View Full Forums : I couldn't be more vague.

Create resurrected
08-25-2006, 03:04 PM
The right to bear arms and the implied notion of decentralized armed forces contrast a trend of a growing federal military, along with the centralization of wealth.

It is not wrong to resist this force by objecting to a limitation of individual rights considering the physical violence needed to regain them after a precedent is established?

Adaptation is key to our organization's survival, but what have we shown? Broad, generalized areas of our freedom have been infringed, rather than specifically at points to solve the issues. Many adaptations we see are not in direct response to even implied threats, let alone tangible ones.

I don't think anyone would truly object to the current limitations of airline travel. While severe, they should, in fact be effective and be a limitation over a small period of time while you travel. Increased audit of physical shipping means is also quite uninvasive. Technology will alleviate some limitations in time.

These changes are in stark contrast to infringements upon personal privacy, or the coming infringements upon legal hispanic residents near the southern border upon the advent of the guest worker program.

The population has been distracted from the long-term consequences of rather drastic domestic social reform by the war on terror. Confusion, distrust, tinfoil theories, political polarization: They are all consequences of the lack of focus and follow through by the administration.

There's two options here: Leadership is intelligent, or not. If you believe the former welcome to conspiracy 101; To what aim are we being intentionally distracted? What is the intent? If you believe the latter please commence Bush-bashing once done reading; Verbally berating absent idiots is our right, damnit! Maybe it's a blend of both. Maybe it's easier to live in Denial, or her sister city Ignorance.

Our leadership is playing us for fools. The best course is to make true the belief that our president is already a lame duck.

Trust no media fully and those close to home much less. Question every motive. Fillibuster when no reasonable argument suits you. The rules cannot change anymore under this leadership, for any reason. Hold the line! The consequences are much greater than the loss of a skyline.

Create resurrected
08-25-2006, 03:07 PM
Yes, I write these types of persuasive editorials voluntarily.

Please edit this, add to it, critique, suggest alternate structure or word choice, whatever comes to mind. Any feedback would be appreciated.

This is intentionally vague. It's more of an outline, sans examples, than a draft, let alone a final.