Can big government & liberty coincide?

[BOBO]

I found the below link both of interest & factual, do U?

What’s So Bad about Big Government Anyway? | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

 

[Sallow]

Yep.

The notion that separate little states are going to protect individual liberties is absurd.

 

[toxicmedia]

I found the below link both of interest & factual, do U?

What’s So Bad about Big Government Anyway? | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

The term "big government" is really just an abstract term most often used without specifics to represent Obama’s communist control of every aspect of the daily lives of Republicans. The article is kind of ego centric...because it's examples of wrong sized "big government" have to do with his "liberty" "properity" "harmony" and "morality suffering. For everyone of those individual sufferings, somebody benefitted from that. I think it's a bit naive to think this isn't just ordinary prediatory human behavior at work, which makes the article a bunch of phony outrage to me.

 

[Antiderivative]

Sure, they can. However, we have seen the opposite in America.

As the government grows and wages more useless and endless wars, civil liberties are curtailed. Additionally, large corporations, banks, and the MIC are all long arm of the government. Corporatism thrives off of big government.

 

[Ravi]

As long as you pay taxes you will never be free.

Stop paying taxes now!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yep.

The notion that separate little states are going to protect individual liberties is absurd.

Apparently you do not read links.

Some states, like California, do more to protect individual rights than the federal government. If we accepted your definition of the supremacy clause this would be prohibited, but, thankfully, this is one area where even progressives support state's rights.

 

[Jarhead]

Yep.

The notion that separate little states are going to protect individual liberties is absurd.

Really?
WHy?
Can you back that statement up?

 

[Contumacious]

I found the below link both of interest & factual, do U?

What’s So Bad about Big Government Anyway? | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

Fuck no.

."Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

-- George Washington

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Large, far reaching government is the antithesis of liberty.

 

[ShackledNation]

The thing you need to know about government is simple. Government does not create wealth. It can transfer wealth at best, and destroy wealth at worst. It steals money from the productive sector of the economy, draining those resources away from private individuals, and squanders them on arbitrary projects. The fallacy of central planning and big government is that government knows best. It never will, and will always use resources less efficiently than the free market.

 

[Antiderivative]

I found the below link both of interest & factual, do U?

What’s So Bad about Big Government Anyway? | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

Fuck no.

."Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

-- George Washington

pfffft....Washington? Go read up on the Whiskey Rebellion and the hypocrisy of Washington.
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2197

 

[Contumacious]

I found the below link both of interest & factual, do U?

What’s So Bad about Big Government Anyway? | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty

Fuck no.

."Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

-- George Washington

pfffft....Washington? Go read up on the Whiskey Rebellion and the hypocrisy of Washington.
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2197

he was out to prove that:

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

.

 

[Antiderivative]

Fuck no.

."Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

-- George Washington

pfffft....Washington? Go read up on the Whiskey Rebellion and the hypocrisy of Washington.
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2197

he was out to prove that:

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

.

Was he? That quote is attributed to Acton in 1887. Wasn't Washington dead by then? Additionally, why would he want to prove it?

 

[whitehall]

Yep.

The notion that separate little states are going to protect individual liberties is absurd.

Absurd? That's a bigoted ignorant statement fuzz face. Why wouldn't elected officials in State Government seek to "protect individual liberties"? State governments are closer to individual liberties than the massive bureaucratic mess the federal government has become. Would state governments invade a quirky religious "compound" in Waco Texas with poison gas and Tanks? The federal ATF law enforcement superceeds state authority and they did such a poor job that they had to call in the Military in order to kill 80 men women and children. Who do we see about the shipment of 2,000 illegal weapons to drug cartels in Mexico? It was the ATF again and they got at least one Border patrol Officer killed. Why would you assume that State governments are unwilling to protect individual liberties? Because Texas executed a Mexican national killer in spite of efforts by the UN/bloated federal bureaucracy to save his depraved life?

 

[Contumacious]

pfffft....Washington? Go read up on the Whiskey Rebellion and the hypocrisy of Washington.
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/print.php?news.2197

he was out to prove that:

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"

.

Was he? That quote is attributed to Acton in 1887. Wasn't Washington dead by then? Additionally, why would he want to prove it?

"Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it"

William Pitt, the Elder,
The Earl of Chatham and British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1778


"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness." -


-- George Washington

 

[Antiderivative]

"Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it"

William Pitt, the Elder,
The Earl of Chatham and British Prime Minister from 1766 to 1778


"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness." -


-- George Washington

Either way, I don't buy into your thesis that Washington was out to prove either Acton or Pitt, but nice try though.

 

[Contumacious]

the thing you need to know about government is simple. Government does not create wealth. It can transfer wealth at best, and destroy wealth at worst. It steals money from the productive sector of the economy, draining those resources away from private individuals, and squanders them on arbitrary projects. The fallacy of central planning and big government is that government knows best. It never will, and will always use resources less efficiently than the free market.

.

 

[Contumacious]

Sure, they can. However, we have seen the opposite in America.

As the government grows and wages more useless and endless wars, civil liberties are curtailed. Additionally, large corporations, banks, and the MIC are all long arm of the government. Corporatism thrives off of big government.

Big Government + Big Business = Fascism

.

 

[Antiderivative]

Sure, they can. However, we have seen the opposite in America.

As the government grows and wages more useless and endless wars, civil liberties are curtailed. Additionally, large corporations, banks, and the MIC are all long arm of the government. Corporatism thrives off of big government.

Big Government + Big Business = Fascism

.

I don't diagree and this was not the contention among our disagreement.

You claimed that Washington was this liberty loving, limited government type of person. I respectfully disagreed and used the Whiskey Rebellion as my example. We can also talk about how he hung deserters and left Thomas Paine to rot in a jail cell.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The ‘size’ of government is irrelevant provided the rule of law is acknowledged and respected. As long as the Federal courts remain independent and neutral venues for Americans to bring forth grievances and seek relief in the context of Constitutional law, we need not fear a government of any size.

Yep.

The notion that separate little states are going to protect individual liberties is absurd.

Really?
WHy?
Can you back that statement up?

Why wouldn't elected officials in State Government seek to "protect individual liberties"?

Because the bulk of violations of civil rights during the last 57 years were committed by state and local jurisdictions, from Brown v. Board of Education (1954) to Lawrence v Texas (2003), Americans were compelled to seek relief from un-Constitutional laws enacted by the states.