Holder, Loretta Lynch and
other assorted Obama appointees managed to heighten racial divisions and
make the election of a Black president appear to be the rise of white
nationalism and "far right extremism." Instead of unifying the nation,
Hussein Obama divided us and set up the climate of fear that put Trump
in the White House.
>
> And he has repeatedly shown he couldn’t care less about the Constitution.
Act, and NDAA care about the Constitution how?
>
> So what happens if Trump is about to be removed—by impeachment or even an
> election?
>
> In early April, Sean Hannity predicted that if impeachment began, “there’s
> going to be two sides of this that are fighting and dividing this
> country at
> a level we’ve never seen”—“those that stand for truth and those that
> literally buy into the corrupt deep state attacks against a duly elected
> president.”
>
> Last summer, Trump consigliore Roger Stone warned of “an insurrection like
> you’ve never seen,” and claimed any politician who voted to oust Trump
> “would be endangering their own life.”
>
> A second civil war? Probably not. But the way Trump and his defenders are
> behaving, it’s not absurd to imagine serious social unrest. That’s how low
> he’s taken us.
defenders have behaved-- threatening to kill the president and burn down
the white house. Reich is a pathetic liar by omission and
misrepresentation of reality. America deserves better than the feeble
minded people Newsweek has writing for them in our time.
>
> http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-second-american-civil-war-opinion-958450
Winston_Smith
Jun 8, 2018, 3:44:24 PM6/8/18
to
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 19:33:21 -0500, "Byker" wrote:
>Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>Here's his latest screed:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
>BY ROBERT REICH
>http://www.newsweek.com/robert-reich-second-american-civil-war-opinion-958450
>Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US Labor
>Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict between
>his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>Here's his latest screed:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
>BY ROBERT REICH
http://robertreich.org/
He served in the administrations of Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy
Carter, and Bill Clinton
https://www.rollingstone.com%2Fpolitics%2Ffeatures%2Frobert-reichs-8-point-plan-for-a-new-democratic-party-w451713
Robert Reich's 8-Point Plan for a New Democratic Party - Rolling Stone
During the 2016 primary, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich was an
outspoken supporter of Bernie Sanders ...
Pretty much says where his opinions come from.
One of the leading cheer leaders for 0bama's bigger and better
"economic easing" after Bush just tried the same thing with no result
except wasted taxpayer money. In fact, 0bama's try was as miserably
bad as Bush's. But Reich thought it was just the ticket.
After 0bama told us it won't get better, this is the new normal, Trump
went to basics and once again the likes of Reich are embarrassed and
trying to change the subject.
#BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 11, 2018, 10:41:58 AM6/11/18
to
>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 19:33:21 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> How do civil wars happen?
>>>
>>> Donald Trump is "trying to start a civil war", according to former US
>>> Labor
>>> Secretary Robert Reich. Reich has accused the President of "licensing
>>> violence" as a "political strategy" and quietly inciting a conflict
>>> between
>>> his core base of White, socially conservative voters and everyone else.
>>> Here's his latest screed:
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> IS TRUMP PUSHING AMERICA TOWARDS A SECOND CIVIL WAR?
WAR.
--
That's Karma
A homeless person can never be lost.
0 new messages