I suppose you never thought about the fact that statements like Buck Ofama in your signature line instigates this?
In my thousands of posts the lion's share I go into great detail on policy and my personal life experiences that lead me to my conclusions. But I'm not afraid to be confrontational either. I guess much like my avatar, Billy Jack, I'm not looking to fight. However I will be relentless in protecting those I care for from others bullying attacks.
I never said balance. I said address. When something is wrong it should be addressed and not just swept under the rug and ignored. It matters not whether this pertains to me or some other American completely different than me. Never let yourself believe that just because someone different than yourself is being persecuted you can't suffer the same fate.
In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.
1960 isn't 2009. If it were you'd have posted the 2008 Democratic Party platform.
The proceeding words "to promote" the general welfare is saying that government can step in to help its people when they are in dire straits. Promote means to foster or to help. What is being said is America is not a government can never help its people fend for yourself or die society nor is it a socialist, everything will be given to you, state.
There's no way this can be done without hurting poor and low income workers. In example: if you keep a 20k per year waitress in the same tax bracket and also lower the 200k per year banker's tax bracket down to the waitress's lower tax bracket there is simply less tax revenue coming in.
Every new budget is always the largest budget because everything goes up in price. Clinton had the so-called peace dividend and he was able to cut military spending. I will say I am a big fan of Bill Clinton and his deficit cutting approach and when people aren't suffering and businesses aren't failing I'm fully in agreement with trying to cut the deficit but people come first.
I will tell you this, wasting $12 billion per month for 8 years in Iraq and skyrocketing health care costs have helped make our economic problems even worse. President Obama created none of this and is simply dealing with the hand he was dealt. Without action we quite possibly could be in another depression and not just the Bush recession.
You leave out many other things that were going on in Nazi Germany. There is absolutely no correlation between Nazi Germany and the American bail out of some of its most important companies.
There are many good reasons for regulation other than the two you cite. One just off the top of my head would be environmental reasons. If Acme Corp. is dumping toxins or raw sewage into my streams and lakes, then I'm drinking it. That is neither force nor fraud.
Everything that might come up in 200 years is not specifically addressed in our constitution. That doesn't mean that the government doesn't have a responsibility to keep the American financial system from collapsing. It does.
But banks wouldn't loan on these companies situations would they? The government had to put out a huge taxpayer loan investment at the request of these businesses that were about to fail. It would be a breach of their fiduciary duty if they were not fully engaged as any major shareholder would be.
Well you'd be wrong. The Democratic platform is not one that looks to discriminate. Saying the Democratic party now wants to discriminate against whites is like saying supporting the women's right to vote was wishing to discriminate against men.
And yes, Democrats have started many wars. Funny how Republicans try to portray us as afraid to fight, hum. But let's also remember Republican administrations have been some of the major escalators of war even when we knew the war was lost, as with Nixon in Vietnam.
I don't know that all Democratic ideas are good. I'm simply saying that this place in time the Democrats have a much better overall package. I at one time was a registered Republican, then an Independent and since the Clinton administration a registered Democrat.
You can balance it. You can make it fair for all people. It may not be specifically what every single different person wants but you can make it fair. If it's fair it doesn't violate individual rights.
Some things have overall bad societal effects and I do understand the idea of regulating them.
Once again, bad to another person is bad to another person. Smoking for instance affects others. I don't really care if it's a rich person or a poor person blowing second hand smoke in my face, I'm equally affected.
Extreme positions can be good or they can just be radical. Most often extreme means self satisfying, self promoting ideology more than good policy or law.
And there are often good ideas all around the middle of a good idea. I try to find compromise without abandoning the things I see as most important.
