The only proper purpose of a government

[Oddball]

There you have it....The self-righteous dictatorial mob ruler mentality.

Thanks for demonstrating exactly the despotic mindset that Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et. al. sought to prevent from taking over the republic.

 

[ilia25]

Communist China and quasi-communist Russia have democratic legislative assemblies, too.

Ever tired of playing dumb?

The government is China and Russia interfere heavily with freedom of speech and freedom of elections. That precludes any possibility of having a real democracy.

 

[Oddball]

So what?...They're democratic bodies....And they exert exactly the kind of tyrannical authoritarian central controller mindset that occupies your black little soul.

 

[regent]

Communist China and quasi-communist Russia have democratic legislative assemblies, too.

Seems to me the difference between democracy and the American republic of 1787 are different in far more than "technical" terms.

Democracy was a dirty word in 1787, yet some also realized that some people, mostly those that owned land, should be involved. Then too there was the Declaration and all that stuff about equality. America gradually became more democratic over the years. We no longer fear democracy and in fact, are proud of having a democratic/republic.
Often quoted is Franklin's response to Mrs. Powel's question, have you given us a monarchy or republic. The word republic has at least two definitions, a representative government or a government that does not have a monarch. The founders gave us both. The USSR was also named as a republic.

 

[Oddball]

Communist China and quasi-communist Russia have democratic legislative assemblies, too.

Seems to me the difference between democracy and the American republic of 1787 are different in far more than "technical" terms.

Democracy was a dirty word in 1787, yet some also realized that some people, mostly those that owned land, should be involved. Then too there was the Declaration and all that stuff about equality. America gradually became more democratic over the years. We no longer fear democracy and in fact, are proud of having a democratic/republic.
Often quoted is Franklin's response to Mrs. Powel's question, have you given us a monarchy or republic. The word republic has at least two definitions, a representative government or a government that does not have a monarch. The founders gave us both. The USSR was also named as a republic.

Thank you, George Orwell.

 

[ilia25]

There you have it....The self-righteous dictatorial mob ruler mentality.

There is no such thing as a mob rule government.

Thanks for demonstrating exactly the despotic mindset that Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et. al. sought to prevent from taking over the republic.

Their fears were unfounded and so their efforts were very much misguided. Just look at the result -- instead of creating a system of government that would protect the democracy, they created something that made it dysfunctional.

The British parliamentary system is way more effective and there is no evidence that is any more prone to turning into a dictatorship.

 

[Oddball]

There you have it....The self-righteous dictatorial mob ruler mentality.

There is no such thing as a mob rule government.

Thanks for demonstrating exactly the despotic mindset that Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et. al. sought to prevent from taking over the republic.

Their fears were unfounded and so their efforts were very much misguided. Just look at the result -- instead of creating a system of government that would protect the democracy, they created something that made it dysfunctional.

The British parliamentary system is way more effective and there is no evidence that is any more prone to turning into a dictatorship.

Yes...Let's embrace communism....Much more streamlined.

 

[ilia25]

So what?...They're democratic bodies..

Are you serious? Those bodies are practically appointed by the government!

 

[Oddball]

Oh, and the bulk of our current "democratic" bureaucracy isn't a bunch of well-connected ruling class appointees?

Goddammit, are you naïve!

 

[ilia25]

There you have it....The self-righteous dictatorial mob ruler mentality.

There is no such thing as a mob rule government.

Thanks for demonstrating exactly the despotic mindset that Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, et. al. sought to prevent from taking over the republic.

Their fears were unfounded and so their efforts were very much misguided. Just look at the result -- instead of creating a system of government that would protect the democracy, they created something that made it dysfunctional.

The British parliamentary system is way more effective and there is no evidence that is any more prone to turning into a dictatorship.

Yes...Let's embrace communism....Much more streamlined.

You are confused. Communism is not a system of government, it is a social order.

And calling the UK a communist country is something -- but coming from you, it is not at all unexpected.

 

[Oddball]

Useful idiot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ilia25]

Oh, and the bulk of our current "democratic" bureaucracy isn't a bunch of well-connected ruling class appointees?

Ruling class? The only people you could have possibly called that are those making millions -- those whose right to keep their income for themselves you defend with such a vigor.

As for the bureaucracy, you are damn right that it is appointed -- by democratically elected representatives. Or you think that process is corrupted w/o press and anyone else noticing?

 

[ilia25]

Useful idiot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is what you are for Koch brothers or Peter Peterson.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oddball got bounced around again. Nothing new. He is a useful fool of his masters.

 

[neomalthusian]

Yup, right-wingers are scared of democracy.

As a rule, most people (not just right-wingers) praise democracy when the majority is singing their tune, and otherwise, not so much.

Most of them are country people living in fear of those urban hordes coming to take away their property.

That's actually exactly what would happen if civilization collapsed. But anyway, you say this with a degree of conviction that begs a link/source. Do you have one?

 

[Inthemiddle]

It's even worse than that....For decades, the bureaucratic buttpipes at the FDA knew that a chewed aspirin was a safe and effective short-term remedy for AMI patients, but prohibited aspirin manufacturers from printing indications for use in those instances and also prohibited EMS personnel from administering aspirin to their AMI patients, without the direct authorization of the attending ER doc....Those rules were only changed in the late '90s.

The FDA has literally killed people who would otherwise be alive, with their dictatorial mindset.

1) No, they did not "know." They believed such, and with good reason, too. But scientifically, the matter was still being established.

2) The prevailing evidence and scientific knowledge indicates that adminstration of asprin need be within a 24 hour time frame of the onset of the heart attack, with immediate administration having no substantial effect than administration later in the first 24 hour time period. It can just as well be administered by medical personnel at the hospital and have the same effect as being administered in the ambulance.

3) You clearly don't now how EMS works. EMTs don't take orders from ER doctors. They take orders from medical directors who work for the emergency response entity, not the hospital. It is a very simple matter for a medical director to establish standing orders to administer aspirin when AMI is suspected. And this was just as true in the 80s as it is now. Of course, EMTs do not diagnose medical condititions, so saying that EMTs administer aspirin to heart attack patients is a little nonsensical.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The founders would keep on sailing if they saw this current form of government.

Then again, the founders were traitors and terrorists.

According to gubmint school revisionist history.

So which part of the following is incorrect?

1) The colonies were part of the Kingdom of Great Britian.
2) Residents of the colonies at times resorted to destruction of private property for political purposes, with the intention or hope to effect political change.
3) Residents of the colonies at times resorted to violence against the uniformed military.
4) Residents of some colonies erected false governments in rebellion against the established governments under law.
5) The colonies raised armies that engaged in open hostilities against their Sovereign.

 

[candycorn]

So are you free to leave...Move the **** to China.

I think the country is doing well; not great but I wouldn't trade places with anyone else in any other country.

Unlike many like yourself who relish in the hope that some doom and gloom visit every door in our land, I think our best days lay ahead.

I will not move to China. But if you--as you apparently do--think it is better, feel free to leave fuckstain. Nobody is stopping you; belive me when I say nobody will miss you except for the fleas in your hair that is.

I mean, seriously, being pissed off about 100% of things 100% of the time isn't worth it. Maybe you can mine mercury in Italy or grow rice in Mongolia. Nobody cares what you do. You're not helping anything here; you're not informed, you're not informing....you're a zero. A nothing. A void in the atmosphere.

Get lost.

 

[candycorn]

Feel free to leave. Boats leave for foreign lands every day; planes every hour.

The founders would keep on sailing if they saw this current form of government.

As recited by History, the founders (i.e. the definition of the word) founded a new country from colonies.. They would have sailed from any established empire. That was a dumb post of yours.

 

[candycorn]

Feel free to leave. Boats leave for foreign lands every day; planes every hour.

Good, why don't you get on one ......one that is with an oil leak....

I like it here. You do not. 332-206 beeotch. Sound familiar?