OT: r - I thought you should see this

Page 9 of 11  
Mark & Juanita wrote:

Say, like George W. Bush, who's spent more on social entitlements both in real dollars and per capita than *any* other president? For the record, I supported W on pounding Iraq (and still do - it was the staying there that irritates me), but this guy's fiscal irresponsibility is at the same level as people like Kennedy and his horrid Leftie cronies.

You mean as opposed to the vigorously defended small central government Federalism the current crop of "Conservatives" and "Neo Conservatives" have managed to preserve? Government powers over the citizenry have been substantially expanded under this "Conservative" regime. I have no problem limiting civil liberties to invaders. I have a big problem doing so to people who are here legitimately: Citizens and legal guests. Why? Because We The Sheeple are Terror-fied.
If we ranked the risks to our health and wellbeing in order, and treated them with the same intensity we do the terror threat, there'd be National Guardsman at every exit ramp to try and reduce the some 40,000 highway deaths *per year*. But the bozo public and the power mad politicians (on all sides) have trumped up the terror threat all out of proportion to get their mitts on my freedoms. I don't like it much, but we're now more-or-less at the mercy of a bunch of terrified children instead of informed citizens... and W has happily exploited this to increase the power of the Executive Branch.
I speak as someone not wholly opposed to things like Patriot I & II or the NSA surveillance activities - some of this is inevitably necessary. But the failure of our government - all parts of it - to do this stuff transparently and with short sunsets on the laws that permit them is unconscionable. We are waddling our way to slavery ...

No, the Republicans are intellectually and philosophically debauched. They've bought into the Democrat/Liberal playbook page that says that "the Federal government's job is to do good for the people". The differ only in their respective definitions of the word "good". If you're a Democrat, doing "good" means funding out-of-wedlock pregnancies and then paying for abortions. If you're a Republican, doing "good" means feeding money to "faith based charities" and spending tax dollars to prevent people from doing naughty things: drugs, sex, gambling, or carrying more than 3oz of perfume in your carryon bag.
The two parties - and the apathetic culture that enables them - deserve each other. While liberty is growing around the planet, it is shrinking in the U.S., primarily due to the abandonment of our first principles: Limited government bounded by enumerated powers, personal liberty, and personal accountability.
It makes NO difference who wins the upcoming election. Either party and almost any of the candidates (other than Paul) will be only too happy to slaughter freedom on the altar of their self-proclaimed do-gooding...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sorry. GWB's spending is at a level that no one else has ever come close to reaching. He not only spent his political capital, he's spent the country's fiscal capital for years to come. How are your great- great grandkids doing? Well, I hope, as they're the ones who will be paying off his wonderful MBA touch.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's the other way around. For his first six years in office the Congress gave him everything he asked for.
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:22:31 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

There is this little problem of our freedom gradually being eroded away. If you can ignore that, you deserve to lose it.
It may be a lost cause, but I haven't given up yet.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What freedom have you lost?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
efgh wrote:

About all of 'em, if you haven't been paying 'tenshun... :(
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Could you be a little more specific please.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It used to be that if an American Citizen was detained in a foreign country, he was guaranteed the right receive visits from officials representing the US State Department.
A couple of years ago, (shortly before I left for a visit to Libya) The Bush administration quietly withdrew from that treaty.
For all intents and purposes, the privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus is gone. If the government can hold an American citizen incommunicado from even his own attorney, and without a showing of evidence, for four years during the appeal process the writ is effectively denied.
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Please itemize our lost freedoms. I'd like to know.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jeff wrote:

How about "serious erosion"...
Everything from the intrusion on travel to financial dealings to library and other information sources to encroachment on 2nd Amendment to the increasing "nanny state" restrictions on personal behavior deemed politically incorrect by the "enlightened"...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not a gun owner, so I have no idea. What guns would you like to buy that you can't?
In light of the fraudulent ratings Moody's, Standard, et al, recently affixed to some mortgage backed securities, some would say there isn't enough regulation in the financial markets.
Specifically, what restrictions on personal behavior vis a vis political correctness are you concerned about? AFAIK, the .gov protects offensive speech. Your employer may have a different view....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:14:16 -0800, Jeff wrote:

Perhaps you didn't read Freds reply - I quote:
"For all intents and purposes, the privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus is gone. If the government can hold an American citizen incommunicado from even his own attorney, and without a showing of evidence, for four years during the appeal process the writ is effectively denied."
And perhaps you also see no problem with eavesdropping without a warrant?
How about asking libraries to keep a record of what you take out?
How about the courts declaring that police have no responsibility to prevent a crime, only to apprehend the perp?
That should be enough for now.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A form of this has been around for years. It's called CCTV.

If it means for a better, more effficient and an increased selection for a particular section of books (fiction, woodworking, reference, etc), I'm all for it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

-snip-
How cute! Sweetie, that's not the purpose for which they're monitoring.
Renata
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I know. I was just putting a different spin on it. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Duh! Sorry - I was in a literal minded moment.
Renata
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jeff wrote:
... snip

Interesting statement you make there. You use the word "fraudulent" which implies illegal and against some law. Then you imply that what is needed is more regulation (i.e., more laws) to make sure those breaking the law don't.
You have no idea the amount of trouble that the so-called fixes like Sarbanes-Oxley have imposed on business all because of Enron and MCI. The cure is costing a huge amount that ultimately must be passed on to consumers.
Would seem to be more effective to just enforce the laws we already have.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Suits are running through the courts. So it will be decided. How would you describe those ratings if not fraudulent?

You omitted a few fiascoes but don't worry. Regulations remain on the books as long as ppl's memories.

What law did Standard & Poors violate when they rated dubious debt with their best designations? None that I'm aware of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Foolish. Someone said "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity".
I've been following the mess fairly closely. The ratings agencies have done serious damage to their creditability with AAA ratings on crap, but I haven't seen much that looks like fraud. I have seen a lot that looks like stupid.
But, as you say, the lawsuits will sort some it out.
-- Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Have you read the Patriot Act?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.