What is your feeling toward the US Government?

  • 81 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Diablo-B
Diablo-B

4063

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#51 Diablo-B
Member since 2009 • 4063 Posts

[QUOTE="Diablo-B"][QUOTE="BATTOSAI76"]

The fed needs to be as small as possible. Right now it's too big, and all it wants to do is get bigger.

BATTOSAI76

LOL, so your evidence that the gov't is trying to control us is that the fed is too big?

Shoot. My bad. I read your comment wrong.

My evidence stands that they want control. Drug and alcohol regulations, tax hikes, federal fire arms regulations, government regulated and required by law health care, government funded abortions and birth control (to control the population). Some of those exist and some have been lobbied for in congress. Not to mention their constant behind the sciences prodding of class warfare. Their strategy, get the poor angry at the rich so they fight to get politicians to get the rich to pay more taxes. Then get the poor to trust them by giving them services that are highly regulated by the government, thus controlling the lower class. The whole government is a racket. All they want is your money and support.

All the things you mentioned are strongly supported by at least half of the country. It sounds less like you have an issue with the gov't and more like you have an issue with half of your countrymen
Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
22Toothpicks

12546

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#52 22Toothpicks
Member since 2005 • 12546 Posts
the only way i could accurately express how i feel about the government in this country is if i could somehow conjure up a fart and then somehow send said fart through cyberspace, directly into your nostrils
Avatar image for michael_1234576
michael_1234576

8621

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 michael_1234576
Member since 2004 • 8621 Posts
don't c are as I don't live in the US
Avatar image for leviathan91
leviathan91

7763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#54 leviathan91
Member since 2007 • 7763 Posts

Government is force. It's neither good nor evil, it's just force but it's necessary to protect the rights of all Americans, mantain the defense of our nation, as well as respond to changing events. However, any government can have the potential to become tyrannical but our government is unlikely to do that since it's highly incompetent and comical.

The details, however, are complicated so I'll just leave it at that.

Avatar image for tocool340
tocool340

21652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#55 tocool340
Member since 2004 • 21652 Posts
Bunch of opportunist....
Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
It needs abolishing, like all states.
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
ghoklebutter

19327

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#57 ghoklebutter
Member since 2007 • 19327 Posts
It needs abolishing, like all states.Rhazakna
Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
22Toothpicks

12546

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#58 22Toothpicks
Member since 2005 • 12546 Posts
^so how would you two propose we (all countries) make this transition? coup d'etat? gradual, systemic change? sincere question i mean it's not like even a fraction of the "civilized" world is prepared for such a change
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#59 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

In theory, all governments should have better transparency and accountability. Lots of nations have done things that their people were probably unaware of or didnt approve. But not sure how you make that work.

Avatar image for CHOASXIII
CHOASXIII

14716

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#60 CHOASXIII
Member since 2009 • 14716 Posts

I feel disgust and disdain of the highest caliber.

Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]^so how would you two propose we (all countries) make this transition? coup d'etat? gradual, systemic change? sincere question i mean it's not like even a fraction of the "civilized" world is prepared for such a change

The state is maintained mostly through ideology. If enough people reject the legitimacy of the state and its laws, it won't be able to hold power for very long before collapsing. Violent revolution will only create a new state, and the state will never be abolished (or even shrunk very much) through democratic means. People's minds have to be changed about what governs them, then the state will become increasingly irrelevany
Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
22Toothpicks

12546

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 22Toothpicks
Member since 2005 • 12546 Posts
[QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]^so how would you two propose we (all countries) make this transition? coup d'etat? gradual, systemic change? sincere question i mean it's not like even a fraction of the "civilized" world is prepared for such a change

The state is maintained mostly through ideology. If enough people reject the legitimacy of the state and its laws, it won't be able to hold power for very long before collapsing. Violent revolution will only create a new state, and the state will never be abolished (or even shrunk very much) through democratic means. People's minds have to be changed about what governs them, then the state will become increasingly irrelevany

wellif thats the case then it's never going to happen in the US. too many sheeple
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
ghoklebutter

19327

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#63 ghoklebutter
Member since 2007 • 19327 Posts
[QUOTE="Rhazakna"] Violent revolution will only create a new state, and the state will never be abolished (or even shrunk very much) through democratic means. People's minds have to be changed about what governs them, then the state will become increasingly irrelevany

How would violent revolution create a new state? Not all violence is pro-statist, especially violence in self-defense.
Avatar image for whiskeystrike
whiskeystrike

12213

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64 whiskeystrike
Member since 2011 • 12213 Posts

Neutral, not indifferent.

Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"] Violent revolution will only create a new state, and the state will never be abolished (or even shrunk very much) through democratic means. People's minds have to be changed about what governs them, then the state will become increasingly irrelevany

How would violent revolution create a new state? Not all violence is pro-statist, especially violence in self-defense.

Because the ideological acceptance of the state would still remain, regardless of what the revolutionaries did most likely. Revolutions are inevitably only fought and aided by a vast minority of the society. The rest of the society is usually still on the side of the existing power structures. If the revolutionaries win, most of society will want the new leaders to install power structures that are relatively pretty similar to the previous ones, perhaps with some changes. If an anarchist group was able to successfully overthrow the US government, and then relinquished power and refused to lead, the people would form their own state(s) because the ideological legitimacy of the state is still accepted. As long as that's true, states will rule the planet. Revolution could work, provided that most people rejected the legitimacy of statism, but if that happened I don't think a revolution would be necessary.
Avatar image for surrealnumber5
surrealnumber5

23044

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#66 surrealnumber5
Member since 2008 • 23044 Posts
none of the above.
Avatar image for ghoklebutter
ghoklebutter

19327

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#67 ghoklebutter
Member since 2007 • 19327 Posts
[QUOTE="Rhazakna"][QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"] Violent revolution will only create a new state, and the state will never be abolished (or even shrunk very much) through democratic means. People's minds have to be changed about what governs them, then the state will become increasingly irrelevany

How would violent revolution create a new state? Not all violence is pro-statist, especially violence in self-defense.

Because the ideological acceptance of the state would still remain, regardless of what the revolutionaries did most likely. Revolutions are inevitably only fought and aided by a vast minority of the society. The rest of the society is usually still on the side of the existing power structures. If the revolutionaries win, most of society will want the new leaders to install power structures that are relatively pretty similar to the previous ones, perhaps with some changes. If an anarchist group was able to successfully overthrow the US government, and then relinquished power and refused to lead, the people would form their own state(s) because the ideological legitimacy of the state is still accepted. As long as that's true, states will rule the planet. Revolution could work, provided that most people rejected the legitimacy of statism, but if that happened I don't think a revolution would be necessary.

That makes a lot of sense.
Avatar image for TacticalDesire
TacticalDesire

10713

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 TacticalDesire
Member since 2010 • 10713 Posts

Mostly good intentions, but it is certainly far from perfect, and yes it is very divided.

Avatar image for 22Toothpicks
22Toothpicks

12546

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 22Toothpicks
Member since 2005 • 12546 Posts

Mostly good intentions, but it is certainly far from perfect, and yes it is very divided.

TacticalDesire
politician have good intentions? since when?
Avatar image for ZombieKiller7
ZombieKiller7

6463

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#70 ZombieKiller7
Member since 2011 • 6463 Posts

Well there's worse govts out there.

The one we have now is a little overdone, too big, it's like they want a department to wipe our ass for our own safety (and charge tax for it!)

I'm not loyal to any govt, I'm loyal to the people.

I think govt should be small and irrelevant to most people's lives.

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#71 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

a mix of division and incredible stupidity and ignorance

Avatar image for double_decker
double_decker

146090

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#72 double_decker
Member since 2006 • 146090 Posts
The entire Government system we have now and many of it's laws need to be redone I feel. It just plain doesn't work anymore, it's about as productive as trying to hump a bag of candy, sure it may feel good having it there, but in the end it's not getting you any place you want to go and only leaves you mildly satisfied :|
Avatar image for Lotus-Edge
Lotus-Edge

50513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73 Lotus-Edge
Member since 2008 • 50513 Posts
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]I think, in general, it is as good or as bad as the people we put in to run it. But I think it is currently being crippled by three things in particular that lead to a rush of extremism: 1. Gerrymandering creating ultimate safe districts 2. The abuse of the filibuster in the Senate 3. Our failed media experiment. The first one is, by far, the most glaring issue. When there is no incentive to compromise or move towards the middle because that has a greater chance of getting you kicked out of office for doing so than there is if you are busy genuflecting to your base, it creates gridlock and encourages extreme views. The second one is a byproduct of the first, but is used in an undemocratic way. It was intended to provide SOME minority protections, not make everything need a supermajority to pass the chamber. The last one exacerbates the problems. Rather than reporting things as true or not true, we have a media that is a mix of "horse race" type reporting (Side A says the sky is blue. Side B says the sky is red. Opinions differ on the truth of the matter) and pure propaganda.

I'm beginning to like that "Quote of the Day" idea now....
Avatar image for soulless4now
soulless4now

41388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#74 soulless4now
Member since 2003 • 41388 Posts

More confusesd than Ryan Seacrest.

Avatar image for buccomatic
buccomatic

1941

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#75 buccomatic
Member since 2005 • 1941 Posts

A lot has been going back and forth lately about the various laws and actions that the gov't has taken or is trying to take. We are very divided, left vs right, and people are very passionate, it seems, for their position. One issue at the forefront as of late is the 2nd amendment whish states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

This law can be interpreted many ways but today many gun advocates interpret it to mean that citizens have the right to own guns to fight against the US gov't. I personally interpret it to mean that citizens have the right to own guns in order to form militia to fight outside threats from other countries, not to rise up against our own democratically elected gov't. At the time considering the infancy of our country the federal army needed the support of local militia for national defense. However, both interpretations allows us to have firearms.

What I find fascinating is how many people believe that they have to have guns to fight the gov't. I can understand having firearms to protect yourself/family from criminals but from the gov't? Really? So I really would like to gather everyone's thoughts, is the gov't our natural enemy? Do you see the gov't as a separate entity or are we the gov't (of the people, by the people, for the people)?

Do you think the gov't is good, evil, stupid, or divided as a byproduct of how culturally divided/diverse our country is?

If you believe we need guns to defend against the gov't would you advocate using them on the military? Police officers? Politicians? (We recently saw a case like this where senatorGabrielle Giffords who had an attempt assassination and there have been many assassination in the past.)

Diablo-B

the government does not represent we the people, and i have a feeling they're all going to get executed for (communist) treason and espionage soon.

Avatar image for TehFuneral
TehFuneral

8237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 TehFuneral
Member since 2007 • 8237 Posts

A bunch of pricks who think they're badasses.

Avatar image for Hakumen21
Hakumen21

359

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#77 Hakumen21
Member since 2013 • 359 Posts
random college students on facebook literally could form a better congress together.
Avatar image for LongZhiZi
LongZhiZi

2453

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 LongZhiZi
Member since 2009 • 2453 Posts
The current US government is comprised nearly exclusively of fascists that insist on controlling you in some way or another. They merely differ on how to control you. The US Constitution is fine- it's the critters that inhabit DC. The only change I think it needs with some level of urgency is an ammendment that prevents the US government from taking on debt. Either tax it or you don't get to spend it.
Avatar image for TehFuneral
TehFuneral

8237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 TehFuneral
Member since 2007 • 8237 Posts

random college students on facebook literally could form a better congress together.Hakumen21

lol

This made me chuckle.

Avatar image for Jacobistheman
Jacobistheman

3975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#80 Jacobistheman
Member since 2007 • 3975 Posts

My feeling is that there are not 536 people smart enough to figure out what is best for this country (even with all advisors) I think that the federal government's primary objective should be to protect people and thier right and leave more collective action things to state/local governments and private groups (education, healthcare, taking care of people in need, etc)

I believe that the US government is terribly inneficient and allows many unsustainable practices continue. The governement allows both businesses and people to take more out of the system than the put in, leading to a more disfunctional society.

Avatar image for tenaka2
tenaka2

17958

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#81 tenaka2
Member since 2004 • 17958 Posts

RIver said it well.

'People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.'


The U.S. government has messed up various governments all over the world often resulting in many deaths for the populations of said countries.