Thank you for the link. From the site I found these words:
“Bottom line, Wall Street fraud and irresponsible risk taking, all condoned by criminal co-conspirators in Congress, drove the economy and budget over the cliff."
And when I compare them to your comment to me:
“There's a saying on Wall Street: The bulls make money and the bears make money, but the pigs get slaughtered. For now, the pigs are running this country and there's no doubt in my mind that anarchists are nothing but a front for the pigs. If I were an anarchist, I would cut my losses and get out of the pig pen before the slaughter”
It seems to me if the pigs are running the country they are co-conspirators with wall-street. What does that make wall-street? The farmers? The pig-pen? The pig-feed? Or are they the bears and the bulls?
I do believe that anarchists are used to front pigs. I believe there are provocateurs who lead utopian minded people so that when the country is in shambles due to the pigs, there are people who help the pigs fight to divide and conquer the country even further. It seems to me though, that sometimes if the criminal anarchists win along with criminal communists and criminal socialist that it is wall street and the bourgeois who get slaughtered. And that is a great concern form me. That some how all of this division will be used to slaughter masses. I don’t want to see anyone slaughtered.
I am wondering. How long do you think the pigs have been in control of the country? There are some who think Hamilton was a pig and set the country up under a consolidated constitution in order to front a national bank. The Bill of Rights did nothing the remove the consolidation of government. It was only a statement of the rights of the people. However, when the pigs rule, they trample the people’s rights. Perhaps we started with little sweet pink pigs and have graduated to wild boars who now want to drop hellfire missiles on US Citizens who are imminent threats. That sounds like authorization for a preemptive strike to me and the American people are applauding the progress.
Make no mistake, I am not an anarchist. I never even heard the term till last year. But I think the dividing line is criminal and noncriminal and I think that criminals can be capitalists, anarchists, socialists. The dividing line to me is built on voluntary associations. I think criminals do not allow competition and therefore voluntarism is not an option under criminal rule as they feed on stealing power from productive individuals. Those who allows competition and voluntary associations will allow productivity to flourish and the people to keep the fruit of their labors.
However, I believe that the American people have been fooled by labels and terms instead of realizing the problem is with criminals who make their crime legal.
“"...and that the ELECTED might never form to themselves an interest separate from the ELECTORS, prudence will point out the propriety of having elections often: because as the ELECTED might by that means return and mix again with the general body of the ELECTORS in a few months, their fidelity to the public will be secured by the prudent reflection of not making a rod for themselves. And as this frequent interchange will establish a common interest with every part of the community, they will mutually and naturally support each other, and on this, (not on the unmeaning name of king,) depends the STRENGTH OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE HAPPINESS OF THE GOVERNED.” http://www.ushistory.org/paine/commonsense/sense2.htm
I don’t think the Bill of Rights fixed the problem.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Other-Founders-Anti-Federalism-Dis... Page 229:
"made like A Fiddle, with but few Strings,"
"play any tune upon it they pleased."
"Regarding the Constitutional Convention, he [William Manning] echoed a common Anti-Federalist complaint: the framers deliberately employed ambiguous language to facilitate their aristocratic designs. He confidently asserted, "The Convention who made it intended to destroy our free government by, or they never would have spent 4 Months in making such an inexpliset thing." The Constitution was a "made like A Fiddle, with but few Strings," so that those in power might "play any tune upon it they pleased." The ambiguity of the Constitution was a deliberate product of Federalist aristocratic machinations-confirmed by the practices of Federalists since ratification. Under the guise of constructive interpretations, Federalists were seeking to extend the powers of their federal government and trample on the people's liberties."
The song being played has changed over time as criminals have become emboldened and the people have become placid. It will not be Nero who fiddles while Rome burns, it is the American people who have had their heads in the clouds while Liberty has been stolen.
When I read your words:
"powers not specifically granted to the Federal government to the States.
When we previously exchanged comments on anarchism, I mentioned my experience in a northern California community where many political activists and civic leaders were openly anarchist. They were very controlling and used government to coerce conformity. All their coercive tactics were portrayed as serving the cause of economic and social justice. "
I think of Washington DC. Coercion is used by criminals of all labels. I saw it used at both the Democratic and Republican Conventions last year. I think we need to use more than labels to identify those who are Friends of Liberty.
What is one to do when the pigs are in charge?