LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteIts getting more and more scary huh...
Visit the Archives for U.S. Politics Online -- U.S. Politics Online . net
Watch the right hand, folks; pay no attention to what the left hand is doing. It doesn't concern you and is completely uninteresting besides. We have all this sexy 'free' health care to talk about.
The Other Government Takeover - WSJ.com
Boy. I sure am glad Obama has cleaned up Washington. No more sneaking around. Now he'll make sure bills get posted before they get voted on. A whole week before if I remember right. He's gonna lower the deficit and cut taxes for 95% of Americans! Even those who don't pay taxes anyway! Now that's some magic right there!
Makes me want to puke. And he gets totally away with it. He really IS the Manchurian President. Scary.
Secretary of Defense
Its getting more and more scary huh...
Are vital U.S. interests more imperiled by what happens in Iraq where were have 50,000 troops, or Afghanistan where we have 100,000, or South Korea where we have 28,000 -- or by what is happening on our border with Mexico?...What does it profit America if we save Anbar and lose Arizona?
P, Buchanan
http://faceswaps.files.wordpress.com...ke-it-rain.gif
Vice President
What baffles me about all of this is can no one on the left imagine a day when someone on the extreme right will be in power? Can they not imagine what could happen with the new foundation they are laying down? If lefties imagine the Bushites was the limit of right wing extremism they are ignorant in the extreme and dooming us all.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Hey! Knock if off! Obama is not a Socialist!
Administrator
They generally don't worry about those things. As history shows once the lefties get into office the righties start getting bullets in the backs of their head or sent off to gulags. All the great reformers worked the same way. Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, Castro, etc.Originally Posted by JDJarvis
It's interesting, none of the lefties on this forum have any problem at all with the idea of punishing people for not "sharing the wealth". One of them, "Ramhota"(sp?), has gone so far as to suggest "reeducation". It's absolutely baffeling how they will give no one's ideas but their own any credibility whatsoever but thet rail against others that they call "close minded".
President
well, they don't want to realize it or acknowledgment it, but the Birkenstock crowd gets the gas in the end too...
Every generation of Americans produces its own "fright wing" in politics. These are the lunatic fringe who are so frightened by everything going on in government they see all their duly elected leaders as Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.
The term lunatic fringe was coined by Teddy Roosevelt to describe the wingnuts of his day, including the one who shot his predecessor, President McKinley.
Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Reagan were all called either socialist or communist traitors by wingnuts on the right and Ronald Reagan was compared to Hitler by wingnuts on the left.
These wingnuts need to have less fear and more appreciation of America's civil and peaceful method of regime change by elections every four years.
Legend of USPO
I agree......we should disregard and dismisss anything the govt does to avoid being deemed lunatics, teabaggers, astroturfers, etc. Also, never speak out on gyas or you're a homophobe, and for God's sake (ha ha ) don't mention GOD!!!!!!!!!!Just belly up to the kool aid bar and guzzle.
Take a good hard look, it's coming.
President
Except, of course, history shows that Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao, etc. were/are right wing dictators. Lip service to Marxism doesn't make one a lefty.
Administrator
OK. You're new around here so maybe I can get a straight answer for once. At what point do YOU see the government overstepping it's Constitutional bounds? Is there anything, anything at all that individuals should be solely responsible for or should government have some say any time that one person interracts with another?
There seems to be a general consensus among the "progressives" around here that since my life may have an impact on your life that government should restrict all of our freedoms and should allocate all of our resources in such a manner as no single person is treated "unfairly". Is that where you stand?
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
I know this is sarcasm, so I'm not even going to ask for a clarification.
President
Actually, no it's not. They were ultraconservative and ultranationalist. Not left wing in the least.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
President
No, that would be reality.
Joint Chiefs of Staff Member
Your question was to Alana, but here's my two cent's worth:
IMHO "Constitutional bounds" are long dead. The US constitutional republic was a great leap forward from the divine rights of kings and popes, but the US government has invariably sided with royalty, status quo dictators, and colonial oppressors thorughout it's history, and now enables royalty in the Mid-East, while it was communists who overthrew the royal caste systems in Russia and China and the European colonial powers throughout Indo-China and Africa. However, collectivism has proved itself time and again to be an unethical and unproductive system in the long run.
The choices are not simply trying to go backward to a constitutional republic, or forward to increased authoritarian collectivism. David Friedman, The Machinery fo Freedom, 1989, and Butler Shaffer, Boundaries of Order, 2009 , have proposed a non-pyramidal-shaped, non-hierarchalical, but horizonally shaped social system that takes the Founding Father's "individual liberty" a step further with regard to self-ownership and non-coercion. Slaves and serfs have been freed and women have made great strides with regard to equal rights, so total self-ownership for all could be next. This might be something to work toward if and when the ethically and financially bankrupt government of the US crumbles of it's own weight.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks