tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post8270503496859486056..comments2024-03-18T15:57:33.286-07:00Comments on Edward Feser: Deep breathEdward Feserhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comBlogger168125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-64787600439697609622024-02-07T15:30:34.395-08:002024-02-07T15:30:34.395-08:00The US is the ONLY first world country without na...The US is the ONLY first world country without nationalized health care. TI would cost two percent of our military budget to get every American free healthcare. We would NOT have to raise taxes. The res too the world pities, not envies, our so-called "healthcare system" which bankrupts 50000 americans a year.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-19143661043684293632023-11-11T17:25:18.838-08:002023-11-11T17:25:18.838-08:00The above post is one of the most undisguised, bla...The above post is one of the most undisguised, blatantly racist and sexist bigoted things I’ve ever seen. Do you own land, Wheeler? If not, then by your logic you shouldn’t voteAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-78734783357287044492013-01-20T18:50:24.308-08:002013-01-20T18:50:24.308-08:00This is fundamentally a problem of morality, or ma...This is fundamentally a problem of morality, or mathematical incompetence, or both. There are no honest leaders to tell the lemmings of the approaching cliff, because doing so results in being ousted and ostracized. Washington wil be forced to inflate their way out of this mess while lying about the inflation rate as they do now, pretending that inflation is low while groceries, energy, and basic goods and services continue to rise in price. The arrogance of folks in Washington to think that they have both the knowledge and intelligence to effectively perform "central planning" duties doesn't help. Businesses are paralyzed to a great extent because they have no idea what "punish the innocent" regulations or taxes are coming next, creating an entirely unstable economic base for hiring, increasing inventory, building orders, etc.<br /><br />Obama's disastrous election, at least to my unsophisticated political mind, says more about the education levels in this country than anything else. Between the utter failure of schools to effectively teach civics and economics, and the increase in the immigrant culture which brings with it a disregard for traditional American culture, the Democrats seem to have an increasing lock on political seats. And in many places where they don't have a lock, it is only the result of Republicans who've compromised principles in exchange for a seat at the table.Justinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-19844126119657028642012-11-26T16:06:28.621-08:002012-11-26T16:06:28.621-08:00They were a success for human rights,
Was the NDAA...<i>They were a success for human rights,</i><br />Was the NDAA repealed? Is the "kill or capture" list defunct?<br /><br /><i>peace,</i><br />Are all undeclared wars ended? Are our troops home? Are we done with drone strikes?<br /><br /><i>health care,</i><br />Did the government step out from between a patient and their doctor?<br /> <br /><i>democracy</i><br />Is the duopoly ended?<br /><br /><i>and the middle class.</i><br />Will there be no more Wall Street bailouts or corporate welfare at the expense of the middle class? Has the Federal Reserve stopped the endless devaluation of the currency the middle class depends on?Liberteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17878796551917615050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-44785153383995041212012-11-25T10:17:34.276-08:002012-11-25T10:17:34.276-08:00The elections were a disaster for the republicans....The elections were a disaster for the republicans. They were a success for human rights, peace, health care, democracy and the middle class.<br /><br />The current republican party and its minion (tea party) are an abomination. They are a disgrace to the republican party of old. They reign on fear, lies, religious fanaticism and ironically a capitalist (see darwinism) paradigm.<br /><br />I see the usual stupids are here preaching their nonsense. Now Obama is apparently a Marxist, just like a while back he was a mad man on an anti-religious crusade.<br /><br />It's sad seeing what otherwise usually is a sensible forum reduced to a rubble of sheer foolishness when it comes to politics.<br /><br />:-(Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-50552707743347821352012-11-19T07:13:13.667-08:002012-11-19T07:13:13.667-08:00Okay.Okay.W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-27365696914915802312012-11-18T23:48:28.891-08:002012-11-18T23:48:28.891-08:00Mr. Wheeler,
I've been very tolerant, but the...Mr. Wheeler,<br /><br />I've been very tolerant, but there are limits. Kindly stop spamming up the combox with this stuff or I start deleting.Edward Feserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13643921537838616224noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-71492548052613721432012-11-18T22:31:17.471-08:002012-11-18T22:31:17.471-08:00Politics is not some game of Tic-tac-toe. Politics...Politics is not some game of Tic-tac-toe. Politics is not like a choice between Vanilla or chocolate ice-cream. <br /><br />Politics is a life or death situation. Wrong choices led to death. Does anybody understand that? This country died. Us good people are now imprisoned in something we can not escape. It is our death warrant (q.v. Barnhardt, Vendee). Greece experienced what they called "club law". Club Law resurrected itself in the French Revolution, in Wiemar Germany, in Tsarist Russia, in the Spanish and Greek civil wars. <br /><br />What does History teach. <br /><br />Politics is deadly. People get killed. People are getting killed because they are idiots. Whole masses of idiots followed the demogogues. <br /><br />That is what is truly behind Plato's Republic and his Laws. Right politics is about remaining alive, escaping death. Do it wrong---and, literally, all hell breaks loose. <br /><br />Well, the thinking of people like Anon, have unleashed Hell on earth. I hope you people enjoy that. Hell is coming and it ain't going to be pretty. Is it any wonder that masses of people, The Herd, is often called "The Beast". The Beast has been unleashed in America and the good and the evil will suffer together. <br /><br />Why should I hold back my tongue. These people deserve a whipping. Too bad it is only my tongue. <br /><br />Politics is not child's play. And it is definitely not for the poor.W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-4205934905627056932012-11-18T21:50:33.098-08:002012-11-18T21:50:33.098-08:00And my take down so badly of this guy is really th...And my take down so badly of this guy is really the reflection upon Academia and the absolute shoddy work that they have done and the total indoctrination that goes on in our schools both Public and Catholic!<br /><br />His/her teachers ought to be ashamed of themselves. Secondly, if you can't handle the heat stay out of the kitchen! If you are going to step into the arena of Political discourse---then KNOW what the hell you are talking about. If you don't---you need to be cut down to size. The time of P#$%sy-footing around is over. It's time to go to the jugular. Wipe their silly grins from their face. <br /><br />I piped up one time and my mom told me "Firma la bouche". She continued, "Until you have read 30 books and traveled the world, then you can say something but until then, Firma La Bouche". I have read 30 books and then some, and I've been around the world in care of the US Navy. I've done my time. Methinks others ought to do the same. You don't go into battle half-assed. You go into battle with your ass wired. <br /><br />That is why the Greeks labeled "To be a cause of victory" a Virtue. To be a Cause of Victory. W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-83020780281043297562012-11-18T21:41:57.896-08:002012-11-18T21:41:57.896-08:00Marxists and liberals are smug. You have to put th...Marxists and liberals are smug. You have to put them in their place. The man has been rambling on here forever on the same stuff. In the short time, the man has not availed himself to any research and corrected his error. <br /><br />Just like in Homer, when a certain jokester started pestering Agamemnon, Odysseus took a whip and beat the man down. Sometimes you have to cut the rug out from under evil. Ignorance is an evil. And the man is spouting evil. As Telly Savalas (Kojak) said, "Sometimes cruelty is an act of kindness". Only a Greek understands that. <br /><br />I'm a Marine, I've been put in my place many a time. And I've learned from those situations. I also served this country with blood, sweat and tears. I lost my country---something that I sacrificed for. When I see the destroyers, They deserve no mercy. When it is a matter of life and death, there is no time to handle idiots with kid gloves. W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-63888246809952504342012-11-18T21:16:09.385-08:002012-11-18T21:16:09.385-08:00Wheeler Why not just criticize the guy's idea ...Wheeler Why not just criticize the guy's idea without character assassination? <br /><br />I know you are all awesome with yourr self-instruction but damn, why the character assassination every turn?Eduardonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-42216776569916203572012-11-18T21:05:33.342-08:002012-11-18T21:05:33.342-08:00Anon, are you in college?
If you are you should l...Anon, are you in college?<br /><br />If you are you should leave. You have no business in a place of higher learning. <br /><br />Are you a product of the public school system? or I'd hate to hear that you went to a private Catholic school. If then, Catholic schooling these days are as bad as public schools anyway. <br /><br />Anon, please. If I was as dumb as you I'd go around to as "anonymous". I'd hate to show myself. It is no wonder you hide behind a veil of anonymity!W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-91867838402860749502012-11-18T20:56:35.698-08:002012-11-18T20:56:35.698-08:00Anon goes on:
the government serves first to pro...Anon goes on: <br /><br /><i>the government serves first to protect the rights of the people,</i><br /><br />Is this what the Roman government did? The Athenian government did? The Persian Empire? The Pharoahs? When in history did this start? So if this is the purpose of government--then I would find this at the very beginning when government came into being, right?<br /><br />I'd like to ask what is your education Anon? Is it any wonder that you're anonymous because I'd be afraid to show myself after spouting so much nonsense. What kind of logic or reasoning or research or learning have you undergone? Or do you just have Leftist indoctrination?<br /><br /><i>the right for poor people to have a say in their government.</i><br /><br />There is absolutely NO right for poor people to have a say in their government! <br /><br />When someone asked Lycurgus why didn't you set up a democracy in your state, he is said to have replied, "Begin my friend, and set it up in your family first". Do parents give their children the right to vote? Do you let children vote? So why would you let the poor--the least educated, the least intelligent? What you have a death wish? Just read the de Tocqueville quotes above. That is what giving the poor the right to vote does----destroys the state!<br /><br /><i>who are mostly extremely poor people, who are mostly minorities?</i> <br /><br />Yea, so? When did any ancient state give foreigners a say in their government? Are you crazy? It would seem that the Ancients are more wiser than moderns who are just fools! What do minorities know about running a WASP government? Do you see anything like America in South America? Or in Central America? Or in Africa? Unlike you Anon, I've been around the world. Because I feel sentimental, I have to give other people the vote. Is this a way to run a country?<br /><br /><i>right to self-determination isn't God-given, it's purchased from the government. That suggestion is as anti-Christian as it is anti-Democratic.</i><br /><br />This again is all Atheist "Enlightenment" BS. There is NO right to self-determination. Did I determine myself to be a Male? NO. I was born that way. Did I determine myself to be 6 foot 1? NO. I was born that way. Did I determine myself to be Greek? NO. What right of "self-determination"? What I must have is Duty to my Kinsmen. That is a Duty, A Virtue that is forced upon me by being born into a group. That has always, always been so until the Enlightenment. <br /><br />When did we start taking order from a bunch of Atheists for? Scrap the stupid idiotic evil "Enlightenment"! And dropping this "self-determination" has nothing to do with Christianity or democracy. Democracy has NO meaning. 90% of all people throughout history have never lived by democracy! So being "anti-democratic" as a standard of judgement is nonsense. The longest, most used form of government has been Monarchy! God uses Monarchy! There is NO democracy in Heaven and by God there is NO "self-determination" in Heaven. You can have your "self-determination" In Hell but not in Heaven! If God uses Monarchy---Who is smarter---God or you stupid inane humans? I follow God's choice!<br /><br /><i>The reality is, you're trying to disenfranchise people who typically vote Democratic.</i><br /><br />Because no smart, sane person would want to live in a democracy! W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-25016272126850386222012-11-18T20:39:02.151-08:002012-11-18T20:39:02.151-08:00I forgot to ask if there is something called a &qu...I forgot to ask if there is something called a "constitutional republic" what is an "Unconstitutional republic"? is there such a thing? What is a straight republic? When I just say "republic" does that mean it is unconstitutional by fiat?<br /><br />Enquiring minds would like to know!W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-26641340861073598242012-11-18T20:36:19.290-08:002012-11-18T20:36:19.290-08:00This post is going to be a rebuttal to the nonsens...This post is going to be a rebuttal to the nonsense of Anon who writes: <i>"In a democratic republic,"</i><br /><br />There is NO such thing as a "democratic republic"! That is an oxymoron. A republic is mixed government. A democracy is Rule of the Poor! It is Montesquieu who invented this crap. He labeled Sparta an "aristocratical republic" and Athens a "Democratic republic". Aristotle who lived in damn Athens made NO such distinction. Actually Aristotle in his <i>Athenian Constitution</i> records how the Athenian Republic created by Solon was "changed by slow decrees and actions into a democracy". So no, Athens is NOT a "democratic republic" for otherwise Aristotle's words would be nonsense! Aristotle's <i>Athenian Constitution</i> and Cicero's <i>De Republica</i> were lost and were not recovered until 1830s and the 1910s. Montesquieu did not have these writings. Montesquieu is a blithering idiot. <br /><br />Furthermore, many people especially David Barton, this American Christian political expert, calls America a "constitutional republic". What an idiot there as well. The word "republic" includes as its meaning "constitution". It certainly does in the Greek. The Greek word "Politiea" means society, constitution, mixed government, and the Romans translated this word as "republic". To say "constitutional republic" tells me that you don't know what the heck you are talking about. <br /><br />So what did the FFofA do? They did not like the class structure of the ancient republics so being liberals they mashed what they liked out of classical republicanism together with democracy. In order to have a true republic you must have a true aristocracy with distinctions of rank in a Upper House. They were "egalitarians" but they wanted the "natural aristocracy". <br /><br />You define different governments by their dominant factor. With no classes in America, the government they started was a democracy.<br /><br />Furthermore, all of modern republicanism is in a sense a democracy. Modern Republicanism is the total opposite of Republicanism in Classical antiquity! The Atheist Machiavelli and others in the Renaissance purposely changed the definition in order to bring about a revolution in their society. <br /><br />So there are NO true repulics anywhere in the modern world. <br /><br />To restate, a "Democratic republic" is an oxymoron. When someone says that, he just acclaims himself to be a friggin' idiot. W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-36606603646531317892012-11-18T17:32:14.067-08:002012-11-18T17:32:14.067-08:00The principle here is that people should have a di...<i>The principle here is that people should have a direct say in the things that affect them....<br /><br />In point of fact, I do have a say in all of those things you mention by virtue of having the vote... I can vote for candidates who will increase funding to state medical schools, thus increasing the number of doctors. Etc. There is very little that affects a member of the electorate that voting won't allow them to have a voice in.</i> <br /><br />Ah, I see. So when you said "direct say in the things that affect them" what you meant was "an indirect say" by voting for candidates that will make laws affecting that action. That would apply even if the only laws that could be made to affect the result are things that aren't the government's role to begin with, such as running medical schools. And that still doesn't give you even an <i>indirect</i> say in who moves in next door, unless you want the government to actually assign housing like the communists. But of course, in a true 100% democracy, if "the people" vote to control who lives in the house next door, the people get to have that control. Or to vote you out of your house.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-59286020482070624492012-11-18T17:02:35.034-08:002012-11-18T17:02:35.034-08:00Why assume there is any positive correlation betwe...<i>Why assume there is any positive correlation between people who don't pay taxes and people who are stupid or evil?<br /><br />Note, also, under your scheme, full-time clergy would not be able to vote, since their income isn't taxed.</i><br /><br />Oh, I see, I am dealing with someone who both doesn't read and doesn't know facts. <br /><br />(1) It was Daniel, not me, who suggested the idea of not extending the vote to people who don't pay tax. My thought was a DIFFERENT concept. It was not about whether you pay tax, it was about whether you have enough self-control and self-restraint to hold onto a measly $100 for 3 months. <br /><br />(2) Clergy do pay tax. In fact they are not exempt from real estate and sales taxes. Oh, you meant "don't pay INCOME tax", didn't you. But then, they DO pay income tax. Some aspects of their income are excluded from SOME aspects of the overall tax scheme - they are not required to pay into SS, but they do have to pay income tax. <br /><br /><i>When reporting gross income for federal income tax purposes, clergy can exclude a portion of their income designated by their church or salary paying unit as a "housing allowance." However, housing amounts are subject to Self Employment Taxes </i> <br /><br />http://www.protax.com/articles/article/clergy-are-blessed-with-almost-tax-free-status/<br /><br /><i>I can vote for candidates who uphold the right for neighborhood associations (which very much does have a say in who moves in next to me)</i> <br /><br />Ok, again lack of facts. I was the president of an HOA, and I had exactly ZERO power to even <i>affect</i> who bought houses and moved in, much less control it. The laws pretty much preclude most of the possible ways to control it, except for the actual homeowner selling his house. And for the homeowner himself, if he uses any realtor or service he is precluded from denying a sale based on race, creed, etc. <br /><br />Or, did you mean that the neighborhood's home prices can price certain classes of people out of the neighborhood? Nah, you couldn't mean that, 'cause that's even MORE racist and discriminatory than what you ascribe to Daniel. <br /><br /><i> if you really believe that monarchy is a legitimate form of government, </i> <br /><br />Well, from that I take it you feel that it is not. Which position is contrary to all of the classical philosophers, and all natural law scholars, and all Christians at least from before 1900. I'll go with their point over yours. However, I didn't say that I thought democracy was NOT a legitimate form of government. It is. So is a republic. I wonder if you know the difference. <br /><br />To accept the principle of self-determination is NOT the same as having a democracy. Some peoples self-determine for a monarchy. See: the book of Samuel. The Israelites weren't repudiating self-determination when they insisted on a monarch, they were exercising it. The fact that you cannot conceive of any other form of government as legitimate shows how narrow and poverty-stricken your imagination is. To be legitimate as a government merely requires that it be capable of being ordered to the common good. And that is possible for a monarchy, and an aristocracy, as well as a democracy. <br /><br /><i>You keep attempting to put words in my mouth, and to inflate my claims uncharitably.</i> <br /><br />What? The only thing I expanded on from your statement was your claim of a "principle" that everyone ought to have a say in what affects them. You didn't limit it to government, so I took its logical consequences. Of course, it isn't a real principle generally, nor is it a principle for government properly either. Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-71216218326491578392012-11-18T15:41:34.550-08:002012-11-18T15:41:34.550-08:00Over at "TheoSpark", they have posted th...Over at "TheoSpark", they have posted the quotes of De Tocqueville:<br /><br />"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years." ― Alexis de Tocqueville<br /> <br />"The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." ― Alexis de Tocqueville<br /> <br />"Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." ― Alexis de Tocqueville<br /> <br />"Society will develop a new kind of servitude which covers the surface of society with a network of complicated rules, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate. It does not tyrannise but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd." ― Alexis de Tocqueville<br /><br /> "Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." ― Alexis de Tocqueville<br /><br />That is surely true and have come to pass. Democracy is the worst form of government. The American people live in slavery now due to the demands of equality. Obama will make sure all people are equal while him and his cohorts will be "more equal than others". W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-71871458423454364742012-11-18T15:16:13.725-08:002012-11-18T15:16:13.725-08:00Daniel Smith,
I neither know nor care whether you...Daniel Smith,<br /><br />I neither know nor care whether you are a racist. I even granted in my last post that you might not intend the de facto racist effect of what you proposed. That doesn't changed the fact that what you proposed is de facto racist.<br /><br />If you want to choose that imagined insult as your excuse from backing away from indefensible comments, I can understand. But I did not call you a racist or a Republican. I assumed you were Conservative, and we both know I'm right as rain about that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-29315644728068843102012-11-18T15:12:07.746-08:002012-11-18T15:12:07.746-08:00Tony,
Why assume there is any positive correlatio...Tony,<br /><br />Why assume there is any positive correlation between people who don't pay taxes and people who are stupid or evil?<br /><br />Clergy don't pay taxes. Are they especially stupid or evil?<br /><br />Note, also, under your scheme, full-time clergy would not be able to vote, since their income isn't taxed.<br /><br />In point of fact, I do have a say in all of those things you mention by virtue of having the vote. I can vote for candidates who uphold the right for neighborhood associations (which very much does have a say in who moves in next to me). I can vote for candidates who will increase funding to state medical schools, thus increasing the number of doctors. Etc. There is very little that affects a member of the electorate that voting won't allow them to have a voice in.<br /><br />Children are prohibited from voting because of a lack of maturity and knowledge. Unless you assume that all people who don't pay taxes (like housewives, disabled veterans, Catholic priests, etc) are similarly lacking in maturity and knowledge, bringing up children doesn't really help your case.<br /><br />You keep attempting to put words in my mouth, and to inflate my claims uncharitably. Just like I never claimed that only poor people pay no taxes, I also never claimed that a person ought to be able to have a say on EVERYTHING that happens to him. I never said any such a thing, and you know it. Obviously people have no control over natural disasters, or the immediate behavior of their fellow citizens. But they ought to have a say in the workings of their government. They ought to be able to vote for who represents them, at a minimum.<br /><br />If the only way you can pretend to have a point is to attribute views to me that I never expressed, might I suggest that you consider simply walking away, rather than further embarrassing yourself?<br /><br />At any rate, if you really believe that monarchy is a legitimate form of government, then you've conceded my earlier point - you don't really believe in democracy. Unfortunately for you, if you live in America, you happen to live among a few hundred million people that do. If you find that fact untenable, might I suggest you depart to the monarchy of your choice?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-68221799618916357112012-11-18T14:20:27.767-08:002012-11-18T14:20:27.767-08:00Anonymous: I'm saying that the only reason you...Anonymous: <i>I'm saying that the only reason you suggest such a rule change is that it would remove people from the voter rolls that are likely to vote Democratic.</i><br /><br />So, so wrong!!!<br /><br /><i>And you know those people are mostly Black and Hispanic, and at best, you don't seem to care.</i><br /><br />Doubly wrong! <br /><br /><i>At worst, you seem to be trying to purposely reverse engineer a system specifically designed to purge them from the rolls.</i><br /><br />I asked you to stop attributing motives to people that aren't there. You refused. The rest of your post actually has some merit and may have been worthy of discussion. Unfortunately, after - again - insinuating that I am a racist and (presumably) a Republican (I'm not). I cannot find the charity in my heart to continue a discourse with you.<br /><br />Sorry dude.Liberteurhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17878796551917615050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-86082977637821969292012-11-18T14:03:07.474-08:002012-11-18T14:03:07.474-08:00The reality is, you're trying to disenfranchis...<i>The reality is, you're trying to disenfranchise people who typically vote Democratic.</i> <br /><br />No, not me. I am trying to <i>partially</i> disenfranchise people who vote for STUPID and EVIL. (It's your own perception that my target was Democrats. I am equally opposed to voting stupid or evil for Republicans. You know, the stupid party and the evil party.) <br /><br />If you will notice, my "disenfranchise"ment merely requires the payment of a modest $100, access to which is granted to EVERY person who asks for it suitably. That's not much in the way of disenfranchising, now is it? According to that approach, no poor person would be excluded on account of being poor, or on account of not paying other taxes. <br /><br /><i>The principle here is that people should have a direct say in the things that affect them. A person who doesn't pay taxes ought to be able to have a say as to whether pollutants can be dumped into the water he drinks.</i> <br /><br />Oh, grow up. Your "principle" is a whining wish-dream of babies and children, not adults who ought to know better. You don't have a "vote" in who buys the house next door, but it affects you. You don't have a vote in whether the neighbor kid down the street studies medicine, but his (and his peers) choice will affect whether you have doctors to run to in 30 years. You don't have a vote in whether the Fed lowers or increases overnight interest rates, but THAT affects you in a thousand different ways, including whether you have a job next month. Come to think of it, you don't have a vote in whether your employer decides to close shop and sell the physical assets, and that certainly affects whether you have a job. <br /><br />Nor are you seriously thinking that children should get to vote, even though that's what your so-called principle would require. Nor criminals, nor mental patients and imbeciles. <br /><br />The purpose of government is to protect and promote the common good. There are many <i>different</i> legitimate forms of government, including monarchy and aristocracy as well as republics and democracies. ALL of them ought to leave in the hands of individuals those decisions that pertain rightly to the individual's own principal sphere of good and authority, NONE of them should be leaving every choice in the hands of every person who will be affected by that choice. In some arenas, you want specialists and trained experts making decisions for you, like running the nuclear plant 10 miles from you. You don't want the day-to-day operation of the plant controlled by the vote of all those affected thereby. Well, government's the same way: in some parts (the top), you want the best suited making the executive decisions. It so happens that figuring out <i>who are the best suited</i> is not subject to a definitively certain set of parameters or algorithms. Voting is a particular mechanism for trying to find the best suited, but there is nothing written in stone or the stars that says it is a particularly well-designed method. And voting for "the best suited" has not been proven to be a highly successful method of locating that sort of person. It simply beggars the imagination to suppose that the 44 men elected to the top office are the 44 men best suited to govern at that level (for one thing, the nonsense of the campaign makes it so that at least 9/10s of the men who would be qualified <i>don't want</i> the position. (Which, actually, is one of the qualifications of the job. And almost all of the recipients failed that parameter.)) Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-27218566115294389582012-11-18T12:18:27.386-08:002012-11-18T12:18:27.386-08:00Here is a Marvin Folkertsma
"Most likely the...Here is a Marvin Folkertsma<br /><br /><i>"Most likely the United States will change into something else, into a “soft” totalitarian society envisioned by Alexis de Tocqueville, where its citizens are “cared for” but weighted down by mountains of rules and bereft of any dynamism, creativity, or imagination—subservient, socialist, and senile.<br /><br />And we will have no one to blame for the fall of our country but ourselves.</i> (From <a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/marvinfolkertsma/2012/11/17/the_decline_and_fall_of_america/page/full" rel="nofollow">here, The Decline and Fall of America</a>.<br /><br />This <i>weighted down by mountains of rules and bereft of any dynamism, creativity, or imagination—subservient, socialist, and senile.</i> is what Ayn Rand predicted. And yes Marvin Folkertsma also predicts an economic collapse. <br /><br />What is written in the article is how interest groups, factions, engage in taking as much of the common product for themselves. Their interest group comes first which actually harms other people. It is about stealing as much goodies for oneself. <br /><br />How do we prevent the collapse? Does any body have a plan? Do we even know what it takes to maintain a liberal free society with a high standard of living? That people live a lie, and no one corrects them--we must certainly pass away. The death of America because we're afraid!--and we're dumber than a box of rocks!W.LindsayWheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06236577164127792348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-82056333449033946132012-11-18T09:33:08.579-08:002012-11-18T09:33:08.579-08:00Daniel,
I'm saying that the only reason you s...Daniel,<br /><br />I'm saying that the only reason you suggest such a rule change is that it would remove people from the voter rolls that are likely to vote Democratic. And you know those people are mostly Black and Hispanic, and at best, you don't seem to care. At worst, you seem to be trying to purposely reverse engineer a system specifically designed to purge them from the rolls. <br /><br />It's no different from the Voter ID laws, which are no different than the grandfather clause. You pick a rule that highly correlates with minorities so that you can exclude them from the voter rolls without explicitly using race as a criteria. Now, maybe you sincerely don't intend the racist effect. It's still racist.<br /><br />As to whether the government is a charity or a business, I offer you the novel suggestion that it is neither. And conceiving of it in such skewed terms is why you can't help but make suggestions that would just appall the majority of the electorate. In a democratic republic, the government serves first to protect the rights of the people, including rights Conservatives deem inconvenient, such as the right for poor people to have a say in their government. <br /><br />The principle here is that people should have a direct say in the things that affect them. A person who doesn't pay taxes ought to be able to have a say as to whether pollutants can be dumped into the water he drinks.<br /><br />What you and Tony seem to be suggesting is that the right to self-determination isn't God-given, it's purchased from the government. That suggestion is as anti-Christian as it is anti-Democratic. And, excuse me for saying so, it also seems pretty antithetical to the Conservative principle that the government doesn't give rights (particularly not as remuneration for taxes received), it protects rights that already exist. In short, I can't think of any principle you presumably stand by under which you should not be completely ashamed for even having contemplated such a suggestion. Full stop.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8954608646904080796.post-86194947858943428322012-11-18T09:15:13.573-08:002012-11-18T09:15:13.573-08:00Tony,
I didn't say all of the extremely poor ...Tony,<br /><br />I didn't say all of the extremely poor don't pay taxes, I said of those who don't pay taxes, the overwhelming majority are extremely poor.<br /><br />Of course there are other ways of influencing the government. But voting is the most direct and efficient way. So the question is, why take that away from non-tax payers, who are mostly extremely poor people, who are mostly minorities?<br /><br />The reality is, you're trying to disenfranchise people who typically vote Democratic. And in a way, that you could casually propose something so appalling is comforting to me, because it proves Conservatives are so out to lunch I won't have to worry about them winning a national election anytime soon. I would absolutely LOVE IT if a major figure within the Republican party took your suggestion seriously and tried to make it a national issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com