9/23/2002 -  Clay S., Waynesville, NC writes ...
Democracy       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Clay S.

I question the whole logic of this topic. I mean the US is a republic not a democracy. The founders of our great republic hated democracy. They equated it to anarchy. If anyone comes by this topic and would like to be enlightened by the truth, just go to this link.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2000/11-06-2000/vo16no23_republic.htm

6/2/2003 -  PKT, San Jose, CA writes ...
Mocking the Majority       Post to Main Thread   Reply to PKT

I try to keep an open mind with a lot of the articles I read on this Web site, but this one is the biggest load of claptrap I’ve seen in a long time. Tucker starts off talking about politics and then moves to religion. Talk about a leap of logic.

I’m so tired of hearing Republicans bashing Democrats for holding up Bush’s court nominees. Has everyone forgotten the Republicans holding up Clinton’s nominees for 8 years? Bush has had over 90% of his nominees approved. The ones being delayed have displayed a too-conservative bent for liberals and they are using legal delaying tactics. This is politics. This is what this country is about. The Senate’s role is to advise and consent, not rubber stamp every nominee that comes down the pike. If Bush can get the votes, then he wins this political match. If he can’t, he loses. End of story. Republicans do it to Democrats and vice versa. I wouldn’t have it any other way.

As for the Texas debacle, the Democrats played a card and won. Again, nothing illegal, nothing immoral, just politics. It was the Republicans who brought in the Department of Homeland Security in a blatant misuse of power, but I guess that’s okay as long as the side you agree with does it.

As for the supposed left-wing bias against Christians by the media, this is another example of conservative overstatement. Let’s not talk about shows like Touched by an Angel, the Hallmark Network, the almost countless TV evangelists and their followers, conservative talk shows, and the daily nods to religion we hear from our elected leaders from both sides of the aisle. I personally think there’s not enough religion bashing going on. This has become the taboo subject with everyone afraid to talk about for fear of offending. We need some good religious discussions. The world is only going to be saved through a good dose of secular humanism. We need to tell the mullahs, ayatollahs, popes, priests, ministers, rabbis and preacher men that we don’t need them anymore. Tax the churches, tax the “love offerings” at the pulpit, make the TV evangelists accountable for every dollar that they bring in from the gullible true believers who tithe from their pensions. The world needs a religious revival to get rid of religion and we’ll all be better off.

6/3/2003 -  Patty, Alpharetta, GA replies to PKT 6/2/2003 ...
Mocking the Majority       Post to Main Thread   Reply to Patty

Pretty rough stuff. Let's not hear anymore from liberals like PKT about "self esteem" and being not judgemental.

But I also agree that both parties practice the same junk. But didn't Clinton's nominations fail on a vote in Congress, while Bush's are held up without a vote? I agree that he should get his vote -- a majority either way.

If you're curious about secular humanism, look around. Communism. Theft through taxation. Pornography out where no one can miss it. Music that tells kids to kill people. Aids. Hypocritical government social rules.

I'll take Christians, with all their warts.

7/23/2003 -  okt, San Jose, CA writes ...
Democracy and Free Markets vs. Socialism       Post to Main Thread   Reply to okt

While I certainly agree that the U.S. isn’t a fascist state there are signs out there that are disturbing. The prison population of the U.S. is the largest in the world. We spend more on the military than any other country and more than all of Europe combined. The Homeland Security Act has extended state powers to a degree unprecedented since the Civil War. Political expression is allowed, but there is a strong undercurrent in our culture to criminalize and persecute certain behaviors, i.e. sodomy, casual drug use, etc. While Americans are uncomfortable with the classic repressions of a communist of fascist state, there is strong support for behavioral restrictions. Witness the draconian drug laws Texas once had for simple pot possession.
Sinclair Lewis in “It Can’t Happen Here” wrote a very convincing scenario of how a fascist state could be created in America. The neo-Nazis were small town Babbits convinced of their own righteousness and rather than the swastika the sign of the party was the Rotary Club’s wheel. The party came to power with a platform based on racism, populism, jingoistic patriotism and that streak of anti-intellectual, anti-foreign sentiment that has been part of American culture from the Know Nothing days up to George Wallace and Pat Buchanan.
As for socialism, if you interpret that as social engineering by the government, the U.S. has always had socialistic programs. In the frontier days the government gave away great tracts of land for public development, granted huge areas of land to the railroads and paid for the railroad construction, improved waterways and built roads, displaced indigenous people to open new markets, etc. Government has always worked hand in hand with private enterprise to adjust the markets and conditions. Protective tariffs, selective taxes, zoning laws, eminent domain, regulation or the lack thereof has been government’s role since the beginning. It’s only when the government moves to improve social conditions that the cry of socialism is raised, hence the old cliché of socialism for the rich and free enterprise for the poor is the norm.
I believe the great majority of Americans eschew labels and look at what works and doesn’t work. Social Security, arguably a socialist inspired program (although it was Otto von Bismarck who had the first state retirement program) has become a lifesaver to millions and allowed the working class to actually have a life after becoming too old to work. Medicare is another example that has become an accepted fact of life and no politician of either the right or left would even suggest ending them. There is no real conflict between “socialism” and “free markets” in America in the traditional sense. The conflict is really between how much are we willing to spend on social programs versus how much we are willing to use taxes and regulations to pay for it. The issue is economics, not philosophy. It’s time to get past labels and to go with what works and what doesn’t work. If a social program has been beneficial like Social Security, Medicare, HeadStart, etc., improve them. If they have failed or need drastic changes such as many urban renewal projects, the management of food stamps, do so. America needs pragmatists, not dogma.