Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Guess what committee this is from


Anonymous said...

I'm really starting to turn on republicans all together. I'd like to meet one, just one, who is a real person. Every one i have ever met goes around masquerading as a civil person, but when it comes to their ideas on how to make America a great place to live, it feels like they want America to become their country only, like an island of intolerance. Of course they would keep the minorities around, so they can cook all of their fast food since they only know how to cook apple pies, steaks and potatoes, which by the way has given them the diabeets. Oh well let them be, they will soon be the minority cooking not my burrito at taco bell, but they will be cooking up heroin on the street to numb the pain of a life of irresponsibility funded by their precious GOP, and lobbyists.
I want to hear from one, I want to know that when they are nice to my face will they be nice behind my back? Will they refrain from condemning me to hell all because I cavort with free thinkers and libertarians? will they shun me because I am not a Christian? I have put up with their "nice guy" attitude for too long just to be shit on in the end.

stanley lipski

Tyler said...

well put

Bello Velo said...

Well said, Consider who the minorities in this country are. The rich are the minority, we the working, the poor, middle class etc... are the majority. Consider the following:

... The founding fathers repeated the sentiments of the British "men of best quality" in almost the same words. As one put it "When I mention the public, I mean to include only the rational part of it. The ignorant and vulgar are as unfit to judge of the modes [of government], as they are unable to manage [its] reins." The people are a "great beast" that must be tamed, his colleague Alexander Hamilton declared. Rebellious and independent farmers had to be taught, sometimes by force, that the ideals of the revolutionary pamphlets were not to be taken too seriously. The common people were not to be represented by countrymen like themselves, who know the people's sores, but by gentry, merchants, lawyers, and other "responsible men" who could be trusted to defend privilege.

The reigning doctrine was expressed clearly by the President of the Continental Congress and first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay "The people who own the country ought to govern it." One issue remained to be settled Who owns the country? The question was answered by the rise of private corporations and the structures devised to protect and support them, though it remains a difficult task to compel the public to keep to the spectator role.

The United States is surely the most important case to study if we hope to understand the world of today and tomorrow. One reason is its incomparable power. Another is its stable democratic institutions. Furthermore, the United States was as close to a tabula rasa as one can find. America can be "as happy as she pleases," Thomas Paine remarked in 1776 "she has a blank sheet to write upon." The indigenous societies were largely eliminated. The U.S. also has little residue of earlier European structures, one reason for the relative weakness of the social contract and of support systems, which often had their roots in pre-capitalist institutions. And to an unusual extent, the sociopolitical order was consciously designed. In studying history, one cannot construct experiments, but the United States is as close to the "ideal case" of state capitalist democracy as can be found.

The main designer, furthermore, was an astute political thinker James Madison, whose views largely prevailed. In the debates on the Constitution, Madison pointed out that if elections in England" were open to all classes of people, the property of landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place," giving land to the landless. The Constitutional system must be designed to prevent such injustice and "secure the permanent interests of the country," which are property rights.

Among Madisonian scholars, there is a consensus that "the Constitution was intrinsically an aristocratic document designed to check the democratic tendencies of the period," delivering power to a "better sort" of people and excluding those who were not rich, well born, or prominent from exercising political power (Lance Banning). The primary responsibility of government is "to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority," Madison declared. That has been the guiding principle of the democratic system from its origins until today.

Anonymous said...

shit man that is deep. The constitution is deep too. They left a lot of loopholes for lawyers of today to pick over and exploit. I have a copy in my desk and even I need to read some of the material without looking too deeply into it.

The constitution is like the bible. People think they can excersize allegoric exegesis with the material and thats where we get extremism and baptists.

The baptisits are the same ones who take the constitution out of context too.

It's all the baptists fault.


Anonymous said...

Oh by the way, the part about dogsleds...that's an almost anti-palin gesture! goodness gracious!

clintpatty said...

I don't agree that the Constitution says that. But I do agree with Spagnola that it is like the Bible and different interpretations are to be expected. I also disagree that the US is the best example of a capitalist democracy. There has been too much government involvement for a while.

I would like for government to be disconnected from the money. It's ok if the rulers are rich, but not if they enact policies to benefit them at the expense of someone or something else, as too often happens. Bush is a great example of not doing this at all and still calling himself Republican. This administration is not fiscally conservative, and it benefits the ultra rich. So will McCain. Reagan was in a more fortunate economic situation that wasn't all his administration's doing just like the current situation can't be blamed all on the Bush administration. Real capitalism should not have government giving money or favorable legislation to businesses. The railroads were one of the first big failures of their country IMO, and started the ultra-rich class with government help.

Right now we're half assing it. And I don't like that. If you're going to half ass it, do it to benefit the majority, the middle class primarily then the poor, not the ultra rich. I guess I'm a republican to hear me talking, or more of a libertarian, but I am pretty much totally unsatisfied with the performance and unfulfilled promises and representation of the ruling class of the republicans.

Bello Velo said...

You don't agree that the Constitution say's what? It seems like that is what we have had since it's inception, protection does seem to be in place for the few ( those in power and wealth). Can you not see that now?

As far as the Republicans and Democrats you really need to look at the economic policies that have gotten us to this point. This would be Milton Freidman. His economic policies of "free markets" and de regulation started at the end of the Nixon presidency and were championed by Reagan. Reagan also destroyed the working class and turned us into a consumer nation. What does america make or manufacture anymore now? Beside trouble. These economic policies continue to this day.

Guess what they don't work "trickle down" etc... whatever name each new president ( including clinton) slaps on it continues it down this road.
*Internet Bubble
*Housing Bubble
*Non Stop War
*Broken Educational System
*Broken Healthcare
*Distrust of Government

Bush did one thing that was very smart got all these people in houses with debt and guess what happens people stop asking questions of their government because they do not want their cushy life style to get interrupted.

We should also accept that this style of democracy is really corporatism and the government will never be fixed or get smaller. We are a country of 300 million people therefore you will have a larger government just like a business grows so does your government.

As far as libertarians I don't get them they just seem to be the new republican party. Same old idea's. I think the one thing that Republicans and Libertarians have accomplished is the complete distrust and cynicism of our government. Works well for them keeps people fighting amongst themselves instead of addressing the real issues. Keeps people away from the polls too. I would say hold your government accountable make them do their jobs "speak up!"

I find it amazing and and that their is a new generation that has never had to do without. whatever they wanted they could have. Seems kind of selfish. We were the richest nation on earth we should also be the most generous instead we sound like spoiled children.

Bello Velo said...

How taxes get distributed federally. The states with bigger population and where most of the money is made and taxed New York California, Chicago etc. this is sent into the federal pool and distributed to states like Alabama for roads, schools and social programs.