RE: WE ARE AMERICA

RE: WE ARE AMERICA (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 4:33:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf I will discuss things with you as well, because frankly you present opposing views in a way that makes me think and examine my own position. Politicians should be servants of the people. In the early days of this country they were servants of the land owners (wealth) except for a few who could actually make a difference. Now most are servants of the large corps and special interest groups. An individual can no longer really garner attention, unless they form a large group. Kind of the same thing been going on for a while. The difference is that in the beginning the land owners often had some of the same foundational ethics and principles as anyone else who lived in the country (in general). Now though the corps have no loyalty to a country, and the only loyalty is to the bottom line. With many of them having global interestes, they do not care much about a country except as a segment of consumers or investors. quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Shep_Smith_We_do_not_fking_0423.html .......saw this mentioned on the Colbert show the other night and found a link. i have to say i was rather impressed. Shepard Smith seems to be expressing a viewpoint i have a lot of sympathy for. America has the potential to be the country it was always meant to be. i, personally, am disappointed when it fails to live up to its own lofty expectations. This Smith fellow struck me as someone wanting to be proud of their country, someone wanting to be the best patriot he can be.......and one who felt his own government was failing to be as patriotic. Should ones government live up to its own ideals? Orion, well said!

FirmhandKY -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 4:37:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Thank heavens we are not locked into any era’s mores. Yes they were for individual self-reliance but were also against women voting and working as an example. Times change… so does the way people think. If enough people in America think the way you do then times will change again. And the changes will again be within the Constitution. I guess what I am saying is just because your way of thinking does not match the majority does not make the Constitution outdated… or America anything but exactly what the majority wants it to be. Butch Butch ... I hear ya, man ... but ... One of the points of your post: "but exactly what the majority wants it to be" is what I have a problem with. I don't CARE what "the majority" wants, as long as I observe the basic societal strictures of behavior (don't steal, lie, kill, etc). In fact, the term "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what I believe is close to occurring, and "the majority" in this case are people - voters no less - who have a net transfer of wealth from individuals who produce the fruits of society, through the instrument of governmental force, in direct violation of personal sovereignty. The Constitution says whatever the courts rule that it says. It was written with certain understandings about how society works, and from a social contract and understanding of meanings and expectations. Those have, and continue to be redefined (see my first post) to mean what "the government" and collective-based philosophies say they are. For example ..."promote the general welfare" ... it is under this concept that the nanny state arose. Do you believe that the founders ever thought of anything such as universal health care, paid for by the government? How about Social Security? Welfare? I don't think so. Read some de Tocqueville, and his observations about "free associations". The original free society of America was about personal responsibility, even including charity and care for the elderly, disabled and sick. When the government takes on the responsibility, you know what happens? Individual donations to charity decrease. Associations (without any government connections or funding) decrease. It causes increased isolation of the individual, a greater divorce from society ... which then makes it easier to justify more governmental intervention. Bottom line: I don't believe that simply redefining what the Constitution means, means that the Constitution still protects the individualism or the society of free and sovereign associations of peoples that was originally envisioned by our founders. You know ... we have to define what "is", is, again ... Firm

StrangerThan -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:06:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY philo, Notice I said "redefined", not absent. I'll enter into a discussion with you, as I have a great deal of respect that you are one of the few here who can enter into a cordial discussion, even if we apparently disagree. However, I'm afraid any reasoned and reasonable discussion will soon be smeared all over the landscape with "neo-con nazi" remarks and vitriol. Ahh, but here is to hoping .... I've been reading a book called "The Liberal Mind". Pretty dense stuff, especially if one is a light thinker, without a lot of philosophical and history knowledge. I'm not prepared to give a review of it, or to declare it as "truth", but it is certainly an interesting read. My initial point in my last post was that the "American ideals" on which this nation was founded are - at least in the political arena - dead and buried. Those ideals are pretty much seen as "far right extermist" views nowadays, or as "too libertarian" to be realistic. The term in our Constitution "promote the general welfare" has been twisted beyond anything conceived of by the founders, as has been the Federal power over the lives of the citizens, and the States. I dunno ... I think we are due for an upheaval. Not this week, this month, or even during this Presidency ... but soon, for even if the original American ideals are no longer seriously in play in our political system, they still live on in much of our culture. And eventually the two will collide, I think. Firm I agree with you Firm. I can't have what amounts to a reasonable discussion with folks on either side. The anger and resentment runs too deep. Start discussing any single issue in today's news and you won't get three posts before someone digs back 5 years, 10, 15, even 30 for some imagined or real wrong - as if that wrong makes a wrong in retribution right. What is absolutely and totally lacking on both sides is compromise. I don't know where it was lost, but it is gone. I watched the video. I agree with the host in theory, and I can see validity with viewpoints of both guests. I also think both guests will defend the extremity always without ever attempting to meet anywhere in the middle. Judith repeatedly went back to waterboarding at any question that would have taken her off her torture podium, and the other guy stuck to his guns as well. Agreeing with the host isn't enough though. Sitting between warring parties and saying I'm not telling you what it is, just don't do it - well, that's both escapist thinking and childish. It's saying, I don't want to have to make a decision. I just want to decide when it's over whether I like it or not. Until then I'm going to sit in the cheap seats and take pot shots any where I feel like it. I think reasonable people find common ground, find a place they can live together. I also think that in news, debate, and just general feeling, what's been lost is the living together part. It's all finger pointing, and accusations. The other side is always wrong. So yeah, I think an upheaval of some sort is coming as well. Dunno when, but the complete lack of respect between the two make a collision virtually inevitable.

DomKen -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:09:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY In fact, the term "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what I believe is close to occurring, and "the majority" in this case are people - voters no less - who have a net transfer of wealth from individuals who produce the fruits of society, through the instrument of governmental force, in direct violation of personal sovereignty. The voters who chose the present government are residents of states, as a whole, that pay far more taxes than they receive in federal spending. For instance Kentucky, went for McCain by about a 4:3 margin, receives $1.51 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. OTOH Illinois, went for Obama by about a 7:4 margin, receives $0.75 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. So in reality the voters that were getting taken to the cleaners by the feds just voted a change of policy that may result in less inequitable distribution of their taxes.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:11:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub You have go to stop painting America for the actions of a few individuals. The true America threw their asses out of office when the truth started coming out...The true America elected a President who they feel will reflect their view of how America should be. If he fails to uphold the American way …he will be out on his ass... this is the true America. Sorry, but I strongly disagree with that. The "true America" supported and enabled the Bush Administration right from Day One, and the truth you say just came out was available to them all along. But the "true America" chose to ignore it because collectively they didn't have the balls to stand up and say "hey, hold on a minute." Some of us called it every step of the way (even though we were loudly derided as crackpots and traitors), and it wasn't because we made a lucky guess - it was because we were actually paying attention to what was happening right in front of our faces, and we spoke up about it. The truth was right there in broad daylight for everyone to see, and anyone who goes around crying now that "gee, we had no idea - who could know?" gets no sympathy from me. If more of these conscientiously born-again revisionists had had the brains to figure it out 6 and 7 years ago, and the balls to renounce it then rather than now when it's safe and fashionable, a lot of the shit we're dealing with right now would never have gone down in the first place. The people who supported Bush all those years need to own that, and if any of them ever happen to let it slip their minds, I'll be happy to remind them. You apparently see last year's election as a re-emergence of the true American personality and moral identity, and the Bush years as an aberration, a blip, a fluke departure from the norm. I see it as exactly the opposite. I think we saw the true America all too clearly in the weeks, months, and years following 9/11 - the cowardice, the bigotry, the selfishness, the willful ignorance, the complete lack of anything resembling a sense of morality, the blind allegiance to anything and anybody (no matter how illogical or morally repugnant) that made it a little easier for them to stop quivering in terror. To me (and to a lot of other people in the world), that's the "true America", and it would take years of good world citizenship before I'd start to respect my fellow Americans again. Getting it right in one election, and even then only because their 401(k)s were suddenly tanking and the reality was finally starting to affect them personally, does not even come close to making up for all the shit this country allowed to go down in their name. Not even close. Which is why I don't share either Philosophy's or Firm's optimism about the future of America, however well-stated and articulate their opinions may be. I do agree with Firm's conclusion that we are due for some sort of philosophical/cultural "revolution" to bring the country back in line with our original values and principles, but unlike Firm, I don't believe the fact that we're due for one means it's going to happen - because I don't think enough people in this country have the balls to stand up and do what it takes to make it happen. Firm will, of course, and Popeye, and and a few others, but the problem is too many people in this country already feel America is perfect the way it is. The country that encouraged George Bush to invade Iraq because they were scared shitless of the towelheads under the bed is suddenly going to risk upsetting the apple cart and force a radical change in their entire structure of government? Yeah, right. Excuse me if i don't hold my breath waiting for that one. The American people spent most of the last 8 years showing everyone exactly who they are and what they're made of, and as long as they've got food on the table, a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs, a car in the driveway, and their kids safe in their beds each night, they're not going to lift one finger on behalf of anything that will put any of that at risk. They'll give it lip service, and bray about it of course, and support whatever politicians bray the same tune back at them, but when the rubber hits the road they'll run in terror from the uncertainty and wind up embracing the devil they know. The politicians, and the wealthy and powerful who employ them, will continue to do whatever they want to do, and the majority of the American voters will continue to roll over and let them do it because it will feel to them like the safest course of action. We're past the point of no return, and the America we all dream about is dead and buried. It's never coming back. Get used to the New America, because it's here to stay.

DomKen -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:20:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY 1. I did not recommend the book, at all. In fact, I was pretty clear that I had no recommendation about it at all, as to it's worth, other than it is generating thoughts. Please read closely, and with an open mind. Saying it is not for light thinkers or those without a philosophical or historical background implies that it is for those not in that group. Since you style yourself some sort of intellectual your endorsement was clear. quote: 2. I've seen many a thread, and posts in which conservatives are pronounced: a. mentally deficient, b. criminal, or c. dupes. You don't seem to have much of a problem with any of them. I happen to think a lot of conservatives have been duped and can make a persuasive case that they have been convinced to act against their own interests. I don't think the moajority of conservatives are mentally deficient or criminal. I have attempted to get those on the left to lay off but with the way the right throws personal attacks at this point I just refrain from doing it myself. quote: 3. Have you read the book yourself, or are you just going by what someone else said? Read the first 50 pages or so but it got to full of lies for me to continue aggravating myself over. quote: 4. Your "like and respect" is really immaterial to me. You have not earned mine, so I don't really care. I guess making a fool of you on basic math ruined my reputation with you. You really shouldn't hold a grudge. quote: 5. Your "hand me my head" is really not conducive to a real discussion, as it a priori assumes both an intellectual and a moral superiority on your part which is not in evidence. Your lack of comprehension of my remarks about the current book I am reading is an excellent case in point. You're reading a book whose premise is that liberals are mentally ill and writing approvingly about it. I'm pretty confident that if you think it is at all useful in understanding the history or philosophical underpinnings of american liberalism then you will be unable to even begin a meaningful discussion of the enlightenment and subsequent events. quote: 6. You are trolling, obviously, and this is likely the last time I'll bother to engage you in this thread, without a change in demeanor. I only did this time, due to the possibility that you showed in the "Gaza" thread, that you might be able to engage ... so, consider this an invitation, or a dismissal, your choice. I do not troll ever. I tire of your personal attacks. But I do acknowledge your amazingly early use of the Brave Sir Robin Gambit.

StrangerThan -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:20:55 PM)
Hot damn that is an excellent post, Panda.

Crush -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:21:25 PM)
Is it a time for a new "American Dream" than what was coined in 1931? What would it be today?

kdsub -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:40:13 PM)
Again I agree with much of what you are saying. There can be tyranny in the majority and in the age of mass media that tyranny can manifest overnight. But that is why the founders in their genius made two ways to stop this very thing. The first is the Supreme Court...Its main job is to protect the minority from the majority within the Constitution. The second is the two houses of congress. The idea is to make change hard and take time. It certainly works. I believe our forefathers wanted us to fit our times to the Constitution... if that means promote the general welfare is reinterpreted to include health insurance so be it. By the way universal healthcare is not here yet and Obama may find himself in the same boat as Clinton. Butch

kdsub -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:49:13 PM)
panda I was right along with you in seeing the mistakes we were making. It was hard for me to understand why many others did not see it. But you give too little credit to the American people. Yes they went along with Bush but only because they were lied to. Once the truth started coming out his support quickly faded. But remember the American people even today believe that our presence in Afghanistan is necessary. They understand we were fooled by the Bush administration in Iraq but understand like it or not we cannot just walk away. I do not blame the American people for thinking that way because I do too. Butch

FirmhandKY -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 5:59:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY In fact, the term "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what I believe is close to occurring, and "the majority" in this case are people - voters no less - who have a net transfer of wealth from individuals who produce the fruits of society, through the instrument of governmental force, in direct violation of personal sovereignty. The voters who chose the present government are residents of states, as a whole, that pay far more taxes than they receive in federal spending. For instance Kentucky, went for McCain by about a 4:3 margin, receives $1.51 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. OTOH Illinois, went for Obama by about a 7:4 margin, receives $0.75 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. So in reality the voters that were getting taken to the cleaners by the feds just voted a change of policy that may result in less inequitable distribution of their taxes. I get your point. But my point is that the thought of "transfer of federal tax monies" is, itself, antithetic to original American ideals. Firm

DomKen -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 8:10:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY In fact, the term "tyranny of the majority" is exactly what I believe is close to occurring, and "the majority" in this case are people - voters no less - who have a net transfer of wealth from individuals who produce the fruits of society, through the instrument of governmental force, in direct violation of personal sovereignty. The voters who chose the present government are residents of states, as a whole, that pay far more taxes than they receive in federal spending. For instance Kentucky, went for McCain by about a 4:3 margin, receives $1.51 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. OTOH Illinois, went for Obama by about a 7:4 margin, receives $0.75 for every $1 paid in federal taxes. So in reality the voters that were getting taken to the cleaners by the feds just voted a change of policy that may result in less inequitable distribution of their taxes. I get your point. But my point is that the thought of "transfer of federal tax monies" is, itself, antithetic to original American ideals. Firm That's odd. The founding fathers quite explicitly allowed tax collection by teh federal government in the US Constitution so it certainly doesn't seem like it was antithetical to the people who founded the nation.

FirmhandKY -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 9:11:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That's odd. The founding fathers quite explicitly allowed tax collection by teh federal government in the US Constitution so it certainly doesn't seem like it was antithetical to the people who founded the nation. While I am not a Constitution scholar (and neither are you), I suspect that the clauses concerning taxes show something pretty interesting: Article 1, Section. 8. Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; Article I, Section. 9. Clause 4: No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken. Seems to me that "equality in taxation" was an issue. I suspect the thought of using the tax system to inherently transfer wealth from one state to another would be kinda ... well ... against the concept of basic fairness in taxation that the founders seem to be attempting to achieve. Not to mention a direct assault to the individual sovereignty of each state. And, FYI, the income tax didn't come into the Constitution until the 16th amendment. Any more "gotcha" games you want to play? Firm

Vendaval -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 10:20:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy Should Antigone observe the law of the city, or the laws of her family? What is the choice that will provide the best long term-benefits with the least amount of risk? Should the city force her to make a choice? I would hope not but that may be inevitable. Do laws force people to choose to do the wrong thing sometimes? Yes Those ol' Greeks were very much like us when they wrestled with politics and social policy. The needs of the many and the needs of the few...or the one.

Owner59 -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 10:46:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I'm more and more coming to the conclusion that in many respects, "American ideals" have been so redefined as to be meaningless in todays political discussion. And it has little or nothing to do with "torture" or "harsh interrogations". Firm More like" American ideals" have been redefined to give bush cover for torture. Seems to me that the selling of torture is more an effort protect bush and cheney`s hide,not Americans. My hat`s off to Smith.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 10:52:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan Hot damn that is an excellent post, Panda. Well, thank you. It wasn't exactly my best writing, but it's gratifying to know you were able to sluice a point out of the mud.

DomKen -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 10:56:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That's odd. The founding fathers quite explicitly allowed tax collection by teh federal government in the US Constitution so it certainly doesn't seem like it was antithetical to the people who founded the nation. While I am not a Constitution scholar (and neither are you), I suspect that the clauses concerning taxes show something pretty interesting: Article 1, Section. 8. You misunderstand this clause. The founders were well aware that import duties would be collected unevenly, it was debated during the convention and is discussed in the Federalist Papers. The fact is MA and NY were importers while the more rural states mostly exported. So of course a few states mostly MA and NY would carry more of the burden from import duties. And of course the reverse was true for excise taxes on exported agricultural goods.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 11:40:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub panda I was right along with you in seeing the mistakes we were making. It was hard for me to understand why many others did not see it. But you give too little credit to the American people. Yes they went along with Bush but only because they were lied to. Once the truth started coming out his support quickly faded. But remember the American people even today believe that our presence in Afghanistan is necessary. They understand we were fooled by the Bush administration in Iraq but understand like it or not we cannot just walk away. I do not blame the American people for thinking that way because I do too. I'm right there with you on Afghanistan, Butch. I supported that 110 % right from the beginning, and still maintain we need to press that to a conclusion no matter what it takes. Afghanistan was a no-brainer, no matter where one stands on Iraq. But as for cutting the American electorate a break because they were lied to, I can't get to that point. Like I said, I knew the whole thing was bullshit from Day One, and you say you sniffed it out as well. So, weren't we lied to just the same as everyone else? Sure we were. We figured it out anyway, though, because we knew it smelled like pure bullshit and we asked the questions we needed to ask. Everybody who bought the lies had access to the same data we had, and had the same opportunity we did to ask those questions and figure out the right answers. But they didn't. And for most of them, it was because they were scared and they wanted to feel safe. They were angry, and they wanted someone to pay. And they didn't care who, as long as whomever it was had turbans on their heads. So they told Bush, "Go get the fuckers," and then they turned their heads and went back to watching "Seinfeld" so they didn't have to see the details. And because of them, the United States, this country I used to loved, invaded another nation and launched a war of aggression for absolutely no reason whatsoever. It's bad enough that the stated reason, the alleged justification - that we needed to attack Iraq because if we didn't, they might attack us someday - was as morally and legally indefensible as it was despicable and cowardly; but even worse it was a total lie, and an incredibly obvious one at that. The citizens in a representative democracy have an obligation, a duty, to educate themselves and make informed decisions, especially on a matter as grave as choosing whether or not to launch a war. The American public, as a whole, did not do their due diligence, did not meet their responsibility, and if they had they would have arrived at the right conclusions and made the same decision you and I made. Not all of them, but enough of them that this criminal madness could have been prevented. I don't cut 'em any slack - they did not do their jobs as American citizens, and they bear the responsibility for letting that war happen. And that's why I find it impossible to believe the American people as a whole are suddenly going to join together and take their country back. They've spent pretty much the last 8 years getting... well... pretty much everything as wrong as it could possibly be gotten, and now they're suddenly going to wake up and start getting it right? Doing the right thing? Taking a stand, and the risks that come with it? I'm not buying it. Maybe, in 3 or 4 years, we'll be revisiting this conversation and I'll be admitting I was wrong, that I'd misunderestimated my fellow Americans, but right now, I've got to go with what seems most likely. And based on 8 year's of observations, what seems most likely is that the electorate will continue to take the easy way out, make the safe choices, and let someone else worry about doing the right thing, because after all they've got a new HDTV to pay for.

MarsBonfire -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/24/2009 11:55:22 PM)
All I know is, I've been wanting to get a small business off the ground for over a decade. Yet, I can't raise the capital to do so. Why? Simple: "The rich" aren't paying their fair share. They've been cut so many breaks that effectively... comparatively... they pay nothing at all. No, the burden of keeping them and the government afloat falls to those of us in the middle and lower classes. Thus, the wealth is concentrated at the top, and the rest of us get pissed on... (I guess that's the basis of "trickle down" economics.) Upshot: I can't start that small business because I'm working my ass off to keep myself alive. The money stays at the top, new small businesses stagnate, and We the People all have to get corporate or government jobs to keep the roof over our heads. We don't get the chance to capitalize our dreams, because the banks are too busy trading phantom money, to bother with local community needs. So, I can't start that business. Same with a huge number of other people who want to do the same. They keep telling us all that these tax breaks to the rich, the elimination of the estate tax, the Cayman Island loopholes... all of those should be working in the little guys favor... eventually. But, as more and more of that wealth is shipped overseas, the more we, the bulk of "We, the American People", get fucked over by the top 2% of income earners. Strange, isn't it? The people who can most afford to pay taxes, the ones who benefitted the most from the American capitalist market...are not expected to pay back into the system that allowed them to become wealthy in the first place. No, it's the hard working guy farther down the ladder who takes it up the ass.... The recent tea bag silliness is a perfect example: a group of rich people wanted their tax cuts protected, so they whipped up a crowd of about 2,000 people nationwide (about the same size crowd as half a high school football game) to go out and try to scare the Obama administration into keeping the Bush tax cuts... and withdraw the slated middle class cut from ever taking place. And the right wing nutjobs obliged. (It looked like the cast of "King of the Hill" was out there in those parks... all of them carrying signs that protested everything: against the bailout, against gun control, against abortion, and especially against Obama winning the Presidancy fair and square. Luckily, the focus WAS lost. If the "Great Tea Party" revolution had actually ammounted to anything more than a fart in a hurricane, Obama might have paused and considered NOT keeping his promise to give the middle class a break. Maybe, just maybe... in four years, or eight... I can finally start that business I've been dreaming of... only I was hoping it wasn't going to be a retirement project...

OrionTheWolf -> RE: WE ARE AMERICA (4/25/2009 6:01:42 AM)
The New American Dream: Blame someone else for why you fail, and the government will help you out.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625