USA's government, not people, make it great

[UserGoogol]

complete government controlled collectivism worked out well for lenin hey? I don't hate the separate individuals in america, for Americans are like individual organisms making up a superorganism, who just happen to hate collectivist expanding government. Why the horrible semantics? Accident of birth, joke right? immigrants choosing to be here is absurd? Nice reactionary responds mr.despot.

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said it is irrational to lump together the individuals who are Americans except for immigrants, because they have the common quality that they all chose to be here and thus must have something in common. Otherwise, the only thing that for instance you and I have in common by virtue of both being American is that we happen to live in the same tract of land and are both subject to the laws of the Federal government.

I don't think we should have "complete controlled government collectivism." The government should exist merely to facilitate individuals being able to do whatever it is that they, as individuals, want to do and prevent things from happening to them (like being murdered or whatever) that they, as individuals, do not want done to them.

America the nation was created by the people for the people. These people now americans continue to make it great. It's the expanding federal government the people of america think is abusing it's balance of power.

I'm a person and I'm American, but I don't think this. (Well, I think that the Federal Government has abused its power in some areas, but not the same areas that you're thinking of I don't think.) Does this mean I'm not part of THE AMERICAN PEOPLE? The American people are not a superorganism. We are a collection of three hundred million people each with our own beliefs, thoughts, and ideas. To treat this collection as a single entity is the fricking definition of collectivism, and it is that which is at the heart of fascism.

I'm saying the people of america are more innovative than cheating off the kids test next to us.

The last of the founding fathers died out over a century ago. Rather then cheaing off the kids test next to us, we are all cheating off the test of the kid who took the test last year. The only difference is that we are sitting in the same chair as that kid (metaphorically speaking).

It is the person that matters, not where they happen to sit.

 

[kallsop]

I do believe in the old saying "people are the same wherever you go". What is good about the US government is that it originally left a lot of power and liberty to the citizens, with most power at the local and state level. This has eroded over time (income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ...) with the ascension of Federal power and the US is definitely drifting towards being just another mediocre socialist nation with a bunch of too powerful career politicians redistributing the diminishing wealth in the best interest of buying votes.

 

[Piggy]

What hospital may I pick up my soma script from?

No need to get harsh with the name calling.
Like Jay-z said: I call a spade a spade, it is what is.

No, I think you're calling a fork a spade.

As for the "name calling", I did not intend the references to paranoia and knee-jerk reactions as epithets. I meant them literally.

Your posts do appear to be driven by both tendencies, given that you're condemning ideas that have not actually been expressed and utterly failing to provide any support for your views, instead merely asserting that you're somehow "telling it like it is".

 

[Piggy]

I do believe in the old saying "people are the same wherever you go". What is good about the US government is that it originally left a lot of power and liberty to the citizens, with most power at the local and state level. This has eroded over time (income tax, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, ...) with the ascension of Federal power and the US is definitely drifting towards being just another mediocre socialist nation with a bunch of too powerful career politicians redistributing the diminishing wealth in the best interest of buying votes.

I have to agree with you on the rise of federal power.

As for these "socialist" tendencies which are popular to talk about these days, all I have to say is, y'all really need to go overseas and live in some socialist countries so you understand that the USA is light years away from socialism.

And given the current political flavor of the day, the chances of socialism erupting onto the American political landscape anytime soon are about as good as my chances of getting propositioned by Scarlett Johansen.

 

[Elind]

Well, it used to be, before the Bush administration took a crap on the Constitution. Now, it is in pretty serious jeopardy.

Do you think that is an original thought; looking back the past few hundred years?

 

[Piggy]

Do you think that is an original thought; looking back the past few hundred years?

Exactly. Which is what continually draws me back to the proposition in the OP.

I find it extremely difficult to argue that something special in the character of Americans is what has allowed our society to repeatedly meet challenges to our freedoms, and in fact to expand those freedoms.

That's a real tough argument to make. What would such a thing be? And why would it be absent elsewhere? How could it persist across 200 years of deaths, births, and demographic and cultural changes?

Yet when we examine the fundamentals of our system, which have endured intact all this time, we can see how the provisions it makes for a broad framework of freedoms within self-correcting limits provides a practical mechanism for restraining the tendencies toward populism and autocracy.

 

[WildCat]

2. Although there certainly are terrorists in Gitmo, without habeas, we don't know which ones are terrorists and which ones aren't, and that's dangerous, for reasons I've already explained.

Since when do enemies captured in a war get that right? Provide historical precedents please.

 

[WildCat]

Approximately 5% of people held by the military in Iraq were actually enemy combatants. Most (~90%) were based on bribes.

Cite?

About 50% of people held in Gitmo (some for years) were eventually released with no charges having been filed.

What a silly thing to say! You don't charge captured enemies with crimes, in fact it's a violation of the Geneva Conventions to do so unless you have evidence of war crimes or other such violations of the rules of warfare. Lacking that, you can hold them as long as you see fit, up until the end of the war if you so desire. How many captured German soldiers in WWII were charged with crimes? Or had a writ of habeus corpus?

 

[Piggy]

Since when do enemies captured in a war get that right? Provide historical precedents please.

Well, that's the problem with Gitmo. Lots of those guys were turned in by bounty hunters for the standing reward for anyone claiming to have people of interest.

They didn't have time to do triage, so they took them all and sorted them out later.

Lots of them have been released.

"Sorry about the five years of your life spent in a cage, Ali. Take care, and don't be a stranger!"

 

[Piggy]

You don't charge captured enemies with crimes, in fact it's a violation of the Geneva Conventions to do so unless you have evidence of war crimes or other such violations of the rules of warfare. Lacking that, you can hold them as long as you see fit, up until the end of the war if you so desire. How many captured German soldiers in WWII were charged with crimes? Or had a writ of habeus corpus?

But even the administration isn't claiming that these guys are POWs. They're attempting to take a middle ground, to simply declare these people "bad guys" by fiat, and hold them in a law-free zone.

But hey, I'm violating my own rule, here.

So....

If you're interested in this topic, start another thread.

It's off-topic if we cannot relate it back to the OP.

Please drop this issue or move it, or I'll have to ask the mods to move it.

Thanks for understanding.

 

[WildCat]

Well, that's the problem with Gitmo. Lots of those guys were turned in by bounty hunters for the standing reward for anyone claiming to have people of interest.

And why were they taken to Gitmo when so many were never taken from Afghanistan?

They didn't have time to do triage, so they took them all and sorted them out later.

Nonsense. The vast majority of enemies captured in Afghanistan never went to Gitmo, only the ones deemed to be of special interest were.

Lots of them have been released.

"Sorry about the five years of your life spent in a cage, Ali. Take care, and don't be a stranger!"

Maybe they'll have second thoughts before rejoining the Taliban after that? They get released if they are deemed no longer likely to fight us again.

You still haven't shown how any of this was illegal or improper.

 

[Piggy]

Take it outside, Wildcat, take it outside.

 

[WildCat]

But even the administration isn't claiming that these guys are POWs.

They're not. POW has a very specific definition per the Geneva Conventions, it's a legal term. The Taliban did not meet the legal requirements necessary to qualify for POW status.

If you're interested in this topic, start another thread.

I let it go, you kept bringing it up. Not my fault if you derail your own thread.

 

[Piggy]

I already admitted that I took the bait and shouldn't have, but now I'm reminding you that this is off topic. Start a new thread, please.

 

[WildCat]

Take it outside, Wildcat, take it outside.

Stop repeating these claims in this thread to make your points and no one will contest them here.

It's not me derailing, it was you. And you started it in the OP!

 

[Piggy]

Fine, Wildcat. I concede the point to you. I will not contest your argument. After all, it doesn't make or break the issue we're talking about here.

 

[Piggy]

It's not me derailing

I know. To clarify, and make sure I'm being fair to you, when I said "I took the bait" I wasn't referring to you. I was referring to the tangential discussion, which you were quoting when you cited my post, that I got involved in earlier. That wasn't clear, and I apologize.

I admitted back then that I was involved in a derail, and I've admitted that again, and I admit it now a third time.

Hey, I ain't Jesus. I screw up, too.

So, no harm, no foul? Point goes to you, ok. Seriously, I'm not going to attempt to argue against your points, here. I just want to move on.

 

[Elind]

Exactly. Which is what continually draws me back to the proposition in the OP.

I find it extremely difficult to argue that something special in the character of Americans is what has allowed our society to repeatedly meet challenges to our freedoms, and in fact to expand those freedoms.

That's a real tough argument to make. What would such a thing be? And why would it be absent elsewhere? How could it persist across 200 years of deaths, births, and demographic and cultural changes?

Yet when we examine the fundamentals of our system, which have endured intact all this time, we can see how the provisions it makes for a broad framework of freedoms within self-correcting limits provides a practical mechanism for restraining the tendencies toward populism and autocracy.

And what my previous comment was directed at was the thought that there have never been similar "crisis" of "bad government" in the past. The sky is always falling for some at any given time in history, and history shows that our particular form of government has a proven robustness in dealing with such fears.

As to why, it is worth remembering that the USA, more than any other nation on the planet, is actually made up of the people from every nation on the planet, and uniquely so.

 

[Piggy]

And what my previous comment was directed at was the thought that there have never been similar "crisis" of "bad government" in the past. The sky is always falling for some at any given time in history, and history shows that our particular form of government has a proven robustness in dealing with such fears.

Yup. I was concurring.

 

[Piggy]

As to why, it is worth remembering that the USA, more than any other nation on the planet, is actually made up of the people from every nation on the planet, and uniquely so.

Wow. The planet's a lot whiter than I thought, then.