Our Supposed to be Limited Government Out of Control

Yes, but a select few will not get filthy rich dragging America down if we do it your way.
I thought you were a conservative ;)

Yes, and I thought you were a liberal, and hence obsessed with control. I'm all about people like Toppy and Chap getting extremely rich (note, its only filthy to a liberal poorist).
 
Just curious where exactly is our government limited?

The gummit cannot do things prohibited by the constitution but it can do things not prohibited by the constitution.
 
Just curious where exactly is our government limited?

The gummit cannot do things prohibited by the constitution but it can do things not prohibited by the constitution.

negative. the constitution outlines exactly what powers the federal government has. Anything not given to the feds via the constitution, are powers that exclusively belong to the state, or the people themselves.

the 9th and 10th Amendments spell that out clearly.

also, read my signature.
 
negative. the constitution outlines exactly what powers the federal government has. Anything not given to the feds via the constitution, are powers that exclusively belong to the state, or the people themselves.

the 9th and 10th Amendments spell that out clearly.

also, read my signature.

SIGH, even new citizens know that. :rolleyes:
 
There is a paradoxical stupidity to Stossel's usual reactionary nonsense. A few observations.

Isn't media supposed to be liberal? Oh, sorry!
Who would provide the services Stossel mentions?
If you don't like opera on TV, no worry, the majority of your money is going into military expenditures so rest easy.
He completely lost me when he claimed FDR moved beyond liberty. I think liberty is more than a highbrow word, he obviously isn't sophisticated enough to know that.

We are the government, the government is us, Stossel would be the first tool on TV complaining about some failure of gov, so in the end this is typical useless reactionary conservative propaganda.


"The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts."

http://www.quotedb.com/speeches/washington-farewell-address

"...that constitution of our nature which makes us feel more intensely what affects us directly than what affects us indirectly through others, necessarily leads to conflict between individuals. Each, in consequence, has a greater regard for his own safety or happiness, than for the safety or happiness of others; and, where these come in opposition, is ready to sacrifice the interests of others to his own. And hence, the tendency to a universal state of conflict, between individual and individual; accompanied by the connected passions of suspicion, jealousy, anger and revenge — followed by insolence, fraud and cruelty — and, if not prevented by some controlling power, ending in a state of universal discord and confusion, destructive of the social state and the ends for which it is ordained. This controlling power, wherever vested, or by whomsoever exercised, is GOVERNMENT."

Disquisition on Government John C. Calhoun
http://www.constitution.org/jcc/disq_gov.htm
 
He completely lost me when he claimed FDR moved beyond liberty. I think liberty is more than a highbrow word, he obviously isn't sophisticated enough to know that.

We are the government, the government is us

FDR was the 2nd Bane to liberty in this country as evidenced by his 'new deal' agenda. The new deal dems practically ran roughshod over the constitution to grab more power than the founders ever intended.

When those elected to positions in our government ignore their assigned duties to engineer their own policies, WE are no longer that government.
 
FDR was the 2nd Bane to liberty in this country as evidenced by his 'new deal' agenda. The new deal dems practically ran roughshod over the constitution to grab more power than the founders ever intended.

When those elected to positions in our government ignore their assigned duties to engineer their own policies, WE are no longer that government.

The New Deal gave us roughly fifty years of prosperity until Reagan began its destruction, and the destruction of the middle class. Take notice, for instance, of how SS continued in spite of the social darwinists attempt to destroy that piece of social welfare.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Ronald-Reagan-Worst-Presi-by-Robert-Parry-090605-584.html

For the thinkers on the board this is excellent.


[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Rhetoric-Reaction-Perversity-Futility-Jeopardy/dp/067476868X/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246707264&sr=1-8"]Amazon.com: The Rhetoric of Reaction: Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy: Albert O. Hirschman: Books[/ame]
 
The New Deal gave us roughly fifty years of prosperity
at what cost to freedom?
"If a nation values anything more than freedom,
it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is
that if it is comfort or money that it values more,
it will lose that, too."


until Reagan began its destruction, and the destruction of the middle class.
pure conjecture and speculation. That period of economic decline could just as easily be laid at the feet of Jimmy Carter and his totally inept office of the presidency.

Take notice, for instance, of how SS continued in spite of the social darwinists attempt to destroy that piece of social welfare.
something we should all learn from that particular piece of social welfare is that once a government program is started, it is impossible to stop no matter how damaging it may be.
 
And if SS is so great, how come liberals let LBJ get away with spending it on his pet projects?

I should also note that there was not 50 years of growth. There was growth from 1945-1957 in exorbitant rates because the rest of the world was annihilated by the war, and and then from 1961-1967. Reagan gave us the Bull Market, which grew from 1983-2008.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top