Overthrowing the United States Government

reply to post by ALightinDarkness


I have kept the case at the Federal level. I think the State level of government is the best choice with Federal oversight only on common goals of all States. Common defense, trade, foreign treaties, etc; should be the only place the Federal Government is involved with individuals.

I have no problems with a State level government. As a group, these are more responsive people to the public needs. A city government is the best form as you have direct citizen interaction and politicians tend to listen about your concerns.

As for the studies about privatization, you need to look at who drove the work, not the results of the study. Management always drove for privatizing while labor always brought up the cases you cite. Managers always become contracting officials, so their jobs are protected. It happens all the time, but you will learn this.

Competitive contracting with the existing workers competing against other private contractors does not always result in the private contractor winning nor does it mean minimum wage jobs with no benefits replacing good paying jobs and excellent benefits. It just means the taxpayer wins at having the least cost service for the work needing done. The real question that needs to be explored but never asked, "if there is a contract option, should the Government be involved with this from the start?" Seems to me that if it is subject to contracting, it's not a GIN organization.

Before you respond read the following paragraph.

I have seen good contracts and bad contracts. It's not the fault of the contracting official, nor the contract specialist; but of the mandate driven by Washington to privatize everything not deemed to be GIN (Government in nature) within the different Departments. It seems a little silly to have private companies in Iraq performing DoD functions with logistics and even some security details, but this is what Washington is driving; who do you blame, it's the bureaucracy at work. The policy makers and non-elected people who took good intentions and skewed them into their own vision. These are the people who really need to kicked out.

Really enjoyed the fire department analogy. This would be a GIN position as would the police. More importantly, this is the local level government job that seems to work best.

We agree on some and disagree on other stuff, this is what America should be about. Forget the education, get a real job and then you'll receive a real education for free.

reply to post by o22a6ar

You do not overthrow the government you assimalate(sp) it just as ron pauls campaign has switched from electing him president to electing others to congress.Once you have taken over the house you pretty much have it.If the senate doesnot straighten out at that point you start impeachment hearings and if need be you charge them with treason for swearing an oath to the constitution then ignoring that oath.The only problem with the plan is time is not on our side.
The powers that be are trying to rid themselves of the constitution and it'll be a race we the people can't afford to lose.As for me it won't much matter I'm an old man and I really don't expect to see my liberty returned.The best I can do is to vote for canidates who believe in the constitution and hope for the sake of our country we are not to late.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
An excellent description of why the government should be stripped to a bare minimum at every level.

Agreed. The problem being, of course, that you don't seem to understand what constitutes the "bare minimum."

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
It is not simply an individual's opinion. The Founders foresaw the danger of a government that did not respond to the will of the People or was fundamentally at odds with the Constitutional rights and best interests of the People. That is why the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution, so that a government that sees itself as the power of the authority is removed in favour of a Constitutional government that recognises that its power derives from the People, from the consent of the governed. Because the opposition to the current government is not merely the opinion of one angry man but rather represents the will of the People (at about 70 percent of public judgment at the moment in the USA), it does represent a call to arms; and, because there is great wisdom in the People, many avenues will be discussed (as they are here) and many decisions will be taken. It is the US Constitutional process at its most fundamental level.

Completely wrong. It is simply your opinion and the minds of a few, who are upset that the government doesn't bend to an extremely narrow and conspiracy oriented worldview. The Founders foresaw the need to build in redress of grievances into the constitution to ensure reactionaries and war mongers didn't try to start a revolution every 6 months. The fact that you refuse to use these avenues to redress your grievances is not the governments fault, nor is the fact that your likely to lose (because your perception that the government should bend to YOUR will is wrong).

I would love to know what poll data you have where 70% of Americans answered yes to the following question: "The country is in shambles and there is no way to repair it, should we have a violent revolution to overthrow the government?" If your going to make audacious claims, cite your source. Yet again, your desire to play Rambo does not constitute a call to arms.

Sometimes, your wrong. You want to bend the will of government to your liking, and it is not up to you do so. If we had a revolt every time someone didn't get their way, there would be no U.S. to speak of. Its sort of like a three year old child stomping his feet because he doesn't get what he wants, except this time you want to give the three year old child a gun and tell him to go shoot people.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
No, it is a slow moving beast because it is bloated, inefficient, self-perpetuating creature that should be put out of its misery.

This shows a complete lack of research on your part. Some parts of the government are quite fast, others slow, still others are slow thanks to the constitution which you are currently trying to stomp on. The constitution set up a system where gridlock is not only possible, but it happens often. I am amazed that you can in one hand try to act like you support the constitution and then turn around and defecate on it.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
There were Royalist/Loyalists at the time of the U.S. Revolution too. No suprise there.

You shame all of the real revolutionaries in our history by even comparing them with this tin-foil hat rambo movement.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness

Originally posted by chris_stibrany
the whole reason this thread got started is because those things don't work.

Originally posted by chris_stibrany
you really are too naive. or at least you have far too much trust in your government! that's too bad...

The irony of someone who has no idea about the 2000 elections nor how the court system works calling anyone else naive is delicious. I'll trust the government before I trust a bunch of Rambo-wannabes trying to overthrow the government because it doesn't bow to their narrow, conspiracy oriented fantasy view of the world.

[edit on 5-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

its not worth my time to waste responding to all of your so called facts but the one thing that needs addressing above all is you shouldn't assume that people here are advocating violence and are all or even some of us 'rambo wannabes' . to assume makes an @$$ out of you and me! i despise violence thats one main reason to try and change politics, to stop america exporting violence all over the world with our violence which is pre-emptive or our pre-emptive idiotic policies. its one thing to call someone naive but to lump me in with a bunch of violent gun toting wacko rambo wannabes is going too far sir. good day.

reply to post by jackinthebox


why is it called treason if you are just marching in a political demonstration like people have been doing since the start of the war? make that 'war' . especially considering this is nonviolent demonstration which is all most people in this thread including me are advocating, thats not illegal its called for in the constitution

reply to post by hinky


I agree with you about the place of state/federal governments. The lower the level of government, the more responsive - usually.

There is a ton of privatization literature in Public Administration Review and Journal of Public Administration Theory. These are the top two journals in Public Administration and are peer reviewed. The results are extremely mixed. Privatization is one tool in the toolbox, but it is not the be all end all. It can - and has - caused complete disaster and wasted a ton of money when used in certain contexts. In the case studies that are not peer reviewed, a simple look at the methodology will show if any bias is occurring. Simply because a interest group runs a study does not mean it is invalid - however, it does mean looking at the methodology section before taking the conclusions seriously (which I do). However, the bulk of stuff I read comes from peer reviewed sources to begin with.

Everything could be contracted. That doesn't mean everything should be contracted. Non "government in nature" contracts still fail often for several reasons:

1) Lowest bidder contracting means service delivery will suffer unless performance measures are built into the contracting (which is very rare). There are several areas where quality matters over price.

2) Citizens will complain to the government when something goes wrong, even though if its contracted out the government often has no direct control over operations. Complaints ensue when they are directed to contact the contractor directly.

3) The re-entry barrier after privatizing is very high. If a something is contracted out and then fails, the government has to buy back all the equipment and personnel. Even if performance bonds are used to lessen the costs, it won't be enough to cover re-entry costs in most cases.

I do like the term "government in nature," but there would be endless fighting about what that constitutes beyond the obvious.

I do laugh at people who think PhD programs are somehow not "real jobs." You either never been in a PhD program, or went to a bad one. I would absolutely love to get paid for the 60 hours (or more) of school/research work I do. And getting holidays off. And vacation. And to think, since I already two part time professional jobs, I'd have a ton of free time! A "real job" is quite easy.

Originally posted by EYEOFEAGLE
I am telling all of you on this thead, if we want to get the attention of the American people and the world for that matter, we must organize a TRUCKERS STRIKE across this country.

Everything in this country revolves around the trucking industry. EVERYTHING! Shut this down and someone is going to listen to who ever is talking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Everything we eat, wear, or buy off of a shelf in a store gets there by truck! EVERYTHING! Think about the affects that would have on getting what the "WE THE PEOPLE" want back in this country!

If you guys want to get serious about things, this is the way to do it!

Eye of Eagle

reply to post by pooty


Well maybe someday I'll figure out how to reply to a post.

While your right about a truckers strike bringing the country to it's knees you will never see it.I was an owner/operator.I can tell you from experience I traded money for freedom.If an O/O shuts his truck down for a week he loses it.War has already been initiated on the O/Os.Diesel fuel has always been cheaper than gasoline because it takes less to refine yet today it costs more than gasoline.You have to convince company drivers to shut down as they have no investment in the truck or the fuel it uses.Company drivers have not been hit by the rising costs of fuel.They are still making good money.You will get a few to agree something has to be done but the majority will keep on truckin.The only way I see this working is to convince the few to park thier company trucks on the interstate highways and block other trucks from using them.But in that case the few need to be quite a few.

Originally posted by brickhouse32
I think the problem with something like this is people are generally apathetic. As long as they have an easy job and a lawn to cut most people they don't want to rock the boat. You need some sort of leader like Ron Paul or Martin Luther King to have a large following and to make real change.

There doesn't seem to be any real way to pull the rug out from under the government to institute another one, sure there is impeachment but even that is dependent on good people making tough decisions. I still don't understand why Bill Clinton got impeached for messing around with a women and Bush is doing so much far worse and still haven't been impeached.

If there were a good clever way to take back the country I think Ron Paul would have exploited it but even his great movement is simply making gatherings and peaceful protests.

I have to agree with you here and I'm sad to say my daughter is a first class example of this.As long as she has the money to buy some new toys now and then she sees no problem with pelosi one of the most liberal dems blocking the impeachment of bush.She knows most of our politicans are corrupt however she has no intention of rocking the boat just because it's having a negative effect on someone else.The fact of the matter is people like her will do absolutly nothing until the government slaps them hard enough to wake them up and that maybe far to late to do anything.

I really think the best way to take the country back would have to be for everyone to not use it's currency, but good luck on that one. Most people simply don't care enough about anything or anyone to do anything about it.

I think the best way to overthrow our government is to stop talking about overthrowing the government period! Individual effort is going to get you nowhere because you can easily be ignored, get a couple thousand people together with a gigantic copy of the constitution and voice your concerns eventually you'll get media coverage which will help further the cause... I think a lot of people are waiting for this to happen it's just nobody is willing to take the initiative.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness


I would love to know what poll data you have where 70% of Americans answered yes to the following question: "The country is in shambles and there is no way to repair it, should we have a violent revolution to overthrow the government?"

I have never posed such an argument or idea.

I have proposed the use of General Strikes to effect change.

I have also made clear the reasons why the removal of a criminal government by the action of the People is a Constitutional action originating in the Constitutional right of the People to keep and bear arms.

Bush CNN rating, Pollingreport.com, Zogby data: Bush approval at 24%, Congressional Job Approvaletc.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness


You want to bend the will of government to your liking, and it is not up to you do so. If we had a revolt every time someone didn't get their way, there would be no U.S. to speak of. Its sort of like a three year old child stomping his feet because he doesn't get what he wants, except this time you want to give the three year old child a gun and tell him to go shoot people.

Slander.

I have done no such thing nor have I advocated anything close.

There are alot of ideas of violence being written. That would be the end of the revolution right there.

Just remember how our country was originally brought into focus.
"No taxation without representation". If we generally feel that we are not being represented and only the corporate interests are being heard. then maybe (and here I go to prison), we as a whole do not pay taxes.

I understand that this could never work unless hundreds of thousands and even more people did not pay taxes at one time. The money lost would be enormous, the political ramifications unknown, but the court and and other criminal systems would be so overwhelmed that they could not respond immediately or completely.

The MSM, and I know how some of the people here feel about them, would have to listen just because of the amount of people involved. It would become a yearly thing just because of the message itself.


No Taxation without Representation!!!

Originally posted by hinky
reply to post by ALightinDarkness

 

As for the studies about privatization, you need to look at who drove the work, not the results of the study.

This is true of studies on most things whether it is milk safety or the safety of aspartame -- one must look first at who was behind the study. If it is a government agency, then one looks deeper into affiliations, contracts etc. that show the "ties that bind" between special interest and the agency.

The same can be said of polling data such as data about USA citizens wanting a different kind of government in operation than the one currently on offer from Bush/Cheney and the Congress. When one begins to find multiple attestation across polling responses from polling organisations of repute, then a deeper legitimacy accrues to the data.

The desire to overturn the direction of the current USA government is one that has multiple attestation now even if not on specifics of how that should be accomplished.

This thread shows a desire to puzzle out how to change something gone wrong with the US federal government. In the end it is a worthy exercise if some strategies can be developed and actions undertaken that can effect an overthrow of the current direction and a reassertion of commonly held expectations of a Constitutional Republic.

I think something has to be done with our government.

Well think this is why he wants to overthrow our government:

(1)Bush is a tyrant that destroyed Iraqi lives
(2)He sedomised children with sticks, vagina ruining acid and raped children (legit child

molestation), so while he doesn't want people downloading child porn, hes doing it, which is

hypocritical.
(3)Our government sold us out to the corporations
(4)Even my own social security keeps getting reduced while gas prices are skyrocketing.
(5)Jobs keep getting destroyed
(6)Gas keeps skyrocketing, while ethanol stinks while it uses coal and will only reduce oil

consumption by 7%
(7)Bush called our constitution a god damed piece of paper, why else wouldn't people want to

hate our government
(8)Bush wants pedophiles, drug dealers, and criminals to run our country and good people to

be thrown in concentration camps (isn't gitmo bay a concentration camp)
(9)He stole our elections 2 times in a row
(10)He has been reportly working for skulls n bones, bilderbergs, and other dangerous secret

societies
(11)Our own government is planning to exterminate our people if it's not overthrown so it's

either people get themselfs killed fighting a civil war or worldwide people will be

exterminated until the population reaches 5,000,000 by the Georgia Guidestones, what

more proof you need that the U.S (if it hasn't already) are beginning a human being

extermination projects.

So thats why he wants to overthrow our government, they want to start a ugenics, suicide

pact, human molestation/exploitation projects, and massive human exterminization projects.

We have got to let our government know it's unextepable to do undiscloable eugenics tests on unwilling subjects, it's unacceptable to murder people to lower the population, it's wrong to make our government our god and make the pope our new Jesus Christ, Hes just a human, the real Jesus is watching whats going on right now.

Originally posted by capgrup
I understand that this could never work unless hundreds of thousands and even more people did not pay taxes at one time. The money lost would be enormous, the political ramifications unknown, but the court and and other criminal systems would be so overwhelmed that they could not respond immediately or completely.

Perhaps this is why KBR and others have been hired by the federal government of the USA to build detention camps across the USA.

Violence naturally follows collapses in civil order, but what many of us are advocating on this thread is the farthest thing from random violence. I return to my suggestions of General Strikes as an example.

It is important to understand under what conditions the Founders insisted that a well-armed militia of the People was an appropriate response to a federal government that had walked off the constitutional farm.

[edit on 6/7/08 by Pellevoisin]