durg78

durg78

16p

10 comments posted · 0 followers · following 1

235 weeks ago @ Big Government - John Locke: Second Tre... · 0 replies · +1 points

John Locke did not agree with the monarchical form of government. This is clear after reading his first treatise on government.

242 weeks ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - What is a Right? · 2 replies · +1 points

"For a man's property is not at all secure, though there be good and equitable laws to set the bounds of it between him and his fellow-subjects, if he who commands those subjects have power to take from any private man what part he pleases of his property, and use and dispose of it as he thinks good." - John Locke

242 weeks ago @ Breitbart.com - Clinton says domestic ... · 0 replies · +1 points

The Whitehouse, as the executive, has no role to play in demestic affairs. If the "domestic political battles are hurting the president's foreign policy goals and damaging America's image abroad", the Whitehouse is doing this to themselves.

246 weeks ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - Legalize the Constitut... · 0 replies · +1 points

Article 1 Section 8.5 [The Congress shall have the power] to coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures

247 weeks ago @ Big Government - Free Speech Vindicated · 1 reply · 0 points

I hope you do not actually believe that if Democrats are against something, than conservatives must be for it. This is a dangerous line of thinking. We have to stop judging a policy or position based on who supports or opposes it and which label (Democrat, Republican, Liberal, Conservative) is attached to them. If we are to have any hope in returning this country to the principles on which it was founded, we must educate ourselves as to what those principles are. I encourage you to read John Locke, Adam Smith, and Montesquieu for starters. Once we have a solid understanding of the founding prinicples, we will be able to judge any issue based on those principles, rather than who supports or opposes them.

247 weeks ago @ Big Government - Free Speech Vindicated · 0 replies · 0 points

Banning organizations is not about the message getting out to voters. It's all about the influence that is created on the candidate who gets elected. When an organization supplies 80% of the funds for a campaign, or spends the money to air aids against an opponent of that campaign, that organization builds a lot of influence on that candidate. This results in the candidate supporting or proposing legislation that is beneficial to that organization. Avoiding this type of corruption is what those limits are all about.

247 weeks ago @ Big Government - Free Speech Vindicated · 3 replies · +1 points

As a true conservative, this SCOTUS decision is not something to celebrate. McCain-Feingold's ban on corporate contributions to the political process in no way restricted the free speech of the citizens. Business and the individual are not the same, and should not be treated as such. Does the bill of rights apply to a business? No, it does not. The entire constitution concerns only three entities: the Federal Government, State Governments, and the people. The individual citizen can vote, but not a business, PAC, or other organization. These organizations also should not be allowed to contribute money to campaigns. That is the job of the individual citizen.

250 weeks ago @ Big Government - The Real Healthcare 'C... · 0 replies · +1 points

See my point #3.

250 weeks ago @ Big Government - The Real Healthcare 'C... · 4 replies · +2 points

If you want to fix healthcare costs, encourage people to cancel their health insurance policies, and become 'self insured'. When the costs of healthcare come out of your own pocket three important things happen.

1) You pay attention to the cost of services, and shop for the best balance between quality and cost. This happens currenlty with procedures that are not covered by insurance, such as Lasik and Plastic Surgery. These two procedures have seen an increase in quality and a decrease in cost because of this competition.

2) Doctors don't need to fill out the reimbursement froms for medicare/medicaid or insurance companies for your visit. This frees up (1) their time, and (2) their money since they don't need to hire staff to fill out those forms. The freed up money allows them to lower costs to be competitive with other Doctors, (since you are now shopping for the best deal). Many Doctors will discout your visit by as much as half, if you self-pay.

3) Private non-profit organizations would spring up to assist the poor with their health care costs. After all, it is the role of society, not government, to assist those in need.

252 weeks ago @ Big Government - The State of Higher Ed... · 1 reply · +1 points

"The 5000 Year Leap" is a good start. Also, "Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith, "Democracy in America" by Alexis de Tocqueville, and "Commentaries on the laws of England" by Sir William Blackstone. These books and many others are all referenced in "The 5000 Year Lap". They should give you a good grounding.