YOU and I are the government.Quote:
Originally Posted by lshadylady
|
YOU and I are the government.Quote:
Originally Posted by lshadylady
Guess you did not understand my comments. I was speaking of more and bigger government, nationalism of our businesses and socialized health care. Those plans have been in the works for years. But it has not been until the past 18 or so months that an all dumbocratic run congress and now an ineffectual president have they been able to put forth all of their agenda.Quote:
Originally Posted by lshadylady
When Government takes over business is that not socialism pure and simply. One needs only look to Russia and what happened there to see where we are headed in a New York minute!
Not if you give up control to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Yes, in a republic or a democracy, the people are the government. However, if you give up your rights, including your right to choose, your rights over what you earn, what you produce, what you may consume, etc. then the people are no longer the government. If that happens the government becomes primary and WE become secondary.
That is the risk of not exerting control TODAY and just allowing a President to nationalize stuff... of "giving him a chance" when what he is doing with that chance is to decrease our freedoms.
Your argument hits the nail right on the head. WE are the government... but only as long as we excersize our control over our rights.
Elliot
Ummm, you failed. Because the problem is that too many people in government are trying to keep us asleep, and it's very serious when they do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Which two years were those?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I seem to remember that as soon as he was elected the legality of that election was brought into question IMMEDIATELY. Too many people didn't even let him take office before jumping on the anti-Bush bandwagon. And they certainly never dropped the "Bush stole the election" stuff.
There was NEVER a time during the Bush Presidency when he wasn't just criticized, but viciously attacked. Not even right after 9-11. The WTC and Pentagon attacks muted it a bit, but it NEVER stopped it.
Sorry to tell you this, Wondergirl, but you are wrong. Bush was NEVER given a chance.
Elliot
That's exactly how I remembered it, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
Thank you for your comments... I just want to say, Dyslexic workers of the world, "UNTIE!"
You might enjoy reading on-line, The Jewish World Review... always interesting... most especially Dennis Prager.
Thanks, Danon. I'm a regular reader of JWR, and I love Prager.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danon Judas
Elliot
BTW, do you know what you get when you mix a dyslexic, an insomniac and an agnostic?Quote:
Originally Posted by Danon Judas
A person who stays up all night wondering if there's a Dog.
What? Do we now start calling you Sleeping Beauty? That liberty was lost many many years ago when we kept sending people to Washington over and over again. They got greedy and now we have no say so in our Government. Just look at the last election to be convinced of that point. There are a few states in the East and California with enough electoral votes that the rest of the country is no longer matters. Except to send more flaming liberals to the big east coast cities to bolster their electoral college votes!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I voted in the last election. Did you?Quote:
Originally Posted by 450donn
Have you met the president's science czar?
I know, that was a long time ago (just a few years after Roe v. Wade when Ruth Bader Ginsburg thought that ruling would lead to Medicaid funding for abortions because "there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of"), but scary nonetheless. Indeed Holdren's book said:Quote:
Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A "Planetary Regime" with the power of life and death over American citizens.
The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?
These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology -- informally known as the United States' Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:
• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.
Quote:
Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.
Quote:
Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.
Quote:
Involuntary fertility control
...
A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
...
The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.
Alrighty then... reach your own conclusions.Quote:
If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection.
And what were YOU thinking about back in 1977? Back then, I believed women belonged at home, barefoot and pregnant.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Hello again, El:Quote:
Originally Posted by ETWolverine
How about the two years AFTER 9/11 and BEFORE he invaded Iraq? The country LOVED him, and the darling left wing media LOVED him... But, I guess you don't remember that stuff. It's OK. That's why I'm here - to remind you of reality.
excon
Um, I was 17 and believed in smoking weed and lots of it. I didn't however, co-author a book on issues surrounding marijuana. In 1977 Holdren had held a PhD for 7 years, I think he was fairly sure of his beliefs by then. In 2006 he was one who claimed global sea levels could rise by 13 feet by the end of this century, even though the IPCC claimed it would be more like 13 inches.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
You would have if you could. You were too busy having the "munchies."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I'm in his cohort, and was well-educated at the same time as he, and was convinced about the barefoot and pregnant thing--and in fact was just that, barefoot and pregnant. Like any good Stepford wife, my house was spotless and the cupboards were full and the toys were picked up and dinner was cooking.Quote:
In 1977 Holdren had held a PhD for 7 years, I think he was fairly sure of his beliefs by then.
Um, no. I was also working, paying rent and chasing babes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
And I noted that he has recently been just as wacky as in 1977.Quote:
I'm in his cohort, and was well-educated at the same time as he, and was convinced about the barefoot and pregnant thing--and in fact was just that, barefoot and pregnant. Like any good Stepford wife, my house was spotless and the cupboards were full and the toys were picked up and dinner was cooking.
Uh yea! DUHHHQuote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
However if you were to look at the election results in an honest light instead of rose colored glasses you would know that the west was totally irrelevant because the big electoral college states of the east had already decided the outcome. We in the far west have not been relevant in any National elections for more than 30 years.
I'll look at those election results honestly if you look at 2000's honestly.Quote:
Originally Posted by 450donn
What? You still believe that that environmental wacko still was actually elected president?
Who?? Be clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by 450donn
All I have to say is...
C'mon, Ex!!Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
The left wing media LOVED Bush??
Don't try to hand me that shovelful. I watched the news, and starting BEFORE the 2000 election, the left wing media started bashing Bush and hasn't stopped even now.
That MJ is making you senile.
Ex is correct. Even I loved him.Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
Hello again, gal:Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
It's true. If the media wasn't in his pocket, he NEVER could have passed the Patriot Act, and he NEVER could have invaded Iraq.
excon
PS> Here's a newsflash. The mainstream media is DEAD. Newspapers are going broke, and the networks are shills for the corporations that own them. The only news today is in the blogasphere.
People need to realize that Obama is not a messiah, but a human being and a politician who is not perfect. Everyone has flaws. I'm no liberal, but my stocks have gone up since he was elected so I'm not going to complain about him as long as the economy recovers. Politicians from both parties need to realize that they will have to both cut spending and possibly raise taxes to get the huge deficit under control even though the right choices won't be popular.
Is excon still in this area?
If so how can I talk at you about a question I had that you had answered earlier?
|
I voted for Bush. I don't know what would have happened if it had gone the other way. Anyone have any ideas how that would have worked out? I didn't want to vote for Bush but it was the lesser of two evils.
Yeah really Kerry is so very very scary.
People in this country give their vote the prettiest face, or the person with the gift for gab. If people actually voted on issues and record, Nobama would have never gotten out of the IL house. Consider that idiot alfranken that IL just elected? Can anything be more ludicrous?Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
Um, Senator Franken represents MN, not IL. (Glad you are up on your current events.)Quote:
Originally Posted by 450donn
If they voted for the prettiest face Palin and co. would have got in. Then you would be up sh1t creek.Quote:
Originally Posted by 450donn
No Skell.
Check your map. That's where we are NOW.
And this report from the Heritage Foundation.
Democrat representative Peter DeFazio who disagreed with Obama's spending plan was told by the president "Don't think we're not keeping score, brother"
That sounds like Mafia SOP to me.
Gal,
It was a joke. Everybody in the room laughed. You wanted to see a mob connection because that's what you want to see. Put down the hatred a second OK?
I just looked it up, and the count given for the number of Obama czars was 18, at the time that report was written.
We should all be concerned about this.
These czars are appointed by the president and answer ONLY to the president. Not to Congress or the people.
There is NO BASIS IN THE CONSTITUTION FOR SUCH OFFICES.
In this set up, all those reigns lead directly to the Oval Office.
Does the fact that this is the organizational map used by Communism and dictatorships disturb you?
How long are we going to let this stand?
Hello gal:Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
Let me see... You complained about the Drug Czar, WHEN??
I've said it before... When you don't look out for OTHERS rights, your's may be next.
excon
Nice non-sequiter!Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
So you DO agree that these appointmants are unconstitutional, right?
And extremely dangerous, right?
Do YOU think Obama (or anyone else for that matter) should be allowed to get away with this?
Politically, what label would you personally hang on him?
Hello again, gal:Quote:
Originally Posted by galveston
He's a liberal who believes the government is the solution to our problems. Do I believe he needs to be stopped?? Only when continuing the illegal programs started by Bush.
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:57 PM. |