Text 4781, 108 rader
Skriven 2004-11-10 14:35:00 av LEE LOFASO (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JOHN HULL
Ärende: Election
================
Hello John,

>JH>There are no signs it will change anytime soon.

>LL>The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

JH>Then work harder, you lazy bum!

The economy is for the person.  Not the other way around.

JH>Quit waiting for the damn government to GIVE it to you.

People are not slaves, and should never be forced into slavery.
Does the world owe me a living?  YOU BET IT DOES!  Unfortunately,
not everybody believes in freedom.  :'(

>JH>And what's wrong with one party in control?

>LL>The danger of falling into a dictatorship.

>JH>Really?  I guess its okay for 60 years on Democratic control
>JH>though, eh? Discussing anything with you is a gesture in futility.
>JH>Of course, that's the case with most liberals.  You've got no
>JH>perspective of history.

>LL>History according to liberals is much different than history
>LL>according to conservatives.  :)

>JH>We might actually get something done for a change, instead of just
>JH>standing around pissing on each other's shoes.

>LL>It has often been alleged that Mussolini got the trains to run
>LL>on time.  But in actuality, things got really fucked up under
>LL>Mussolini.

JH>Now you're accusing us of being Brown Shirts?  What's next, Nazis?
JH>Khmer Rouge?  You're beginning to piss me off, Lee.

All democracies have fascist tendencies.  That does not mean that Bush
is a fascist, or that the Republican Party is fascist.  FDR interned
thousands of Japanese Americans after the events of Pearl Harbor, and
during WWII.  That was a form of fascism.  Did that make FDR a fascist?
Did that make the Democratic Party fascist?  Bush interned over a
thousand Muslims after the events of 9-11 on suspicion they might be
terrorists. That was a form of fascism.  Does that make Bush a fascist?
Does that make the Republican Party fascist?

>JH>After all, the Democrats had their turn for nearly 50 years, and
>JH>didn't do much except increase dependency on government and
>JH>increase the welfare rolls and taxes.

>LL>Government should work *for* people, not against people.
>LL>That is why Democrats still believe in social justice.

>JH>Increasing the *amount* of government isn't working FOR anybody but
>JH>bureaucrats.  It damn sure don't have anything to do with justice,
>JH>social or otherwise.

>LL>The economy is for the person, not the other way around.

>JH>That isn't what this country is all about.

>LL>Yes, it is.

>JH>No, it isn't.  You need to reread the Declaration of Independence
>JH>and the Constitution.  If you believe all the stuff you've said here
>JH>you don't get i anymore.

>LL>Government is to "promote the general Welfare", according to our
>LL>Constitution.  Remember the old saying, "Government provides,

JH>You don't have a clue what that means, do you?

The U.S. Constitution is a good, legal document.  The U.S. Constitution
says what it means, and it means what it says.  Understanding the
Preamble to the U.S. Constitution is essential for understanding the
rest of the U.S. Constitution.  After all, the Preamble is part of the
U.S. Constitution.

>LL>business denies."  As such, what should the proper role of government b

JH>The proper role of government is to do those specific things spelled out in
JH>Constitution, and nothing more.  The proper role of government is to stay th
JH>hell out of the way of the individual, to allow him or her to get ahead on
JH>their sweat and tears.

"We the people" means our government is comprised "of the people, by the
people, for the people".  IOW, we can do whatever we damn well please.
After all, it's *our* government.

>LL>What should the proper role of business be?  Should government be
>LL>run like a business?  In my view, it should not.  After all,
>LL>business is in business to make a profit.  And government is supposed t
>LL>be a non-profit organization, working solely for the people, our
>LL>government being "We the people" (first three words of the U.S.
>LL>Constitution).

JH>Why don't you try actually living by the Constitution, instead of
JH>as a subject of the nanny state?

Nobody lives by the Constitution.  Nor would anybody want to.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * Hello, I am part number ³ºÞº³º³Û³ºÝ³ºÝ³³
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)