"He (Bush) speaks to the audience as if they're idiots. I think the reason he does that is because that's the way these issues were explained to him." - Graydon Carter
I think there's alot of other freedoms that nim-rod is intrested in having us loose. Now there's talk of foreign companies buying our highways, there's the talk of our ports being bought by Arabian nations (doesn't every arab govt have some tie in to a terroist group) I sincerly think that the use of fear (9-11) should be illegal in campaigning. The whole stick a boot up their ass routine has gotten us into this mess. War on drugs? The war on drugs has been used since the mid 1980's reagan era by your Weapons manufactureres, police equipment manufacturerers, big buisness, to make more money. The war on teh potheads has turned alot of people in law enforcement and all the related buisness's that are supplying law enforcemant with their armamant. Now mind you, I'm not some anti gun, anti war anti all american pothead, that thinks the bush/cheney/haliburton Administration and the religous republican right is out to turn this country into a money making machine for christians with political convitions. I love guns....got four of im myself... but I also realise that this country, that has been worried about whats been going on in the mid east sooo much, has let so much at home go to shit it's not even funny. And loosing the seconded amendmant has ntohing to do with it.
It's depressing, history will show how badly this admin has fuct this country up, it will take years to get it back into shape, and the war on terror, and the war on drugs are two things that running it into the ground. I just hope that this is all over by the time my boy gets ready to go into the world to make his way. And doesn't have to struggle.
Goddamn, I didnt' feel political this morning when I woke up!
Get the facts straight, the Dubai flap wasn't about the ports being "purchased", the ports were NEVER for sale, rather the contract to operate the port. It's a significant difference. Further, I suspect the highways issue is probably one of who maintains the roads and contracts out the operation of tollways. This is no different than a lot of other privatization measures that have gone on. More over, now that the Democrats have a nice "we're for security too" feather in their cap, they'll pleasantly ignore the basic fact that there STILL isn't any real funding for radiation detectors at the major container ports nor is there any real strengthening of our port infrastructure. The only benefit is that the issue was brought out in the open, as it should be, transparent and public.
If you're really going to sort out the port's deal, then you need to draw up new rules on what corporations can operate what contracts in the US and how much of those corporations can be held or operated by foreign governments.
I sincerely think that the use of fear (9-11) should be illegal in campaigning.
You claim to be worried about freedoms, but you propose that to insure it you restrict it? Pot, Kettle, Black. Don't defend something by proposing to restrict it. Please!
Even in this we have bi-partisan problem. Russ Fiengold and John McCain both think that Campaign finance needs to be reformed. The process of doing this will make the campaign finance system more abstract and insure that those in power stay in power. Money will still flow to the parties, but will take even more convoluted paths. Somehow, speech on the internet has been decided as being money and that can be regulated, so speech on the internet (or anywhere else in support of a campaign) is regulated. Sounds like a basic violation of 1st amendment rights to me. Many very intelligent people agree, yet the Federal Court that saw the case thought differently. Why is that?
The war on drugs is a sticky tar baby that's based on a desire for morality. However it's just like prohibition, it feeds the monster making it grow by trying to fight it. If the Democrats got off their "Not the Republicans" platform and really started standing up for our rights they'd get a lot more votes than they currently get. But they're too interested in pushing their new form of socialism if anything and can't get out of the corner they painted themselves into. If Democrats actually proposed a real system of legal drugs that wouldn't cost the government a single red cent and was harsh with people that used drugs in public or when operating equipment, then they'd actually be standing for something good. So far, they haven't. They're part of the problem too.
The Second Amendment rest on the basic perspective that you are your own first and last guardian. You are the defender of your safety and that of your family. Not the state. Welfare, taxes, nanny state ideals all touch on this, but ultimately it comes down to who takes care of you and who do you call for help. Federal case law dictates that the police are NOT responsible for your safety, yet there are places across the country where you have to show some significant cause or be famous or special to possess a firearm for self defense. The argument that is usually made in defense of this is that you're not the cops so you shouldn't have one. Yet, it's not the cops that typically get robbed or worse is it? If we tossed out this idea that the state is the one that comes to help you when you're hurt first last and always, the above poster would be less of a threat. People that choose to trade security for freedom be it in the form of more cops in lieu of their own actions or people that partake of a welfare state their whole lives when they have the means not to are directly involved in making the state our parents and removing our own choice from the equation.
Just look at the flap over Katrina and Federal response. That sorely proves my point. And illustrates the dichotomy in ideals of people that were down there. Some chose to stay and wait out the storm and it's after affects, they prepared ahead of time, had arms, fuel, water, supplies etc and were good. Others were used to living off the largesse of the state and when the state was not there, they demanded it come from the federal government. And then the chose to milk that cow for all it was worth. More interestingly some thought it wise to go around and forcibly remove people from their homes and/or disarm them when they were perfectly safe in their environs. What's wrong with this picture? Patricia Konie is a poster child for this. I hope she sues the shit out of the State, city and agencies involved in her kidnapping, assault and robbery. Question is, will the lesson sink in?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori
I don't know if guns are what we should be worried about...
I sincerly think that the use of fear (9-11) should be illegal in campaigning. The whole stick a boot up their ass routine has gotten us into this mess.
War on drugs? The war on drugs has been used since the mid 1980's reagan era by your Weapons manufactureres, police equipment manufacturerers, big buisness,
to make more money. The war on teh potheads has turned alot of people in law enforcement and all the related buisness's that are supplying law enforcemant with their armamant.
Now mind you, I'm not some anti gun, anti war anti all american pothead, that thinks the bush/cheney/haliburton Administration and the religous republican right is out to turn this country into a money making machine for christians with political convitions. I love guns....got four of im myself... but I also realise that this country, that has been worried about whats been going on in the mid east sooo much, has let so much at home go to shit it's not even funny. And loosing the seconded amendmant has ntohing to do with it.
It's depressing, history will show how badly this admin has fuct this country up, it will take years to get it back into shape, and the war on terror, and the war on drugs are two things that running it into the ground. I just hope that this is all over by the time my boy gets ready to go into the world to make his way. And doesn't have to struggle.
Goddamn, I didnt' feel political this morning when I woke up!
Re: I don't know if guns are what we should be worried about...
If you're really going to sort out the port's deal, then you need to draw up new rules on what corporations can operate what contracts in the US and how much of those corporations can be held or operated by foreign governments.
I sincerely think that the use of fear (9-11) should be illegal in campaigning.
You claim to be worried about freedoms, but you propose that to insure it you restrict it? Pot, Kettle, Black. Don't defend something by proposing to restrict it. Please!
Even in this we have bi-partisan problem. Russ Fiengold and John McCain both think that Campaign finance needs to be reformed. The process of doing this will make the campaign finance system more abstract and insure that those in power stay in power. Money will still flow to the parties, but will take even more convoluted paths. Somehow, speech on the internet has been decided as being money and that can be regulated, so speech on the internet (or anywhere else in support of a campaign) is regulated. Sounds like a basic violation of 1st amendment rights to me. Many very intelligent people agree, yet the Federal Court that saw the case thought differently. Why is that?
The war on drugs is a sticky tar baby that's based on a desire for morality. However it's just like prohibition, it feeds the monster making it grow by trying to fight it. If the Democrats got off their "Not the Republicans" platform and really started standing up for our rights they'd get a lot more votes than they currently get. But they're too interested in pushing their new form of socialism if anything and can't get out of the corner they painted themselves into. If Democrats actually proposed a real system of legal drugs that wouldn't cost the government a single red cent and was harsh with people that used drugs in public or when operating equipment, then they'd actually be standing for something good. So far, they haven't. They're part of the problem too.
The Second Amendment rest on the basic perspective that you are your own first and last guardian. You are the defender of your safety and that of your family. Not the state. Welfare, taxes, nanny state ideals all touch on this, but ultimately it comes down to who takes care of you and who do you call for help. Federal case law dictates that the police are NOT responsible for your safety, yet there are places across the country where you have to show some significant cause or be famous or special to possess a firearm for self defense. The argument that is usually made in defense of this is that you're not the cops so you shouldn't have one. Yet, it's not the cops that typically get robbed or worse is it? If we tossed out this idea that the state is the one that comes to help you when you're hurt first last and always, the above poster would be less of a threat. People that choose to trade security for freedom be it in the form of more cops in lieu of their own actions or people that partake of a welfare state their whole lives when they have the means not to are directly involved in making the state our parents and removing our own choice from the equation.
Re: I don't know if guns are what we should be worried about...
Just look at the flap over Katrina and Federal response. That sorely proves my point. And illustrates the dichotomy in ideals of people that were down there. Some chose to stay and wait out the storm and it's after affects, they prepared ahead of time, had arms, fuel, water, supplies etc and were good. Others were used to living off the largesse of the state and when the state was not there, they demanded it come from the federal government. And then the chose to milk that cow for all it was worth. More interestingly some thought it wise to go around and forcibly remove people from their homes and/or disarm them when they were perfectly safe in their environs. What's wrong with this picture? Patricia Konie is a poster child for this. I hope she sues the shit out of the State, city and agencies involved in her kidnapping, assault and robbery. Question is, will the lesson sink in?