I'm Pre-Approved for an ObamaCard!
- 05-17-2009, 01:03 PM
- 05-17-2009, 03:56 PM
- 05-17-2009, 05:33 PM
Complaining about politics and politicians is a full time job. Neither party (Dem or Repub) has alot to offer right now. GWB did pretty well on many fronts, but really screwed up alot during his last 2+ years. Of course, that timeline also coincides with when the Dems took over Congress.
I could never call myself a Democrat under todays construct, and right now, who really knows what a Republican is? McCain? Nope. Specter - clearly not in a long time. Charlie Crist? No....certainly not. I for one, am a Floridian NOT thrilled about CC running for Senate. He's too much in the middle.
I wish there were some fiscal conservatives with constitutional rights & values in mind out there for us to rally around. Maybe someone will come to the forefront soon.....but it won't be Jindal or Crist. Palin? Probably not, the media is hell bent on destroying her.
As for BO - he has broken MANY MANY of his campaign promises already. Reality is forcing some of that. Easy for him to talk out his butt when running for office and he only had part of the info, but when you are in the captains chair and making decisions, things change.
However, fiscally - he is an idiot and a liar. FLAT OUT LIAR. He cannot cut the deficit in any shape or form with his current social programs and plans. He WILL tax the people making under 50K a year before its all said and done with . Just watch.
05-18-2009, 03:57 AM
I know our country has a ton of problems but being close minded is not one of them. As I stated earlier we give more money and aid than any other nation in the world by far. We constantly go out of our way for the minority. That sounds like a really ***** ass police state
05-18-2009, 08:47 AM
Constitution Party, 2012! Get rid of Welfare, Medicare, move education to the state authority, etc. Let free market free again.
Bring back the 10th Amendment and Federalism. Fed. Gov. should be working FOR the state, not against.
The Historic PES Legend
05-18-2009, 09:43 AM
05-18-2009, 09:52 AM
05-18-2009, 10:09 AM
.Yes in america only americans opinions should count, in england only english opinions should count, in australia only australian opinions count, im sure you get what I mean , the more developed countries in the world are being flooded by immigrants, immigrants which are taking jobs that that countries native people need. This is creating a serious problem and is leading to an increasing amount of hate towards immigrants, now we are in a recision and in england a large amount of our recession problems can be directly attributed to immigrants taking the simpler jobs such as cleaners etc, the NHS would also be in a considerably better position if it did not spend so much money treating immigrants who have never even payed english tax. Im sure you are also aware that this is a very similar situation to what happened in germany just before WW2, this recession is just a step towards civil war. Just as hitler kicked out the jews so his native german people could prosper, soon the only way we will be able to prosper as a country again is to remove a large proportion of the immigrants. Every english person I know supports hitler style policies of england for english people, judging by the responses in this thread I would think a lot of americans share the same views
Immigrants are what made this country strong. It's the illegal ones that are giving the problems. Hitler didn't relocate Jews, he slaghtered them! Don't try and make what he did seem beneficial by choosing your words carefully. We've been in recessions before without a total world meltdown of anarchy and civil war. I think it's a bit too early to be sounding the trumpet of tribulation.
05-18-2009, 11:57 AM
05-18-2009, 12:00 PM
The Historic PES Legend
05-18-2009, 12:16 PM
I think more and more of American will first try and 'get theirs' from the system before they even think of trying freedom for a change.I will always vote in the direction I believe, and that being third party. I only hope more and more of America will wake up to the idea that these two parties do not have our best interest in mind, and only further and further killing the sovereignty that made America great.
05-18-2009, 12:29 PM
05-18-2009, 01:15 PM
It's politics... Even if you had a Libertarian movement that worked and gained political power on the Hill it would only be a matter of time before we ended up right where we are now. People more worried about keeping their seat of power over what their constituants want.
05-18-2009, 01:25 PM
05-18-2009, 01:26 PM
05-18-2009, 01:34 PM
I didn't say it would be easy but its the only way we can have our representatives actually represent us, rather than being career politicians. I mean seriously, after the obama presidency, what state do you think Hillary will try to become a senator in this time around? Arlen Specter anyone? He's changed parties then back again, solely to get past the PRIMARIES for his party. not so much even for the general election purposes, but just the primaries. Who does he represent? seems like mostly he represents Arlen Specter
05-18-2009, 01:47 PM
05-18-2009, 01:51 PM
05-18-2009, 02:04 PM
05-21-2009, 08:13 PM
05-22-2009, 03:08 AM
The Historic PES Legend
05-22-2009, 06:43 AM
05-22-2009, 09:17 AM
The Historic PES Legend
05-22-2009, 09:39 AM
As a practical matter? Nothing. As a far reach, monarchy of some kind so the head of state in effect owns the state and is interested in preserving and increasing its long term capital value as opposed to just squeezing it for all it's worth in the present, which is what elected stewards tend to do. Chances of that happening in the US though are practically zilch.Originally Posted by Rightintheface
As a practical avenue, try and re educate people as to what many of the founders knew. That being, that the state is not a solution to life's imperfections and that its scope should be severely limited. That freedom is preferable than a possibly more cushy life but one in effect spent in bondage of some kind. A big part of this is recapturing the vocabulary. Rights used to mean restrictions on the state's power, these days it means government enablement. Freedom of speech meant the state couldn't stop you from speaking your mind, not that everyone was enabled to publish their own newspaper. These days the latter intepretation is more likely. Of old the free market meant just that, a market free from intervention. These days institutions like The Fed are considered 'free market', even though The Fed's job stated outright is to push interest lower than the market would have set it and to make money more freely available than the market would have. We live in a newspeak world where the operations of a government institution whose goal is to directly interfere with and change market prices for the direct benefit of a few politically connected bankers is considered 'free market' even though it's a page right out of the Marx/Engles play book, both of whom stated outright that a centralization and control of credit and capital would be instrumental in bringing about socialism/communism.
So the first step I think is to take back the language, and then try and show people that by and large they are better off without the government sucking up half their income. To show them that a country where the government does just that on a regular basis is not properly considered free.
05-23-2009, 09:55 AM
I too have concerns about the governmental form of democracy as I see it in so many countries.
I have not problem with the concept of democracy itself, but with how in practice it has many problems.
It too has corruption, often inefficient decision making that leads to compromises that often have little to do with the original idea. One of the biggest problems is that most democracies are democracies in process but not in content.
Even the process is not really strictly democratic, but through representatives that act for the people rather than the people directly who participate. Of course there is justification. If we would have every nitwit in the country decide what is best for the country than that could be scary.
However the problem is still process vs. contents. If for example through a new law it would be decided by the House and the Senate that half the government has to consist of the KKK then that clearly is a democratically taken decision, despite the content of the decision being very undemocratic.
Governmental forms that differ from democracies in the end usually have far more abuses of human rights.
One would have to search history to find a couple of absolutists whose ruling does not escalate.
I can think of Frederick II of Prussia for example, a so-called "enlightened absolutist". There aren't too many others. Charles v, perhaps ? Charlemagne ?
A pure monarchic form of government in reality only is fairer and better than the concept of democracy is that monarch approaches the perfection of God in terms of having the ability to do only good, be perfectly fair and having absolute wisdom and knowledge.
The fallibility of man, the conditions of man being subject to beliefs, passions, culture make that almost per definition impossible. Thus in hindsight, I never say that democracy is the best way of the government but the least worse one.
05-23-2009, 01:06 PM
what we have to be careful of here, is we have to make sure illegal immigrants are prosecuted, and not build up a fear of the legal immigrants. an old coworker of mine is an illegal immigrant and on his 5th DUI. they told him if he got another one, he MIGHT be deported. IMO it is the immigrants that create problems that have to be dealt with more harshly, and leave the rest alone.
05-23-2009, 01:46 PM
05-23-2009, 02:07 PM
There can be no justification for using Hitler's antisemitism, and the accompanying grave consequences, as an analogy or hint for a social paradigm. Besides, Hitler's Germany was a completely different historical setting, especially in the light of the World War I reparation payments Germany was burdened with, coupled with the high level of unemployment of the time. So, Hitler's lopsided, ethically and morally problematic approach to the social challenges of the Germany of his era, including his infamous Solution of the so-called Jewish Question, should not and cannot morally be cited, even in a very remote sense, as a prescriptive model for modern-day policy action.
Product Educator | USPowders
Statements made by this online persona are the sole property of the owner, and do not necessarily reflect USPowders opinion as a whole.
05-23-2009, 04:17 PM
Hitler was a nutcase, I in no way support his policies of slaughtering the jews or anyone for that matter, the fact I was stating was that one of hitlers main policies was germany would support german people first- he believed that the jews and immigrants did nothing but make it harder for german people as a whole. Using this idea he convinced the german people that the answer to their problems was to be rid of the jews. In modern society a large proportion of the population is of the opinion that our countries would be better were it not for the illegal immigrants- there you have the hate of immigrants already set up, it is a very small step to move to believing that removing the illegal immigrants (and a large amount of the lazy legal ones) would solve our countries problems and again a large percentage of the population also believes this. The step to take measures to remove these immigrants will be a small one, it is a matter of time before such a situation occurs. Jayhawk I agree it is to soon at this time to be sounding the trumpet of tribulation, it is only a matter of time before a situation where the immigrants are removed occurs, every day that passes more move in and more strain is put on our countries already struggling systems.
edit: @irish cannons last quoted comment, well said irish
05-23-2009, 04:30 PM
i feel that illegal immigrants also tarnish the image of legal immigrants that work very hard to live in this country. you also are comparing hitler's "we have to remove all immigrants from our country" to the current "we have to remove all illegal immigrants from our country". i think we note a difference between those who followed the right steps to come here, and those that did not.
i could be wrong though.
Similar Forum Threads
- By CONTROLLED LABS in forum Controlled LabsReplies: 2Last Post: 10-27-2009, 11:09 AM
- By IceT in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 2Last Post: 08-11-2008, 08:44 PM
- By DeerDeer in forum SupplementsReplies: 3Last Post: 10-20-2006, 06:33 PM