RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces

RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (Full Version)

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

Message

StrangerThan -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:14:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: So you tell me, what happens if the federal government stops obeying the Constitution. Eventually, it ends up before the SC, another branch of that federal government many tend to look too when they feel their rights have been abridged... another part of that government so many are railing about. What happens if the ferderal government changes it? And, btw, is it your only defense to lower yourself to pot shots and belittling comments? Cant you argue a point without them? I'd argue this point if there was reason to argue it. You're telling me the government grants rights which is essentially the legal vs natural rights debate that's been batted about for a long time by people who want governments to be the purveyor of all rights. This, in a country where natural rights were used in preamble to both the Revolutionary War and the Constitution. Preamble does not mean the actual preamble, but rather the events and thoughts and mechanics of debate that led to the creation of both. What is more appropriate is that your Constitution allows you to attack it in such a manner as opposed to the government giving you right or denying it.

tazzygirl -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:19:22 AM)
And yet you ignore both questions i asked. My point still stands. The tea party complains about government while utilizing government property and money to complain. I find that extremely hypocritical for many reasons. And, just where did i say i wanted the government to be the purveyor of all rights? And while they may have been utilized in the preamble to both of those events, the founders still felt the need to ensure the government they set up guarenteed those rights to citizens.

rulemylife -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:20:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how?

StrangerThan -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:26:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl And yet you ignore both questions i asked. My point still stands. The tea party complains about government while utilizing government property and money to complain. I find that extremely hypocritical for many reasons. And, just where did i say i wanted the government to be the purveyor of all rights? And while they may have been utilized in the preamble to both of those events, the founders still felt the need to ensure the government they set up guarenteed those rights to citizens. While they may have "felt" the need, they also bowed to those who demanded those rights as a precursor to the Constitution. In fact, many felt the document should have had a preamble of rights rather than being attached afterwards. It was only the promise of such rights that enabled the Constitution to be ratified. It was not written and rights added later as an afterthought. I said your position echoed the legal vs natural right debate. The tea party rails against excess, against big government. No where have I ever seen documentation insisting they want government abolished. There is within that, acceptance of the necessary evil of government as in "Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one."

StrangerThan -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:29:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how? How about another question? Do you feel your government to be in the context of we the people? Does it depend on who is in office? Did you feel that way under Bush?

tazzygirl -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:40:17 AM)
The Tea Party wants to abolish taxes, Social Security, county government, the Federal Reserve, the 13th amendment, the 17th amendment, Americans with Disabilities Act, Dept of Education... and that was just the first 4 pages of the search.

rulemylife -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:43:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how? How about another question? Do you feel your government to be in the context of we the people? Does it depend on who is in office? Did you feel that way under Bush? How about not trying to deflect my question? It was simple and straightforward.

StrangerThan -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:47:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how? How about another question? Do you feel your government to be in the context of we the people? Does it depend on who is in office? Did you feel that way under Bush? How about not trying to deflect my question? It was simple and straightforward. No it's not. And that's the problem.

pogo4pres -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:47:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how? How about another question? Do you feel your government to be in the context of we the people? Does it depend on who is in office? Did you feel that way under Bush? Tell you what I won't speak for tazzy, but I will offer my two cents. This government has been growing out of control since day 1, but especially since 15 Aug, 1945. On that day we became the ONLY nation in the history of this planet to win not a "one front" or "two front war" we won a FIVE FRONT GLOBAL WAR (with a lot of help mind you, lest I get slammed for "American exceptionalism"). We were warned by none other than the "retired general" come President Eisenhower of allowing the "military industrial complex" to grow unchecked. Did we listen, noooooooooooooo, so now we are where we are, a nation divided , because it serves their corporate interests. So no to me it matters not who holds the office, or which party is in power they are both whores to the corporate dollar. The recent Supreme court decision to equate "money with speech" by allowing corporate political donations is but the latest example of why we have the very "Best Government Money Can Buy". "Americans have the government they think they want; therefore the government they deserve" H.L. Mencken (iirc) Historically, Some Knucklehead in NJ

Archer -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:48:15 AM)
tazzy wants folks to answer her questions but as yet has provided no answer to the citation of any part of the founding documents that expresses the idea that the government Grants rights. So I would say that she is entitled to 0 no nothing when it comes to answers unless and until that question has been answered by her. Additionally the idea that tazzy wants to cry foul about the "pot shots" when the first pot shot was hers at me, makes me laugh my ass off at her hypocrisy level. Citation "You may wanna look that up" reference the point I had already ceded on public transportation. Now as to the groups protesting using federal land etc. tazzy lets not forget the last two sections of the first ammendment where the government is prohibited from preventing such things as The right to peacably assemble (didn't see a riot) and the right to petition the government fro redress of their grievances (seemed to be the point of the protest to begin with) The basic idea being that these protesters calling for small government want to have something that is based on the constitution when it comes to how the government is run, and they interpret the promote the general welfare clause to be much abused. They are protesting the expansion of government (wait here is a key concept so tazzy slow down and actually read here) beyond its constitutionally restricted powers. So since their argument is based on constitutional theory the fact that their protest is constitutionally protected in no way conflicts with itself. Protesting the growth of government beyond it's constitutionally provided limitations does not in any way mean that they want anarchy, they simply want government to return to the limited format that the constitution provides for.

StrangerThan -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 10:57:30 AM)
There are better people in this world to argue Constitutional right than I. My understanding and knowledge is more based upon my own reading than anything else. What I know for an absolute fact however, is that I and everyone else who ever served in the armed forces swore an oath to protect it, including the man I will carry to his grave in a veterans cemetery tomorrow. As best I can remember, I didn;t swear to keep the federal government safe.

tazzygirl -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:05:15 AM)
quote: Citation "You may wanna look that up" reference the point I had already ceded on public transportation. Trust me, that wasnt a pot shot by any means. Mine are much better. You made the comment that local government supplies the funding, mine is that state government provides more, and they get theirs from the federal government. Thats what you needed to look up. But here is one source for your consideration. http://www.statemaster.com/graph/trn_pub_tra_fed_fun_2003-transportation-public-federal-funding-2003 quote: They are protesting the expansion of government (wait here is a key concept so tazzy slow down and actually read here) beyond its constitutionally restricted powers. So since their argument is based on constitutional theory the fact that their protest is constitutionally protected in no way conflicts with itself. Protesting the growth of government beyond it's constitutionally provided limitations does not in any way mean that they want anarchy, they simply want government to return to the limited format that the constitution provides for. Thank you, i did slow down and read. How does the ADA exceed government format? Why the call or repeal the 13th and 17th amendment? quote: tazzy wants folks to answer her questions but as yet has provided no answer to the citation of any part of the founding documents that expresses the idea that the government Grants rights. You are assuming i meant strictly the founding documents. Which isnt the case. Many things the federal government has granted to its citizens. Here is but a few. http://www.ehow.com/federal-rights/ Many of these would not be in effect if not for the federal government. Lets not forget many of those attending were women. [:D]

DCWoody -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:29:30 AM)
The message I get from that article is that 'averagebro' isn't a nice guy. I almost thought it was satire when he talked about stealing someones flag. And almost immediately the thread starts arguing about whether public transport/roads are socialist or capitalist. What a load of shit.

rulemylife -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:43:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim You are in the ever-increasing majority of "We the people..." who simply want all levels of government, but especially the Federal government, to abide by the U.S. Constitution. Yes, I keep hearing that catchy phrase repeated over and over, but how about we get into specifics. What parts of the Constitution do you feel are being violated and how? How about another question? Do you feel your government to be in the context of we the people? Does it depend on who is in office? Did you feel that way under Bush? How about not trying to deflect my question? It was simple and straightforward. No it's not. And that's the problem. Unfortunately it is. If people are going to say that the government is not abiding by the Constitution then I would assume they have strong, well-thought out beliefs and know exactly which parts of the Constitution the government is not abiding by and in what ways.

Archer -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:51:26 AM)
Again the government does not provide rights, rights are provided by natural force, by simple act of being born, by god........ You refuse to discuss the idea behind the government not being able to provide an actual right. The thing is if the government provided it then it also has the power to retract it. In the examples of voting rights the right existed before the law that recognized the right. Each of those rights you give reference to has a basis in the act that was passed by congress that in every case has the legal requirement to tell us what basis in law the government has the authority to make that law. So they are recognizing the right as extending to this area of life. The right existed before it was protected by law. Womens right to vote was not created out of whole cloth, it was recognized as the natural conclusion one must reach when you see citizens as equal. it is the result of the government removing the cognative dissonance between the ideas that formed the government of this nation and the laws used to effect those ideas. The rights existed they simply took too long for the government to recognize them. Much the same as when it took a war to achieve the removal of the cognative dissonance that allowed slavery in a country founded on the idea of all men being created equal. Now for the things you have listed as things the Tea Party wants to do. "The Tea Party wants to abolish taxes" a lie really, the Tea Party has tax REFORM as one of their key ideas. A large part of them want the Fair Tax to be made law thus abolishing the IRS and the income tax, and replacing it with a consumption tax. Others want the Flat Tax that Forbes has long advocated. None of them really are advocating an abolishment of taxes in total, only the reform of them. The only the entire set of Tea Party groups have agreed on in this area is that the Tax System in the US needs to be reformed and simplified. Social Security- the Tea Party has 3 or 4 perspectives on this, again the Fair Tax is one area that applies since he Fair Tax's consumption tax would replace this tax as well. Other parts of the movement want to kill this beast in some way because they recognize that it is not sustainable. It fits the legal definition of a ponzy scheme, and if any private group tried such a thing they would be arrested, for good reason. County Government?????? OK that's a new one for me not sure where that came from so wont try to answer it Federal Reserve, yes alot of folks find the Federal Reserve to be a problem concept, but then again the idea of a national bank has always been an issue in our government, hell it was fought about and taken to the SC by Jackson back in the early 1800's So yes there are lots of folks who have issue with the federal reserve, not all of them conservatives. The 13th amendment????? really you've seen protests calling for the return to slavery from the Tea Party?????? cite that please I've seen the 16th amendment protested by the Tea PArty (that's the income Tax) 17th amendment before you read this do you even know which one this is? The popular election of state senators instead of the State Legisaltors the way it originally stated in the Constitution. The idea behind this is that there is nobody in the federal Government who's job it is to represent the interest of the State Governments of the various States. Which was the original job of the Senate. So this is yes a call to return to the earlier constitutional provisions. a point that can be argued and debated but that has a firm footing in constitutional theory. The ADA? hmm have not seen too much on that from the Tea Party, but I cna imagine it is an issue for some. The idea being that the definition of reasonable accommodations and the idea of regulation exceeding common sense have been an issue for the way the ADA is enforced. common sense example A floor of a historic protected building where they have been exempted from the need for an elevator the ADA still required that they install new water fountains for wheelchair accessibility on the 2nd floor of the building where there was no wheelchair access to that floor. I'm not hot on the ADA being repealed or anything but I am all for some kind of common sense test being applied to any enforcement actions. Department of Education, yep a very common item for protest. The results can speak loudly for the protesters. Since it's creation the US has fallen behind faster in areas such as math and science. Cause and effect can be debated some but the school systems functioned very well and achieved results better than we have now for decades before the creation of the Dept of Education. State, Local County and City governments could handle these issues better in many folks opinion. ANd this is certainly one of those areas where many find the Promote the General Welfare clause is abused.

tazzygirl -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:57:39 AM)
quote: Also organizers of Tax Cuts Now tell The Yonkers Insider that they estimate that there were 2,261 signatures collected on a petition on Saturday on the issue of Higher Taxes and Abolishing County Goverment. The Organizers also estimate that over 3,000 people showed up http://yonkersinsider.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/yonkers-insider-editorial-48/ The rest will have to wait till after work. [;)]

popeye1250 -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 11:59:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan Nice post. Somewhere along the line the concept of not wanting government fingers in every aspect of life gets twisted into hate-mongering, right wing fanaticism. I must be in a tiny minority of folks who mostly want government to leave me the fuck alone and operate with its intended manner, that being for the people, by the people and of the people. Stranger, Archer, exactly. Govt. doesn't "grant" anyone "rights." It is there to serve The People not to try to tell us what to do or try to dictate to us! They're the hired help not the management.

Sanity -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 12:09:59 PM)
You have a lot more patience than I do, Archer. Kudos to you too, because thats a good thing.

Archer -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 12:17:00 PM)
OK so folks in Yonkers are protesting and calling for abolishing of a their specific county government, that is a far cry from the impression that the Tea Party as a whole is for the abolishing of County Governments in general. Reading the whole article you find that the call for abolition of the County Government was a petition and really seems to be rhetorical, since the local anti tax group is in fact putting up 17 candidates for the next County Election challenging the sitting council for every seat regardless of party.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Blech's "I have a dream, too" speech: A Black Man reminisces (9/1/2010 12:32:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan Nice post. Somewhere along the line the concept of not wanting government fingers in every aspect of life gets twisted into hate-mongering, right wing fanaticism. I must be in a tiny minority of folks who mostly want government to leave me the fuck alone and operate with its intended manner, that being for the people, by the people and of the people. I think the problem comes when we start to define what for the people, by the people and of the people means....

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625