Can it be that the neo cons aren't the least bit afraid of we the people?

[Philosoraptor]

Their arrogance and indifference to us is sometimes startling, but to be expected with the neocons, sometimes I wonder if they ever fear being on the receiving end of some righteous justice?

I wonder if deep down in their darkest heart of hearts they might be just a teeny tiny bit afraid of us, after all they are severely outnumbered.

Or are they so cocksure in their baronial mindset that they simply laugh at our seeming impotence to stop them?

Do you think some of them are afraid of the November election? Or do they simply disregard that too, like they have all previous elections? I suspect that in their supreme arrogance they feel that they will carry on their agenda no matter who sits in the oval office.

The status quo ain't working out too good for us, we need to change it.

[annabanana]

1. They are keeping a close eye on

"irregularities" and chaos at voting sites, as the machines inject just the right amount of uncertainty and instability into our elections..

Their only fear is of an accurate vote count.

[Philosoraptor]

3. an accurate vote count wouldn't matter to these assholes

and I doubt that a landslide would either. even if they lose the house and senate, they aren't going to slither off, the plan is to make the next D pres. miserable and impeach him/her.

[Jawja]

13. Not if there is a Dem

Congress. Clinton had a Repug Congress after 1994 who then proceeded to go after him.

[FloridaPat]

2. They are very much afraid of us. That's why the Patriot Act was

passed. It seems to protect the gov't from us - not us from any terrorists. They are trying to make it easy to "arrest" those that are against them. We citizens can now be detained indefinately without chrages or access to a lawyer if our idiot president decides if we "terrorists" or not. Everything HomeLand Security does is against us.

[Demeter]

4. Do They Think Paper Can Prevent Revolution?

The only two ways the Patriot Act constrains us is:

1) We agree to abide by the terms (which we do not, or will not, when they try to enforce it)

2) The Neocons have a big enough army to enforce the terms (which they do not).

They aren't going to get the armed forces, the National Guard, the police, or even the mercenaries to back them up with this coup. They haven't the loyalty, the manpower, nor the money to buy them. The people they hate are the same as the ones they want to hurt the people they hate.

We are a nation and our families are the armed forces, the police, even the mercenaries.

[FloridaPat]

26. There is a provison in the unPatriot Act about what happens in

case of a nation pandemic. You will take the shots the gov't gives you. If you don't take the shots, you will be jailed and all your property taken away from you. Just imagine people getting sick and dying everywhere. Do you think an ounc of calm will come to most people?

Repubs are mean and vicious when others disagree with them. The Rush Limbaugh people will be behind them. It will be interesting to see if the armed forces, Nat'l Gaurd and police back them. The police have done a good job so far of defending the cowards against the people. Did you see the Nat'l Guard in NOLA? Aiming at starving people. Ready to fire. I do believe they did fire at a few people. Think it can't happen here? Think again.

[MADem]

5. They are protected by their mighty overlord, Diebold, perhaps? NT

[CJCRANE]

6. Look around the world

and back through (recent) history.

Tyrants are generally happy to keep on doing their thing for as long as they can get away with it. Look at Mugabe in Zimbabwe, his people are starving and the economy is in ruins but he's still there, happy as larry.

But then look at Ceaucescu...his people eventually turned on him...and it wasn't a pretty sight.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zeemike]

7. The difference between us and the Neo cons is

That they have a plan and we do not.
And there plan has been working largely because they have control of the media and the courts and key institutions, as well as a party that they can count on to follow along in lock step with their plan.
We don't have a plan to take back this country because it would seem like we were plotting somehow, and most people with a moral compass feel like that is wrong.
All we have going for us is truth and a desire for justice, and I hope that is enough.

[marions ghost]

11. good point

re. your statement "we don't have a plan to take back this country because it would seem like we were plotting somehow, and most people with a moral compass feel like that is wrong."

Interesting statement. So you believe that people think that to fight back in a constructive way is "wrong?" Why is this?

[zeemike]

14. No not just fighting back but plotting

That is what a plan is. You plot out a strategy and set goals that in this case may sounds a lot like manipulating the system as well as people. Playing by their rules and doing dirty tricks like discouraging republican voters from voting, and using the loyal democrats in the election boards to do what Blackwell and Harris did to the democrats.
Even the creating of propaganda seems like something wrong to a lot of people even if it is the truth.
Don't get me wrong I think also this is our strength the fact that we do have a moral compass but it puts at a disadvantage.

[marions ghost]

15. OK thanks

I agree that Democrats will not stoop to the level of stealing elections (and that's a disadvantage in a corrupt system, definitely), but I'm wondering about the rest of what you said. The idea that "getting the truth out" feels like propagandizing to some people is an interesting observation and I wonder how widespread it is. I come from a media family and so getting any information out has always seemed justified to me, but I'm aware that others may feel inhibited or discouraged. In a sense they are willing to accept that they don't have a voice, that there's nothing they can or should do even if it's perfectly legal. This might be something worth trying to change. Why do liberals feel this way? Is it a kind of self-censorship?

[zeemike]

17. Good propaganda is not necessarily about getting out the truth

But reducing it to a catch phrase of something simple that can be repeated over and over to be planted in the minds of people.
One example of this would be "Tax and spend democrats" of "cut and run" Now most thinking people and most liberals know that it is not as simple as that and prefer tog et the truth out in a more intellectual manner and so it is not as effective as the repukes.
If you want to really know what effective propaganda really is then study the writings of Gooble (I am sure I spelled it wrong) Because that is the play book the the repukes are using, along with Orwell's 1984.

[marions ghost]

18. wouldn't the difference be

that if the Dems do "sound bites" it would have more truth behind it? --(unlike "tax & spend" and "cut & run"). And therefore it would not be propaganda, since propaganda is lying or distortion. An example would be John Edwards' "Two Americas"...which is a characterization based in fact.

So why is that not OK with Dems? Seems to me there's a time and place for intellectual approach, and a time and place for sound bites.

[zeemike]

21. That is the perception, that propaganda is lies

And that is not so. Truth works just as well as lies even the Nazis knew that and often did use truth when it suited there cause.
And Edwards "Two Americas" is propaganda because it encapsulates an idea into simple terms that can be repeated and burned into the mind of the public. Propaganda is not in itself evil but can be used for good just as easy as evil. The US used it in both world wars quite effectively.

[marions ghost]

24. We are both correct....

You compelled me to look up "propaganda"--

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

"The method of propaganda is essential to the word's meaning as well. A message does not have to be untrue to qualify as propaganda.

In fact, the message in modern propaganda is often not blatantly untrue. But even if the message conveys only "true" information, it will generally contain partisan bias and fail to present a complete and balanced consideration of the issue. Another common characteristic of propaganda is volume (in the sense of a large amount). For example, a propagandist may seek to influence opinion by attempting to get a message heard in as many places as possible, and as often as possible. The intention of this approach is to a) reinforce an idea through repetition, and b) exclude or "drown out" any alternative ideas.

In English, the word "propaganda" now carries strong negative (as well as political, mainly) connotations, although it has not always done so. It was formerly common for political organizations, as it had started to be for the advertising and public relations industry, to refer to their own material as propaganda. Because of the negative connotations the word has gained, nowadays nobody admits doing propaganda but, on the other side, everybody accuses the opponent of doing propaganda, whenever there is an opponent in question..."

[zeemike]

23. here is a quote by Joseph Goebbels

"Success is the important thing. Propaganda is not a matter for average minds, but rather a matter for practitioners. It is not supposed to be lovely or theoretically correct. I do not care if I give wonderful, aesthetically elegant speeches, or speak so that women cry. The point of a political speech is to persuade people of what we think right. I speak differently in the provinces than I do in Berlin, and when I speak in Bayreuth, I say different things than I say in the Pharus Hall. That is a matter of practice, not of theory.We do not want to be a movement of a few straw brains, but rather a movement that can conquer the broad masses. Propaganda should be popular, not intellectually pleasing. It is not the task of propaganda to discover intellectual truths."

[Glorfindel]

8. Actually, at this point, I don't want them to be afraid

I want them to continue to be arrogant, bullying, and contemptuous of the common welfare until the country erupts in an explosion of Krakatoan proportions. Thomas Jefferson had it right:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

I think the tree of liberty is long, long overdue for a refreshing drink. :evilgrin:

[marions ghost]

9. They don't fear us

we are just moles they have to whack down. It gets tiring to play whack-a-mole all the time but that's all part of maintaining dominance. It ain't easy being mean.

The Neocons would have to lose something big --they would have to have a major reversal before there would be any real sign of fear. And who will do that? Certainly the legal system supports them. The media has not been completely complicit lately but still rolls over on command. The media's greatest sins against us have been their sins of omission. The election "system" (if you can call it that) is in their hands. The federal government obviously has no effective controls. They should not have been able to get this far if there were any real deterrent. The fact that they have made great strides gives them supreme confidence, even considering the spectacular failures of the administration.

Sure, they are laughing. Oh they know they'll have to work hard to avoid the appearance of stolen elections, but with Diebold and the courts on their side....well, it's just another minor hurdle. Democratic wins in the House will just add grist to the mill. It is an uphill battle for us all the way. But we still have to fight on every front we can.

Never underestimate these people.

[atommom]

12. I don't think they're afraid, at least not yet.

They have a plan, and they have a lot of money and power at their disposal. Even if many of them are voted out of office, we can't afford to assume that they're out of the game. They will simply regroup and refine their attack, as they have been doing for many years.

[Karenina]

16. A permit (perviously denied) has been granted

for a march in NYC on September 19th as "We the PEOPLE" made it PREFECTLY CLEAR they would MARCH ANYWAY.

[Swamp Rat]

19. Way'at Karenina!

:hug:

[Karenina]

20. YO, BABYKINS!!!

I be tryin not to lose my damn mind in this swill pit we call "civilized society!" Meanwhile the Bach G moll is going well!

[Swamp Rat]

25. Mmm! I'm listening to Tomás de Victoria's "Requiem": "Versa est in luctum"

The Tallis Scholars :9

[CarlVK]

22. Of course. That's a hallmark of socipaths.