Hi folks.

Remember the quote that Ben Franklin made? The one that said "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." I can't remember the number of times I have heard people use that quote as justification against the USA Patriot Act. The USA Patriot Act has half the nation in an uproar over the perception that our freedoms are somehow being curtailed.

Yet what freedoms, exactly have we lost with the USA Patriot act? What essential liberties have been curtailed? OK, so you have to wait a little longer at the airport, and maybe you need to show your ID a little more often. But other than that, are we any less free than we were before the USA Patriot act was enacted? Freedom to travel, freedom earn, freedom to worship, freedom to gather... all of these freedoms remain intact and untouched, despite the USA Patriot act.

However, the same people who were the strongest opponents of the USA Patriot Act because it MIGHT somehow limit our freedoms seem to be the same people who support a government bailout that includes government control of some of the biggest corporate entities in the world.

Doesn't it scare any of you that with the government in direct control of the largest corporations in America, the government can price-fix, tax, regulate, and otherwise manipulate markets without even needing a vote of Congress?

These are REAL freedoms that are at stake. The freedom to earn a living, the freedom to keep our money and the freedom spend it as we wish will all be affected.

As I have mentioned in other posts, the wording of Ben Franklin's phrase is important. He speaks of giving up ESSENTIAL liberties for A LITTLE safety. The USA Patriot Act takes nothing essential from us, and in turn we get a LOT of safety. That is a deal that Ben Franklin would have made in a heartbeat.

But for a little financial safety, we seem ready to give up some of the essential liberties of capitalism that made us what we are... the world's sole superpower... through the nationalization of Americas largest businesses.

And the very people who were loudest when speaking of the USA Patriot Act stealing our freedoms are silent about this bailout and the freedoms we are GUARANTEED to lose as a result of this act of blatant socialism. In fact, many of them are the biggest supporters of the bailout.

What's going on here?

Elliot

Wondergirl

Give most of the $700B to the Main Street banks.

tomder55

I want to give my share of it to my daughter to help her wit ha downpayment .

If I skipped a payment or 2 of monthly rent I would be evicted. Why is a homeowner entitled to the money of a renter to help them keep their home? In some cases ,the renter will be paying tax money to help the landlord keep the house. The more I think about it the more insane it gets.....Because this is what is being billed as a fair alternative....giving the renters money to the banker, who holds the mortgage of the landlord, who bought the house because it was an investment.
Socializing debt is Mussolini-style fascism .

inthebox

Give 700B to the 90 +% of homeowners that actually pay the mortgage on time?

Unlike the Wallstreet investment banks, our administration and congress [ Dems and Reps ], these homeowners have demonstrated basic fiscal responsibility.

Wondergirl

Heavens yes! Deregulation is what we need!

Wondergirl

I'm thinking every church body of any religion along with groups of concern citizens who don't belong to a church can adopt homeowners in crisis and help them with their mortgages. Meanwhile, the Main Street banks will do their part.

inthebox

http://www.southlandchristian.org/as...2challenge.pdf

some already do . [ btw - all the challenges have been met ]

No government interference/ regulations / mandates, just individual initiative.




Back to ET's point:

Liberty has its costs.
Capitatlism has its costs.
Both are well worth those costs.



Now that we face a financial crisis, in part caused by the government

Obama–ACORN–CRA–Congress–Democratic Party–Fannie Mae–Freddie Mac–Bailout–Socialism– Just Say No! « Pronk Palisades

mandating risky lending practices [ CRA ], there are those, who complain of the patriot act, wanting that same government to use taxpayor money to bail the banks/defaulters out?

excon

Hello El:

I dunno. I thought Bush was YOUR guy. You always said watch what he does, not what he says. Well, I'm watching. He's acting kinda liberal, doncha think?

By the way, what I liked about the congress womans plan, is that it WASN'T a plan. She didn't want to gve our money away either.

excon

ETWolverine

I agree, excon. This is a socialist response to the problem, and will lead to more socialism. And there have always been issues where I disagreed with Bush. Primarily, those have been on the issue of illegal immigration. But this is another case where I disagree with him.

Nobody says that I have to agree with everything the guy does, even if I support him. Nor does my disagreement with him on this issue mean that I no longer support him.

I stand by my support of Bush's correct actions, and my disagreement with his incorrect ones. As defined by me, of course.

Elliot

ETWolverine

Exactly my point.

If government intervention is the right answer to the financial crisis, why is it NOT the correct response to terrorist attacks?

Elliot