Proper role of government..

[fj1200]

It depends on how fallen the society is. When landlords commonly think a security deposit is a "lease administration fee", rentals need to be tightly regulated. When car repair shops commonly run up a four figure bill on a car needing no repairs, car repairs need to be tightly regulated. A society that mostly is unethical doesn't deserve freedom. Pre-Castro Cuba had nearly degraded to a "modern" Sodom and Gomorrah in the 1950s. I at least entertain the idea that it deserved Castro. Maybe they have learned their lesson in 50+ years. Our country is defined how each of us live our everyday lives. The politics reflect the society, not the other way around. Socialism, Communism or even Stalinism is appropriate for a nation that completely loses its sense of right and wrong.

I'd argue that regulations do not effectively address the issues and are counterproductive. We need a government that enforces contracts and encourages transparency. The difference between right and wrong is when one side is able to force its will against the other and a governmental system that is based on that, writ large, is not a solution to the inherent problems.

[Abbey Marie]

Do you have the power of your convictions? Your second question; Not really an option is it?

Actually, I think his second question is the better question. If we are forced to pay into these programs, the choice to forgo really isn't ours to make. What is the point of asking whether we will refuse to accept the money we've paid in? It's ours, and we deserve to get it back.

A better question might be, would LA be willing to refuse handouts if he falls on hard times? Such as welfare. Or unemployment benefits, if he hasn't paid into those already, too.

[fj1200]

Actually, I think his second question is the better question. If we are forced to pay into these programs, the choice to forgo really isn't ours to make. What is the point of asking whether we will refuse to accept the money we've paid in? It's ours, and we deserve to get it back.

A better question might be, would LA be willing to refuse handouts if he falls on hard times? Such as welfare. Or unemployment benefits, if he hasn't paid into those already, too.

It's a fine question but it's also the difference between what is and what is not. At this point we do NOT have the option of opting out of SS/Medicare and covering ourselves but we will, IMO, come to a point where those programs will be curtailed and my question gets to the heart of whether any strict Constitutionalists will scream, "I want mine," even as they rail against the program. You can easily forgo those programs, I believe Romney has already opted out of Medicare. I heard Neal Boortz discussing the subject of whether to take SS when he gets to that point; not taking it as he would have the option to do or taking it and donating to charity because he can accomplish more good with those dollars than leaving it in government hands.

Besides, it's not yours, SCOTUS says so.

Kathianne said she could get SNAP but doesn't; that, to me, is a position of conviction.

[Kathianne]

It's a fine question but it's also the difference between what is and what is not. At this point we do NOT have the option of opting out of SS/Medicare and covering ourselves but we will, IMO, come to a point where those programs will be curtailed and my question gets to the heart of whether any strict Constitutionalists will scream, "I want mine," even as they rail against the program. You can easily forgo those programs, I believe Romney has already opted out of Medicare. I heard Neal Boortz discussing the subject of whether to take SS when he gets to that point; not taking it as he would have the option to do or taking it and donating to charity because he can accomplish more good with those dollars than leaving it in government hands.

Besides, it's not yours, SCOTUS says so.

Kathianne said she could get SNAP but doesn't; that, to me, is a position of conviction.

However, if I had to take benefits, I would. Not only have I paid into those benefits, but so has everyone. What I do think this woman and the Church and others prove is that if there wasn't SNAP, those most in need would get it. If SNAP didn't exist and I needed help, I've plenty of family and friends. I do not have to worry about being homeless or hungry. Just depressed.

[fj1200]

However, if I had to take benefits, I would. Not only have I paid into those benefits, but so has everyone.

And I think a safety net can be a necessary function of government, at the state level hopefully, but I think the notion of "paid into" is a misnomer that causes one to expect that they have a right to benefits. It's the difference between arguing a safety net as a proper role of government and government creating a virtual retirement program.

[Kathianne]

And I think a safety net can be a necessary function of government, at the state level hopefully, but I think the notion of "paid into" is a misnomer that causes one to expect that they have a right to benefits. It's the difference between arguing a safety net as a proper role of government and government creating a virtual retirement program.

I agree. On the 'paid into that,' I mean because a program there. Personally I agree that there should be a safety net, but with clear limits.

I have some conundrum here though; I don't like the government telling folks what to eat, sleep, drive, wear, etc. I will say honestly that I've believed that making choices is how one learns to manage things. Through mistakes, learning happens. That doesn't seem to be working with SNAP though. My 'part-time' job has soured me on folks either needing the benefits or they have terrible diets. Yesterday another $25 sale of candy, chips, pop-at Walgreens. $1.83 for a pop! I mean if your going to drink empty calories, get a good price on it!

I do think the programs should be state or local. There should be limits on who gets and how it's used.

[tailfins]

Tyr,

The founding fathers NEVER meant for us to be a welfare state and it is clear to me that States are now like little nations who are members of the UN. They cater to the master and it seems that our States are doing the same. The only problem is the RED STATES who are not completely sold out YET. The UNION is not working the way it was intended and I'm getting to the point that I'd rather see RED STATES do their own thing before we all go down together. If you hanging from a cliff and both are going to fall (both WILL fall) and you can save yourself by cutting the rope...you may have to cut the rope.

I'm all for holding on for a brother but the more I see of blue states the more foreign they seem. I actually see blue states as an enemy because from within these blue states are those who STRIVE to dictate my religion, how I raise my children and with how I am to defend my family (if I'm allowed to defend them at all). The disease is spreading and I heard that a gal in Mississippi is raising can and determined to ban "assault weapons". Close the border you say....I'm about ready to close our State lines. Keep your filth out of my State...I like it the way it is right now thank you very much. You fix your problems before trying to ram your filth down our throats.

Am I a rebel? I must be if I refuse to cave in to the whims and will of those who would force me to live as one who occupied a plot of land and required to work for the Lord who owned that land with promises of entitlements and/or protection. Am I a rebel...YES! Just as those who broke free from King George! We may very well have to start this thing all over again! Boys, keep you powder dry, your axes sharp and your knives handy.

Tyr, I'd rather look over my shoulder for common thieves and vile murderers than look over my shoulder in fear of my gov. A gov. that is going to 'allowed' what I say, do or think and whether I'm 'allowed' to own something at any given moment or with what I'm to defend myself with...if I'm allowed to defend myself at all. You've posted for years and have met many folks. You've read the posts from some of these liberals who would gladly see the same thing happen to you as what this scum wrote about the six year old boy who so adequately voiced his opinion about reasons that NONE of us should (or should have) voted for B.O. Granted, few are civil and even open minded but most are vile little liberals from all over the world. Regardless of where they originate, they all share the same mindset. Over the years, you've read posts of those who label themselves conservatives but when you get down to it...they're really not conservative at all and would give you up in a second. All of them consider us a threat to their "image" or to their "agenda". Many of them consider us to be vigilantes, racist, ignorant rednecks, doomsayers and an obstacle that prevents progress, equality and harmony.


Attachment 3828

For someone who wants to responsible for himself, you sure worry about who wins elections. Even Limbaugh says his success is not determined by who wins elections. I'll take Cambridge, Mass. (where coincidentally due to popular demand Cuban government TV is available on cable) over Mississippi any day of the week. There are good "Red" states and crappy "Red" states just as there are "Blue". Sure, conservative policies tend to produce prosperity and liberal policies tend to be a drag, but they are not an end all and be all. There are just too many moving parts to that calculation. If you are an educated person, Massachusetts is currently the best place in the nation to weather the recession.

If you can stomach paying $3,000 for a small apartment, Williston, ND is also an employee's labor market. Politics is a much smaller factor than you realize. I may consider Dallas-Fort Worth in the future depending on how severe the typical problems of traffic congestion and housing shortages are. Currently Texas is not a good environment because the hype has caused too many refugees from the recession to move there, overpowering the job market. The Texas unemployment rate is almost two percentage points higher than New Hampshire which is part of the Boston labor market.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

THOMAS JEFFERSON
At 5, began studying under his cousin's tutor.
At 9, studied Latin, Greek and French.
At 14, studied classical literature and additional languages.
At 16, entered the College of William and Mary.
At 19, studied Law for 5 years starting under George Wythe.
At 23, started his own law practice.
At 25, was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.
At 31, wrote the widely circulated "Summary View of the Rights of British America " and retired from his law practice.
At 32, was a Delegate to the Second Continental Congress.
At 33, wrote the Declaration of Independence .
At 33, took three years to revise Virginia ’s legal code and wrote a Public Education bill and a statute for Religious Freedom.
At 36, was elected the second Governor of Virginia succeeding Patrick Henry.
At 40, served in Congress for two years.
At 41, was the American minister to France and negotiated commercial treaties with European nations along with Ben Franklin and John Adams.
At 46, served as the first Secretary of State under George Washington.
At 53, served as Vice President and was elected president of the American Philosophical Society.
At 55, drafted the Kentucky Resolutions and became the active head of Republican Party.
At 57, was elected the third president of the United States .
At 60, obtained the Louisiana Purchase doubling the nation’s size.
At 61, was elected to a second term as President.
At 65, retired to Monticello .
At 80, helped President Monroe shape the Monroe Doctrine.
At 81, almost single-handedly created the University of Virginia and served as its first president.
At 83, died on the 50th anniversary of the Signing of the Declaration of Independence.
John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement: "This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to gather at one time in the White House with the exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe .
Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
Thomas Jefferson
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive
the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson's brilliance can not be questioned by any honorable intelligent person. His life and accomplishments speak clearly to us especially in regards to the government's role and the danger government represents to our lives and freedoms! I have no doubt that if Jefferson were alive to judge today his opinion of obama and obama's treason would be that a day in court is due him and if found guilty he should receive the strongest sentence allowed by law..-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/head...ood-bad-state/

The Good State and the Bad State, Progressivism, Part III
What Constitution?
Posted July 14, 2010
Most Americans pay homage to the U.S. Constitution. Public officials swear to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, both foreign and domestic,” and the late Sen. Robert Byrd, who wrote the book on pork barrel spending, carried a copy of the document with him at all times.

Almost everyone in authority claims to revere the Constitution. However, few people of them believe they should be bound by the limitations that define the document.
During the late 1800s and early 1900s the U.S. Supreme Court struck down laws imposed at all governmental levels that attempted to regulate business hours and employee pay. Today, the U.S. secretary of labor dictates much labor policy
-------------------------------

Progressives won the day because they gained control of the institutions that serve as “gatekeepers” in civil society, and they also won because intervention begets more intervention. For example, the Federal Reserve System, a favorite of Progressives, helped create the Great Depression and the New Deal, which, in effect, overthrew what was left of the constitutional order.

Today, the United States is what I call a “Progressive Democracy,” bearing little resemblance to the republic that existed 200 years ago. However, no matter how “advanced” government may claim to be, it still is government and needs to be controlled.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any government powerful enough to give you all you need (cradle to grave care) is powerful enough and quite likely to take all you have at some point in time!
Not only is our government too damn big it has also went down a dark and scary path that lends itself easily to powermadness. Such madness will march towards dictatorial power if not reversed. The beast ALWAYS aspire to have absolute control over its victims!--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A liberal state of mind just in time to displace us as the strong guardsman in this evil and violent 'ole world!
The progressive (liberal fantasy)philosophy, an economic failure, is also a massive blight on our souls. For it chains man to his fellow man and impoverishes all of society by taking away man’s individualism, his sense of responsibility and his self-worth. The progressive (liberal)state dehumanizes and demoralizes man, leaving him a pathetic and miserable lttle slave. There is no compassion in such a system. There is no morality in such a system. All that there is man ruling over his fellow man, throwing miserly government benefits at various mindless voting groups unable to see through such a scheme after so many years of socialistic ideological subversion. Yet we are blessed that our founders gave us a great and valuable weapon, the vote, which come this November we can as defenders of our culture, lives and nation use to great advantage by kicking out the vermin that has infected and tortured us so greatly since 2008.-Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

a liberal state of mind just in time to displace us as the strong guardsman in this evil and violent 'ole world!
The progressive (liberal fantasy)philosophy, an economic failure, is also a massive blight on our souls. For it chains man to his fellow man and impoverishes all of society by taking away man’s individualism, his sense of responsibility and his self-worth. The progressive (liberal)state dehumanizes and demoralizes man, leaving him a pathetic and miserable lttle slave. There is no compassion in such a system. There is no morality in such a system. All that there is man ruling over his fellow man, throwing miserly government benefits at various mindless voting groups unable to see through such a scheme after so many years of socialistic ideological subversion. Yet we are blessed that our founders gave us a great and valuable weapon, the vote, which come this november we can as defenders of our culture, lives and nation use to great advantage by kicking out the vermin that has infected and tortured us so greatly since 2008.-tyr

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

^^^^^ the vote = our weapon against obama!!!! Use it or lose the nation..--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.sentryjournal.com/2011/01...to-grant-them/

Do you own you own body? Apparently not, according to the left, as they take the stance that people can be “nudged (Cass Sunstein)” into doing as the state wishes. Also, is it not Mr. Sunstein that suggests that organs might be removed from living people? Do you control your body when the government wishes to determine what you can or cannot eat, or otherwise consume, or what type, amount, or frequency of health care you can receive? Again, the left seems to act as if YOU belong to them, and that all that you do is subject to government intervention and supervision. Hate crimes laws take into consideration what an individual may or may have been thinking when they committed a crime, are we then to assume that the government means to legislate our thought processes?
Beyond the basic control over one’s body, the basic property that all of us have is our labor. We contract with an employer, or a customer, in order to exchange currency, goods , and services. We own our labor, and Locke and the founders suggest that this too, is an unalienable right. However, do we own our own labor when the government takes ever increasing amounts of it? Do we own our own labor when, depending on where one works, a labor union can take from you and use it against your own best interests? For that matter, can one be forced to join a union against their will? Also, why does government turn a blind eye to the violence committed by labor unions? Do we own our own labor when the government advocates forcing you to “volunteer” that labor (The GIVE act)? For that matter, do we own our own labor when, this year, the average American worked into August to pay off their tax bills?
A common deception of the left is to not ban something that they want to “go away.” Rather, they use increasing levels of taxation or regulation to make it either impossible to exercise a right, or create so many administrative hoops that one can only exercise a right within a narrow window of government regulation. Can we use our property as we see fit, or do we have to leap through many hoops to do what we want? Can we control the heat and power consumption of our home, or will the “smart grid” do that for us? Can government take our property and hand it over to private developers? It’s happening all over. Are sustainable development regulations being translated into zoning and building codes all over the US? Yes, they determine where you can build, what you can build, and how big it can be, and a myriad of other requirements that have to be met. Is the government “nudging” us into living in certain areas, all in the name of eliminating “suburban sprawl?” In the end, are we really free to own and use property, or does the government create an environment in which we can (at least for now) own property, but can only do with it as they allow?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A brilliant commentary on the status the American citizen has now. The last 40+years has eroded our rights so greatly!! Our founders would be in shock to see that we do not even know what has been taken from us unless we are old enough to have lived those 40 or 50 years ago. Thats how they do it it, a small cut here , one there and over time the cuts add up to get te desired results, its the leftist way.. -Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Poli...n/jeff1230.htm

Thomas Jefferson on Politics & Government

---

26. Presidential Elections

The Constitution created a strong presidency, but the fear was that it might become an office for life, or even hereditary. Jefferson's recommendation that the President be limited to two terms in office was not implemented until the ratification of the 22nd Amendment in 1951. The executive department should be subject to change by the people on short intervals, and this may require not only the replacement of the President himself, but also the subordinate office holders in the government.

---

"The people... are not qualified to exercise themselves the Executive department; but they are qualified to name the person who shall exercise it. With us, therefore, they choose this officer every four years." --Thomas Jefferson to Abbe Arnoux, 1789. ME 7:422, Papers 15:283

"I have ever considered the constitutional mode of election ultimately by the Legislature voting by States as the most dangerous blot in our Constitution, and one which some unlucky chance will some day hit and give us a pope and antipope." --Thomas Jefferson to George Hay, 1823. FE 10:264

"While the Presidential election was in suspense in Congress,... [I believed] it to be my duty to be passive and silent during the present scene; that I should certainly make no terms; should never go into the office of President by capitulation, nor with my hands tied by any conditions which should hinder me from pursuing the measures which I should deem for the public good." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1806. ME 1:451

• The Principle of Rotation in Office

"I apprehend... that the total abandonment of the principle of rotation in the offices of President and Senator will end in abuse." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Rutledge, 1788. ME 7:81
"My fears of [the re-eligibility of the President] were founded on the importance of the office, on the fierce contentions it might excite among ourselves if continuable for life, and the dangers of interference, either with money or arms, by foreign nations to whom the choice of an American President might become interesting." --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821. ME 1:118
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson warned against electing a man like obama and Andrew Jackson would have likely ran obama's sorry ass out of town on a rail..-Tyr