Obama: If People 'Can't Trust' Government, 'We're Going to Have Some Problems Here'

[candycorn]

We PAY TAXES for all those things to OUR STATE..
I trust my State government some, Obama government, NONE

Do you think the mailman reads your letters you get from your inmate pen-pals? No? Then you trust the government.

Do you think the government is watching the mailman 24/7 to make sure he doesn't read the letters?

If not, then you don't trust the government to stop him from reading the letters, despite your insistence that you do.

The mailman is a government employee...hence the trust is the same.

Personally, I trust that the mailman just doesn't have the time to read all the letters he delivers. Then again, I have a barain, and put my trust, when I give it, in people, not government.

What about people who work for the government? Or is that too deep for your shallow mind?

 

[martybegan]

No, don't be silly.

But the idea that you don't trust the government as a blanket statement is a farce ("you" being the perjorative "you" and not you personally).

The most fervent anti-government moron here trusts the government to a degree. It's a silly statement to say you don't. And that is born out by thos who try to substantiate the silly stance; "I grow all my own food"...

Pfft....

The concept behind not "trusting" the government for me is predicated on how much power I want them to have. Libertarians by default only go to government intervention when a compelling interest is shown. Progressives and statists on the other hand see the government as the first option when it comes to solving a given issue or concern.

Sometimes I suppose;

Other times it's to the point where we've been down the road before in this country...just saying.

So you trust the government in some cases but not others...is that the case?

The government I trust is the one that defaults to the most local control possible of any given issue. If it can be handled by the town, let the town handle it. if it can handled by the county, let the county handle it etc. My distrust is not the government per se, but the people implementing it, be it politicans or burecrats.

If government work attracts people who believe larger government is the solution to all problems, then you have a self propegating problem as far as libertarian leaning people are concerned. This is especially true at the federal level of government, which is involved in far to many issues that are really local concerns.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you think the mailman reads your letters you get from your inmate pen-pals? No? Then you trust the government.

Do you think the government is watching the mailman 24/7 to make sure he doesn't read the letters?

If not, then you don't trust the government to stop him from reading the letters, despite your insistence that you do.

The mailman is a government employee...hence the trust is the same.

Personally, I trust that the mailman just doesn't have the time to read all the letters he delivers. Then again, I have a barain, and put my trust, when I give it, in people, not government.

What about people who work for the government? Or is that too deep for your shallow mind?

Hate to burst your bubble, but the fact that someone is a government employee, and that I trust that particular person, does not mean I trust the government.

 

[candycorn]

The concept behind not "trusting" the government for me is predicated on how much power I want them to have. Libertarians by default only go to government intervention when a compelling interest is shown. Progressives and statists on the other hand see the government as the first option when it comes to solving a given issue or concern.

Sometimes I suppose;

Other times it's to the point where we've been down the road before in this country...just saying.

So you trust the government in some cases but not others...is that the case?

The government I trust is the one that defaults to the most local control possible of any given issue. If it can be handled by the town, let the town handle it. if it can handled by the county, let the county handle it etc. My distrust is not the government per se, but the people implementing it, be it politicans or burecrats.

If government work attracts people who believe larger government is the solution to all problems, then you have a self propegating problem as far as libertarian leaning people are concerned. This is especially true at the federal level of government, which is involved in far to many issues that are really local concerns.

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

 

[candycorn]

Do you think the government is watching the mailman 24/7 to make sure he doesn't read the letters?

If not, then you don't trust the government to stop him from reading the letters, despite your insistence that you do.

The mailman is a government employee...hence the trust is the same.

Personally, I trust that the mailman just doesn't have the time to read all the letters he delivers. Then again, I have a barain, and put my trust, when I give it, in people, not government.

What about people who work for the government? Or is that too deep for your shallow mind?

Hate to burst your bubble, but the fact that someone is a government employee, and that I trust that particular person, does not mean I trust the government.

So you trust the government employees, just not the government.

Gotcha.

I see happy hour started way early today for some.

 

[buckeye45_73]

*snicker*

You trust your government.

You trust that your water is clean, that your food is safe, that the punishment for crime is such that only a very small percentage would risk it and it keeps you and your family safe, that your roads are safe, that the toys you buy your kids do not have small pieces that can be swallowed or covered in lead, that your bank account is insured in the face of bank robbery, etc....

I'm sure you don't want any of those protections and programs.

Tough tacos. They're here to stay.

We PAY TAXES for all those things to OUR STATE..
I trust my State government some, Obama government, NONE

Do you think the mailman reads your letters you get from your inmate pen-pals? No? Then you trust the government.

Is that really your arguement?????

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The mailman is a government employee...hence the trust is the same.

What about people who work for the government? Or is that too deep for your shallow mind?

Hate to burst your bubble, but the fact that someone is a government employee, and that I trust that particular person, does not mean I trust the government.

So you trust the government employees, just not the government.

Gotcha.

I see happy hour started way early today for some.

I trust people some of them happen to work for the government. The government itself is not worthy of my trust, and hasn't been since sometime in 1960.

 

[LoneLaugher]

( pulled from another thread.......maybe better suited for this one )


Dear nutters,

Here is the deal. Our nation.......this grand experiment.......is different from all others PRECISELY because we have established the rule of law......and THEREFORE.....are able to actually trust our government.

You see.....we have elections.....and we have courts which are accessible to all citizens. When the government does that which is unlawful.....we have a course of action OTHER than the bullshit method that 2A is suggesting here ( militia revolt ). And..when those we elect to represent us fail to do so to our satisfaction.....we have legal ways to remove them every two, four or six years.

You all have lost faith in this country and in your fellow Americans. At the same time. You have WILLINGLY handed over more and more power to UNELECTED leaders of multinationals. The shit that Snowden was doing was PRIVATE SECTOR contract shit. The CEO of that company is not answerable to us. See anything wrong with that?

Trust in our constitution.....and in the rule of law. Doing so does not make you naive....it makes you AMERICAN.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Ongoing, daily, waste, sloth, bloat, corruption and outright lies. Year in, year out. With our money, no less, under the guise of working "for us", of being "public servants". And right square in the face of those who are so willing to forgive them for all of it.

Indeed, a civilized society needs an effective, functional government. But this abused wife-style of blind, unconditional forgiveness is an abject mystery to me. What is it about government that gives people such a warm and fuzzy?

.

 

[hjmick]

I'm fairly certain that I have never trusted the government...

I believe that one would be foolish to trust the government...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Do you think the mailman reads your letters you get from your inmate pen-pals? No? Then you trust the government.

Do you think the government is watching the mailman 24/7 to make sure he doesn't read the letters?

If not, then you don't trust the government to stop him from reading the letters, despite your insistence that you do.

The mailman is a government employee...hence the trust is the same.

Personally, I trust that the mailman just doesn't have the time to read all the letters he delivers. Then again, I have a barain, and put my trust, when I give it, in people, not government.

What about people who work for the government? Or is that too deep for your shallow mind?

My dog seems to think otherwise.

 

[martybegan]

Sometimes I suppose;

Other times it's to the point where we've been down the road before in this country...just saying.

So you trust the government in some cases but not others...is that the case?

The government I trust is the one that defaults to the most local control possible of any given issue. If it can be handled by the town, let the town handle it. if it can handled by the county, let the county handle it etc. My distrust is not the government per se, but the people implementing it, be it politicans or burecrats.

If government work attracts people who believe larger government is the solution to all problems, then you have a self propegating problem as far as libertarian leaning people are concerned. This is especially true at the federal level of government, which is involved in far to many issues that are really local concerns.

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

 

[Stephanie]

The government I trust is the one that defaults to the most local control possible of any given issue. If it can be handled by the town, let the town handle it. if it can handled by the county, let the county handle it etc. My distrust is not the government per se, but the people implementing it, be it politicans or burecrats.

If government work attracts people who believe larger government is the solution to all problems, then you have a self propegating problem as far as libertarian leaning people are concerned. This is especially true at the federal level of government, which is involved in far to many issues that are really local concerns.

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

well too bad for you the minority still has a say..you want mob rule, you move...Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea..

 

[FA_Q2]

( pulled from another thread.......maybe better suited for this one )


Dear nutters,

Here is the deal. Our nation.......this grand experiment.......is different from all others PRECISELY because we have established the rule of law......and THEREFORE.....are able to actually trust our government.

You see.....we have elections.....and we have courts which are accessible to all citizens. When the government does that which is unlawful.....we have a course of action OTHER than the bullshit method that 2A is suggesting here ( militia revolt ). And..when those we elect to represent us fail to do so to our satisfaction.....we have legal ways to remove them every two, four or six years.

You all have lost faith in this country and in your fellow Americans. At the same time. You have WILLINGLY handed over more and more power to UNELECTED leaders of multinationals. The shit that Snowden was doing was PRIVATE SECTOR contract shit. The CEO of that company is not answerable to us. See anything wrong with that?

Trust in our constitution.....and in the rule of law. Doing so does not make you naive....it makes you AMERICAN.

That is the exact opposite of trusting government. We are not unique because we can trust government, we are unique because WE DON’T HAVE TO. The people provide ultimate oversight and are there to watch what the government does and slap them down when they **** up. The problems we face today are almost all attributable to the fact that the people have FAILED to provide that oversight. Instead, they do exactly what many have been advocating – simply trust the government to do it and do it right. It was trust in the government that allowed the NDAA and PA to pass. We can trust them to do the right thing, right??? **** NO! That is OUR job – to oversee the government NOT trust it.

The fact that I can turn on the water and ‘trust’ that it is relatively safe is not because I trust the government. It is because I keep an EYE ON GOVERNMENT. It is because we have a media, no matter how poor it has gotten, that covers these things and the government knows that if that water is not clean it is going to have a pissed off constituency to answer to.

So NO! I do not trust the government nor will I ever trust it. I will do my job as one of the overseers of government and such a job requires that I do not trust them. That I watch for their errors and demand that they be fixed. If more people would STOP trusting government we would be far better off.

 

[martybegan]

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

well too bad for you the minority still has a say..you want mob rule, you move...Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea..

Methinks you misunderstand.

The above discussion assumes the inclusion of consitutional protections based on the federal and state consitutions. Beyond that, legislative action decides the laws to be applied. At a local level, if you disagree with, say dry laws, which are perfectly consitutional, you have 3 choices.

1) stay and follow the law.
2) move to a "wet" locality
3) Revolt, or at least break the law by drinking in said dry county.

 

[LoneLaugher]

( pulled from another thread.......maybe better suited for this one )


Dear nutters,

Here is the deal. Our nation.......this grand experiment.......is different from all others PRECISELY because we have established the rule of law......and THEREFORE.....are able to actually trust our government.

You see.....we have elections.....and we have courts which are accessible to all citizens. When the government does that which is unlawful.....we have a course of action OTHER than the bullshit method that 2A is suggesting here ( militia revolt ). And..when those we elect to represent us fail to do so to our satisfaction.....we have legal ways to remove them every two, four or six years.

You all have lost faith in this country and in your fellow Americans. At the same time. You have WILLINGLY handed over more and more power to UNELECTED leaders of multinationals. The shit that Snowden was doing was PRIVATE SECTOR contract shit. The CEO of that company is not answerable to us. See anything wrong with that?

Trust in our constitution.....and in the rule of law. Doing so does not make you naive....it makes you AMERICAN.

That is the exact opposite of trusting government. We are not unique because we can trust government, we are unique because WE DON’T HAVE TO. The people provide ultimate oversight and are there to watch what the government does and slap them down when they **** up. The problems we face today are almost all attributable to the fact that the people have FAILED to provide that oversight. Instead, they do exactly what many have been advocating – simply trust the government to do it and do it right. It was trust in the government that allowed the NDAA and PA to pass. We can trust them to do the right thing, right??? **** NO! That is OUR job – to oversee the government NOT trust it.

The fact that I can turn on the water and ‘trust’ that it is relatively safe is not because I trust the government. It is because I keep an EYE ON GOVERNMENT. It is because we have a media, no matter how poor it has gotten, that covers these things and the government knows that if that water is not clean it is going to have a pissed off constituency to answer to.

So NO! I do not trust the government nor will I ever trust it. I will do my job as one of the overseers of government and such a job requires that I do not trust them. That I watch for their errors and demand that they be fixed. If more people would STOP trusting government we would be far better off.

Load of crap. I never said that we don't have a respondibility to oversee government. It is through our elections and our courts that we do so. We hire REPRESENTATIVES.......we need to trust that they will do the job. If not.....we get rid of them.

See the difference?

 

[candycorn]

The government I trust is the one that defaults to the most local control possible of any given issue. If it can be handled by the town, let the town handle it. if it can handled by the county, let the county handle it etc. My distrust is not the government per se, but the people implementing it, be it politicans or burecrats.

If government work attracts people who believe larger government is the solution to all problems, then you have a self propegating problem as far as libertarian leaning people are concerned. This is especially true at the federal level of government, which is involved in far to many issues that are really local concerns.

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

Ahh...So either just take the injustice, move or revolt?

Humor me; you're black, it's 1960 and you're in Mississippi...which of the 3 options above would you have taken?

 

[candycorn]

( pulled from another thread.......maybe better suited for this one )


Dear nutters,

Here is the deal. Our nation.......this grand experiment.......is different from all others PRECISELY because we have established the rule of law......and THEREFORE.....are able to actually trust our government.

You see.....we have elections.....and we have courts which are accessible to all citizens. When the government does that which is unlawful.....we have a course of action OTHER than the bullshit method that 2A is suggesting here ( militia revolt ). And..when those we elect to represent us fail to do so to our satisfaction.....we have legal ways to remove them every two, four or six years.

You all have lost faith in this country and in your fellow Americans. At the same time. You have WILLINGLY handed over more and more power to UNELECTED leaders of multinationals. The shit that Snowden was doing was PRIVATE SECTOR contract shit. The CEO of that company is not answerable to us. See anything wrong with that?

Trust in our constitution.....and in the rule of law. Doing so does not make you naive....it makes you AMERICAN.

That is the exact opposite of trusting government. We are not unique because we can trust government, we are unique because WE DON’T HAVE TO. The people provide ultimate oversight and are there to watch what the government does and slap them down when they **** up. The problems we face today are almost all attributable to the fact that the people have FAILED to provide that oversight. Instead, they do exactly what many have been advocating – simply trust the government to do it and do it right. It was trust in the government that allowed the NDAA and PA to pass. We can trust them to do the right thing, right??? **** NO! That is OUR job – to oversee the government NOT trust it.

The fact that I can turn on the water and ‘trust’ that it is relatively safe is not because I trust the government. It is because I keep an EYE ON GOVERNMENT. It is because we have a media, no matter how poor it has gotten, that covers these things and the government knows that if that water is not clean it is going to have a pissed off constituency to answer to.

So NO! I do not trust the government nor will I ever trust it. I will do my job as one of the overseers of government and such a job requires that I do not trust them. That I watch for their errors and demand that they be fixed. If more people would STOP trusting government we would be far better off.

Load of crap. I never said that we don't have a respondibility to oversee government. It is through our elections and our courts that we do so. We hire REPRESENTATIVES.......we need to trust that they will do the job. If not.....we get rid of them.

See the difference?

It's humorous that in 2014, over 90% of the representatives that supposedly

NOBODY TRUSTS ​

will be re-elected; many will not even be opposed.

Yeah, Nobody trusts the government....riiiight.

Either nobody on this board votes or there is a great deparity between what they think and what actually takes place in reality. I beleve the latter.

 

[martybegan]

And if the solution that is arrived at locally is not appetizing to a minority in that locality; what should the minority do?

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

Ahh...So either just take the injustice, move or revolt?

Humor me; you're black, it's 1960 and you're in Mississippi...which of the 3 options above would you have taken?

"Injustices" are often unconsitutional, and thus outside of the legislative powers of the majority (or at least should be).

I dont feign to know how I would react, But to address your point as to what occured back then, most went with option 1. Many went with option 2 and moved north, and some went with option 3, and fought it (although the revolt was a non violent one, using the courts).

 

[candycorn]

What any minority has to do when outvoted by the majority. 1) Deal with it, 2) Move 3) Revolt.

Ahh...So either just take the injustice, move or revolt?

Humor me; you're black, it's 1960 and you're in Mississippi...which of the 3 options above would you have taken?

"Injustices" are often unconsitutional, and thus outside of the legislative powers of the majority (or at least should be).

I dont feign to know how I would react, But to address your point as to what occured back then, most went with option 1. Many went with option 2 and moved north, and some went with option 3, and fought it (although the revolt was a non violent one, using the courts).

Was the nationalization of the State National Guard a federal over-reach?