Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
This is from :
http://www.neusysinc.com/columnarchive/colm0009.html
"When Davy Crockett was a US Representative from Tennessee, he had an experience that drove this principle home for him. One day, while lounging on the Capitol steps with some other Congressmen, they saw a fire raging in Georgetown. Crockett and the others rode to the fire and worked to get it under control (imagine that happening now, if you can). When the fire was out, a number of people had been left homeless. The next morning, on the House floor, a bill appropriating $20,000 to relieve the victims of the fire was rushed through on a recorded vote. Crockett voted in favor of the bill.
The next summer, when he was up for re-election, Colonel Crockett went back to his home district to do some campaigning. People seemed happy enough with him, until he ran into a man named Horatio Bunce, a well-respected resident of the district. Mr. Bunce told Davy in no uncertain terms that he could not vote for him again. He accused the Congressman of not having the capacity to understand the Constitution, citing the $20,000 appropriation as evidence.
Noting that giving charity is not one of the powers of Congress enumerated in the Constitution, Mr. Bunce told Davy, "...while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he...If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose."
Thoroughly convinced, Davy incorporated Mr. Bunce's arguments, and a confession of his own wrongdoing, into his campaign speeches. Re-elected without opposition, Crockett returned to Washington with a far better understanding of his duty to uphold the Constitution. When the opportunity came to vote on a relief bill for the widow of a naval officer, he offered in his speech to donate one week's salary to her cause, but not to vote public funds for it. The House followed his lead in voting down the appropriation, but not a single other member contributed any of his own money (though they had been ready enough to contribute that of the taxpayers).
Oh, for a silver tongue like that of Horatio Bunce! To be able to convince citizens and Congressmen alike to respect the Constitution and the founding principles of our nation. Crockett's biographer, Edward S. Ellis, passed on this story in his book, "The Life of Colonel David Crockett." I have some reprints of the whole story (which I have necessarily condensed for this column), available on request."
I have read of this account before and this seems factually accurate. It does not include something that happened subsequent to Crockett's reelection. The accounts I've read in the past included excerpts from congress concerning a similar measure some time later.
Crockett stood up and addressed congress about another relief bill. He proposed that each congressman give one week's pay to the relief effort, and that of course he would do so despite being among the least wealthy of the members. He also noted that the total would be more than the amount of taxpayers' money that was sought in the bill.
What do you think of something like this in light of recent developments ? But before you answer, consider a few things. If, for the good of the taxpayers, because of what we have become lately, the bailout is something we actually should do, I will now engage in the vernacular of my favorite psychopath to make the point.
"If we spend all this money, there is no way that the muthafukers who ran this into the ground keep their jobs, pensions, nothing. I would have to be the stooopidest muthafuker on the planet to just let them do it again".
That is assuming that you agree that not bailing them out would hurt us more, and I am not so convinced. These crooks are now set for life, and I think they should not be quite so set for life.
And then we have entitlements. Oh boy, I can't see any sane person voting for McCain if they are retired or working. He wants to privatize social security, if that had happened what kind of shape would we be in then ? And right there is says on the website that he intends to cut benefits for retirees. I mean medicare and that. That is taking away from the people who need it most.
If this country is going to engage in giving out welfare, wouldn't you agree that it should go to the most needy ? In fact people who WORKED for it ?
Yes you can consider any entitlement to be welfare, but with social security you have a vested interest, you paid into it. McCain didn't. Obama may have in earlier life, but in either case when they cut entitlements for us, their's are unaffected. In fact they give themselves raises. Did Obama ever vote on his own raise, and if so did he vote yes or no ? Perhaps I'll have to go see the Google later.
Now, much as I hate to, the election. I am for Obama, but I have no love for him. However the alternative is totally unacceptable. I look at McCain ads and can't seem to find any substance. Talking about experience is total crap, neither one of them have any Presidential experience, at least that's what the history books say, all of them. Talk about a twistable metaphor here, the pot calling the kettle black. That is almost worth a chuckle, just not right now.
As a racist (special definition, see other posts) and being White, I am for Obama I find, not so much for his Whiteness as his Blackness. This is a bit complex. It does deserve an explaination though.
I think it is their turn.
This country has been ruled by White Men since before it's inception. Look at where we are now. Compare it to what we used to be, the industrial revolution, we did that. We took the world from huts to hilltop mansions. We found ways to enrich ourselves instead of others with our natural resources and our talent in using them. Yes similar research and development was going on in other places, but we were one of the leaders.
Now we have a trade deficit that is going to make us puke because we no longer build anything that pulls in any real fucking money. We also owe foreign banks so much that eventually, no matter who is elected, we will have to nationalize the foreign debt. That will effectively turn us into an isolationist colony as our currency will be worthless outside our borders. That HAS to happen. There is no way in hell we can afford to ever pay it all back, anyone still on Mars might not know about it, but just look at the numbers.
Most of the old stereotypes no longer apply, and it depends on the Man's specific background. But there might just lie a bit of a radical part inside, with fresh ideas and possibly some problem solving abilities. It seems the White Man has evolved away from problem solving abilities. Up until now our "leaders" seem to become adept at putting off problems, rather than solving them.
First of all, the people must survive as they are the only source of true wealth, however potential in nature that may be right now. When they start making paupers out of people who have worked all their life, it is wrong. I think Obama might give that some thought. I do not think that McCain shares that concern.
People say Obama is a socialist, well that has been hashed out in another thread, we pretty much are socialists except for a few things. We in the US seem to be enjoying the downside to socialism in possibly the fullest bloom since the 1930s. But we don't enjoy the upside of socialism, and that doesn't even include the banks, stocks and all that crisis they created.
And profited from.
T
|
Welfare, it did not start yesterday - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread