A Question For Americans

[antagon]

Tell Us Everyday what We should, Think, Say, Do , Wear. Roosevelt had nothing over Jefferson or Madison. You really Really suck in American History.

what the hell are you on about?

does your 'superior' history tout madison's economic policies as a laudable model?.. or are you talking out of your ass?

I didnt think you'd venture to compare madison's 18th century economics to anything afforded consideration of the century after that... to your credit. (note paranoia highlighted above)

Is it paranoia that I see a Statist take over of a Constitutional Republic?

yes, indeed. profound paranoia.. right in line with what is highlighted above.

What is the progressive stance on the Individual?

empowerment through opportunity, in short.

Are we anything more than commodities to the Elite?

mutually, commodities to the collective, when looked at as commodities at all. so, yes.

What is the progressive POV on Unalienable Right or Conscience?

perhaps to relinquish any social guidance in lieu of freedoms, and at any expense, however, all politics being progressive, liberal progress is often a juxtaposition of conservative progress. politics taking presidence over principle, leadership picks and chooses restrictions and freedoms as they afford popular or financial support. in the end, nothing comes without cost and ideologies squabble over who's to bear it.

your position, like a typical politician's, assumes you know at whose expense, and how best to be progressive...

The impositions We place on Each Other, in many cases are unjustified and beyond measure, more than We can account for, and address. The key here to maintaining was well defined Enumerated Power.

well defined enumerated power? what is your take on unalienable right? doesnt your history enlighten you to what your hero, madison, felt about enumeration of rights?

Do We show cause anymore when We legislate? Do We limit and tailor, adapt to circumstance? No. We decree without consent, awareness, or understanding.

buddy, cause for legislation is shown in the often exhaustive debate that precedes voting. then, resolutions are prefaced with a statement of cause. this talking out of your ass is a theme?

the constitution's provision for legislatures of the people's (recent) election is the only consent and accountability for circumstance which our government empowers. what do you want, to amend referendums into our government?

as for awareness and understanding, politicians are only humans imperiled by their level of popularity and political/financial allegiances. despite that, i think some shine through as being aware and informed about a few issues, severally. you're welcome to do better yourself, however, you sound like you are more the type to gripe and whine about freedoms, than to realize them.

...Higher Authority than Government... Consequence Dictates otherwise... The Course is Not Right... The evidence is all around Us... Call it Paranoia if You must... It is My Position....There are no Free Passes.

..or at least write a book about your hogwash. you're good at making titles for them.

 

[sparky]

this fits here>

Read The Bill: H.R. 645 - GovTrack.us

 

[Intense]

That is a LOT of 'isms', Bud... are you offering a contract or grant to me to do this study of ancient opinions of ways to solve ancient problems?

Is the current situation not just plain different?

Pointless is what you make or miss... Good point.

One man's cluster fuck is another mans opportunity to move billions of $$ around the planet quite suddenly, filtering off a HEALTHY percentage along the way... Ass-u-me-ing of course it's the lawyers on the payroll of you and your friends who wrote the current rules for businesses.

Chumps.

Every fucking one of us.

Foundation is not different. Foundation based on Principle that is validated is what the structure is built on. Do we integrate with compatible or incompatible material. Circumstances change, not right and wrong. Some want to deny Others Unalienable Right, that is a corruption.
Imagine a Referee With interest, Players, and money bet on the other team. Hamilton breached the divide and it was never corrected. We need Our Government to facilitate Impartial Justice, an art lost long ago. Our system went Oligarchy long ago. We live under the illusion of a Constitutional Republic, while the Real Money is tied into the Ruling Elite. They will always move Their money, before administering the Schemes that deplete Our's. We end up oppressed by Government Regulation, Decree, and Contract with the Big money, Government protected Monopoly. Govern protects It's investment first, profiting from a polluted partnership with that It was supposed to protect Us from. None of that is Free Market.

Roosevelt had crops destroyed while people were hungry to manipulate the cost at market. He knocked out competition supporting Corporate Take Over, and Monopolies, that's job loss and compounded price fixing. The Nature of the free market was to reduce prices with over supply, he undermined that by destroying product, fighting the natural order with other people's money. He got in some trouble with the Supreme Court, yet it appears just the tip of the ice berg. He fought nature then, and We are currently doing it again. Unsustainable value needs to adjust to real worth, be it real estate, industry, service, or agriculture. That is just the way it is. Schemes and scams don't change that. The Government refuses to face up to It's loss of investment, and It is scrambling to bleed us dry doing it. The shit has still not hit the fan.

Got Links?

?

I provided the link yesterday.

New Deal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Intense]

Mankind in groups and men individually will rarely task themselves worthy with no regrets... Can we expect no less from our largest enterprises - our governments? Should we?

How about our other large scale endeavors? There are plenty of companies that we've built on this planet that rival or far exceed 90% of the governments we've built... Should we expect businesses and companies to operate without regrets? Are there crimes worthy of capital punishment for corporations?

No. Yet even unintended consequences require remedy, action to restore balance, restitution, justice. In relation to the Mammoth Companies that insure who sits where in government, We have a Constitution that was designed to protect Us from All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic. I believe the solution to the puzzle lies somewhere there. Applied Theory. Are there crimes worthy of Liquidation? Yes.

Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

Our Constitution was created in a different time. Communication took days, the states had reasonable autonomy and all voters were white men who owned property.

When it comes to drafting the rules we live by, history is the greatest of teachers, but living by precedent sucks.

I suppose the Ten Commandments are out dated too? Not likely. I do not live by precedent, do You? I'm more of a moral absolutist, considering that circumstances and situations may change the application of principle, the principle itself does not change. Why confuse the usage with the source, it is a product of the source, not a substitute of it. Methods change as We progress and digress. Consequence is one of many litmus tests.

I may live by Purpose at my best, within the bounds of decency and fair play. Purpose, foundation, structure, are building blocks, no? Vision, inspiration, are usually more specific to the needs at hand, the vessel (Individual) is guided by what in invention or discovery? There are real and artificial boundaries, at play, some temporary, some fixed, some requiring prerequisite. Every circumstance is unique, the remedy should naturally by tied to the relevant factors, not, what has been done before, though that information might be helpful, it might also hinder or obstruct.

 

[editec]

NO government ever has much difficulty convincing troops or cops to attack their own people.

That is the nature of governments and the people who wear their uniforms.

There will always be people in uniform who will object, of course. God bless them, but those sorts of willful people are usually fairly rare.

But under the extreme circumstances you propose for purposes of discussion here?

Those people would be SHOT and their executions would motivate others to OBEY ORDERS.

 

[Douger]

i trust the military over law enforcement whose job is to turn on the public, for better or worse.

I don't trust any of those assholes.
They are brainwashed to the hilt and on a total power trip.
" Just doing my job, sir"... Horseshit.
Fucking brainless slaves.

 

[Intense]

what the hell are you on about?

does your 'superior' history tout madison's economic policies as a laudable model?.. or are you talking out of your ass?

I didnt think you'd venture to compare madison's 18th century economics to anything afforded consideration of the century after that... to your credit. (note paranoia highlighted above)

yes, indeed. profound paranoia.. right in line with what is highlighted above.

empowerment through opportunity, in short.

mutually, commodities to the collective, when looked at as commodities at all. so, yes.
perhaps to relinquish any social guidance in lieu of freedoms, and at any expense, however, all politics being progressive, liberal progress is often a juxtaposition of conservative progress. politics taking presidence over principle, leadership picks and chooses restrictions and freedoms as they afford popular or financial support. in the end, nothing comes without cost and ideologies squabble over who's to bear it.

your position, like a typical politician's, assumes you know at whose expense, and how best to be progressive...


well defined enumerated power? what is your take on unalienable right? doesnt your history enlighten you to what your hero, madison, felt about enumeration of rights?

Do We show cause anymore when We legislate? Do We limit and tailor, adapt to circumstance? No. We decree without consent, awareness, or understanding.

buddy, cause for legislation is shown in the often exhaustive debate that precedes voting. then, resolutions are prefaced with a statement of cause. this talking out of your ass is a theme?

the constitution's provision for legislatures of the people's (recent) election is the only consent and accountability for circumstance which our government empowers. what do you want, to amend referendums into our government?

as for awareness and understanding, politicians are only humans imperiled by their level of popularity and political/financial allegiances. despite that, i think some shine through as being aware and informed about a few issues, severally. you're welcome to do better yourself, however, you sound like you are more the type to gripe and whine about freedoms, than to realize them.

...Higher Authority than Government... Consequence Dictates otherwise... The Course is Not Right... The evidence is all around Us... Call it Paranoia if You must... It is My Position....There are no Free Passes.

..or at least write a book about your hogwash. you're good at making titles for them.

The fact that You confuse Principle with Method, the fact that You seek to compare them, speaks volumes of Your fucked up reasoning. Your anal fetishes and fantasies aside, You are a poor excuse of a Person. When Injustice is found and confirmed, especially when born of legislation, repeal is the next obvious path. You instead make lame excuses imagining You can Justify, that which causes harm to Others, while accusing Me of Manipulating. I'm not interested in telling You what You can and can't do, I'm interested in telling You what You can and can't do that is hurtful to Those around You. How much collateral damage does it take for You to remove Your Head from Your Ass?

 

[Intense]

i trust the military over law enforcement whose job is to turn on the public, for better or worse.

I don't trust any of those assholes.
They are brainwashed to the hilt and on a total power trip.
" Just doing my job, sir"... Horseshit.
Fucking brainless slaves.

Sometimes Eye contact helps, sometimes not. Trust in God, play your hand the best you can.

 

[antagon]

The fact that You confuse Principle with Method, the fact that You seek to compare them, speaks volumes of Your fucked up reasoning. Your anal fetishes and fantasies aside, You are a poor excuse of a Person. When Injustice is found and confirmed, especially when born of legislation, repeal is the next obvious path. You instead make lame excuses imagining You can Justify, that which causes harm to Others, while accusing Me of Manipulating. I'm not interested in telling You what You can and can't do, I'm interested in telling You what You can and can't do that is hurtful to Those around You. How much collateral damage does it take for You to remove Your Head from Your Ass?

what are you a crackhead buddha now?

 

[Intense]

The fact that You confuse Principle with Method, the fact that You seek to compare them, speaks volumes of Your fucked up reasoning. Your anal fetishes and fantasies aside, You are a poor excuse of a Person. When Injustice is found and confirmed, especially when born of legislation, repeal is the next obvious path. You instead make lame excuses imagining You can Justify, that which causes harm to Others, while accusing Me of Manipulating. I'm not interested in telling You what You can and can't do, I'm interested in telling You what You can and can't do that is hurtful to Those around You. How much collateral damage does it take for You to remove Your Head from Your Ass?

what are you a crackhead buddha now?

As opposed to You and fucked up undefended hypocritical Control Politics. No I'm not into crack or Buddha, Piss Ant, you Totalitarian Statist Fuck.

 

[Intense]

Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considerd as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.
Religious Freedom Page: Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments, James Madison (1785)

 

[Intense]

Selected Works on Tyranny
To understand the principles of constitutional republican government, one must understand the principles of its opposite. The Founders of the United States generally called it tyranny, but the 19th and 20th centuries have developed supporting doctrines or ideologies of tyranny. Such doctrines go by various names, reflecting subtleties of exposition and ostensible purpose: fascism, national socialism, totalitarianism, authoritarianism, collectivism, communism, or statism. For the tyranny of the majority we have majoritarianism, which has often appeared under the labels of "socialism", "progressivism" or "liberalism", the last originally referring to its opposite. That opposite today is usually referred to as "libertarianism" or "constitutionalism". The following are some works that examine the principles of tyrannical government.
Selected Works on Tyranny

 

[Intense]

After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience? — in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.

Henry David Thoreau: On the Duty of Civil Disobedience

 

[antagon]

The fact that You confuse Principle with Method, the fact that You seek to compare them, speaks volumes of Your fucked up reasoning. Your anal fetishes and fantasies aside, You are a poor excuse of a Person. When Injustice is found and confirmed, especially when born of legislation, repeal is the next obvious path. You instead make lame excuses imagining You can Justify, that which causes harm to Others, while accusing Me of Manipulating. I'm not interested in telling You what You can and can't do, I'm interested in telling You what You can and can't do that is hurtful to Those around You. How much collateral damage does it take for You to remove Your Head from Your Ass?

what are you a crackhead buddha now?

As opposed to You and fucked up undefended hypocritical Control Politics. No I'm not into crack or Buddha, Piss Ant, you Totalitarian Statist Fuck.

stop bitchin, man. i dont think the US is the world, or the world is going to hell in a handbasket... but if i did, i wouldnt just be bitchin about it on the internet. what a pussy. do somethin.

...something other than quote people who actually were coherent. at least hide out in the woods like thoreau.

 

[Intense]

what are you a crackhead buddha now?

As opposed to You and fucked up undefended hypocritical Control Politics. No I'm not into crack or Buddha, Piss Ant, you Totalitarian Statist Fuck.

stop bitchin, man. i dont think the US is the world, or the world is going to hell in a handbasket... but if i did, i wouldnt just be bitchin about it on the internet. what a pussy. do somethin.

...something other than quote people who actually were coherent. at least hide out in the woods like thoreau.

You are not my keeper Dip Shit! You neither limit or inspire in any fucking way You clueless piece of shit.

 

[Diuretic]

NO government ever has much difficulty convincing troops or cops to attack their own people.

That is the nature of governments and the people who wear their uniforms.

There will always be people in uniform who will object, of course. God bless them, but those sorts of willful people are usually fairly rare.

But under the extreme circumstances you propose for purposes of discussion here?

Those people would be SHOT and their executions would motivate others to OBEY ORDERS.

Human nature being what it is - I think you're exactly correct.

The Milgram's experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram, which measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,[1] and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.[2]

The experiments began in July 1961, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the question: "Was it that Eichmann and his accomplices in the Holocaust had mutual intent, in at least with regard to the goals of the Holocaust?" In other words, "Was there a mutual sense of morality among those involved?" Milgram's testing suggested that it could have been that the millions of accomplices were merely following orders, despite violating their deepest moral beliefs.

Milgram experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AVG-JOE]

Foundation is not different. Foundation based on Principle that is validated is what the structure is built on. Do we integrate with compatible or incompatible material. Circumstances change, not right and wrong. Some want to deny Others Unalienable Right, that is a corruption.
Imagine a Referee With interest, Players, and money bet on the other team. Hamilton breached the divide and it was never corrected. We need Our Government to facilitate Impartial Justice, an art lost long ago. Our system went Oligarchy long ago. We live under the illusion of a Constitutional Republic, while the Real Money is tied into the Ruling Elite. They will always move Their money, before administering the Schemes that deplete Our's. We end up oppressed by Government Regulation, Decree, and Contract with the Big money, Government protected Monopoly. Govern protects It's investment first, profiting from a polluted partnership with that It was supposed to protect Us from. None of that is Free Market.

Roosevelt had crops destroyed while people were hungry to manipulate the cost at market. He knocked out competition supporting Corporate Take Over, and Monopolies, that's job loss and compounded price fixing. The Nature of the free market was to reduce prices with over supply, he undermined that by destroying product, fighting the natural order with other people's money. He got in some trouble with the Supreme Court, yet it appears just the tip of the ice berg. He fought nature then, and We are currently doing it again. Unsustainable value needs to adjust to real worth, be it real estate, industry, service, or agriculture. That is just the way it is. Schemes and scams don't change that. The Government refuses to face up to It's loss of investment, and It is scrambling to bleed us dry doing it. The shit has still not hit the fan.

Got Links?

?

I provided the link yesterday.

New Deal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting link....

As a result of the New Deal, political and economic life became more competitive than before, with workers, farmers, consumers, and others now able to press their demands upon the government in ways that in the past had been available only to the corporate world.

In a measure that garnered substantial popular support for his New Deal, Roosevelt, on March 13, 1933, moved to put to rest one of the most divisive cultural issues of the 1920s. Just nine days later he signed the bill to legalize the manufacture and sale of alcohol,

Roosevelt pushed to save the entrepreneurial family farm in America, educated a generation like no other in history and pushed for the individual freedom of being able to legally crack a brew after a hard days work.

Evil. Truly evil.

Sanity against the corporations and the self-righteous.

No wonder he was president for as long as he was.

And then one of the most respected republicans in modern history saw the value Roosevelt saw in an educated population that had dignity and security, and were not just 'resources'.

As a Republican President in the 1950s, Dwight D. Eisenhower left the New Deal largely intact.

 

[froggy]

'Dwight D Eisenhower' Quote

"I think that people want peace so much
that one of these days government had better
get out of their way and let them have it."

 

[froggy]

'Dwight D Eisenhower' Quote

"In the councils of government we must guard
against the acquisition of unwarranted influence,
whether sought or unsought,
by the military-industrial complex.
The potential for the disastrous rise
of misplaced power exists and will persist.

 

[JW Frogen]

I live in the Antipodes, Australia, the only question for Americans I have is will you still front up and protect us? There was a time I would have never asked.

We will front up to help, as we did in Iraq and Afghanistan, but in the end, it is up to you and your willpower.

We need you USA, you must lead, and you need to know the entire democratic world needs you to lead.

Are there Revolutionary Rumblings among the Koalas?

Insurgents Disguised as Kangaroos?

Murderous Marceupials enraged over names beginning with the letter "K?"

We have a high alcohol content in our beer so it is easier to endure the hopping Kangroo king hits, the echidna kidding, the platitudinous playtupus taunts all the time, but China is our real concern. We have a lot of expesnive rocks they want, right now they are playing nice (with the exception of one Rio Tino executive) but long term if they push Uncle Sam out of the West Pacific we have to ask how Pacific will China be?

When powerful nations get hungry they tend to eat their fill.