STOP comparing the level of freedom in this country with the level of freedom in other countries. This is a lie the media tries to feed us, and the principal has now worked its way into the Supreme Court - they are now looking at laws FROM OTHER COUNTRIES to help decide cases in our country! How is that constitutional?
Don't listen to people who show stories or talk about the level of surveillance in England, and either say we should have that here or use that to show how much 'more free' we are here. Just because the level of tyranny is rising around the globe doesn't mean it should be acceptable to have a little less here. We are supposed to be a FREE country. Where I live, I have to ask the government if I want to cut down a tree on my own property. Is that freedom?
Give me liberty or give me death!
Actually, reading back over this, I'm going to apologize and say that I agree...mostly. I still think that the whole 'I'm going to post until you respond' is a bit much...but I think the site is rapidly getting out of control in terms of readability/usability. Maybe one of the things I responded negatively to is the factioning of the site into your version doing one thing, another lady's doing another, etc. Since this is a grassroots thing, and now bigger than even Glenn probably expected, maybe this needs to open up to more of a Wiki style or something like the Huffington Post combined with a forum (which I mentioned in another post here). Thoughts?
Again, please accept my apology.
I'm seeing a trend here, that goes along with MisterNobody's comments. This site is exploding, I wonder how we can work with Glenn's people to make it better/more open/more conducive to conversation, consensus, etc. Any admins listening?
Please forgive my generalization. Obviously not all government employees are this way. I just feel that, generally there are too many government employees, and - again generally - if you work for fish and wildlife, and a candidate says he is going to cut back in fish and wildlife, you will be predisposed to vote against him. In that way, candidates almost have to grow government.
Don't feel bad about working in government though (unless you're not working hard or being a bad guy), we need voices other than liberal ones in there to fight waste and corruption!
Agreed as well. I saw this and tried to come back to it and comment, and it took me 20 minutes to find it again. I think part of the problem is that the 'intense debate' platform is meant for a couple of comments at the bottom of a blog, not as a forum, which is what this has very quickly turned into. Hopefully they will listen to what I said in the venting section about the lack of conservatives using media correctly and effectively. I think this site should be a combination of a conservative Huffington Post with a forum and polls, etc....but it seems that most conservatives are unwilling to invest in quality message delivery, which hurts the credibility of the message. One of the reasons Democrats swept this year is because they know how to use the internet as a message delivery platform correctly. How much did Obama raise on his website, half a BILLION dollars?
I agree. Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty website has links to a lot of these documents. They are in the blue bar on the right under 'Pillars of Liberty'.
I agree. Surprisingly though, I don't necessarily tow the 'party line' on this. For example, I think the government SHOULD be involved in food supply protection (Barack Obama's expansion of the FDA is a good thing in my opinion), and a few other critical areas like defense, etc.. That being said, there are far too many other areas that they are just far too involved in. Not only that, I think there is far too much overlap between Federal, State and local governments. Reduce the Federal government and bring back states rights I say.
This is very sad, but I think the deeper problem is something you touched on. A lack of personal responsibility and morals. This is a direct result of a lack of God in peoples lives and a dwindling Christian population which is primarily due to Christians who can't, or won't, coherently explain the gospel and churches who are so concerned with their size that they forget to teach the basics. I hear that this is already starting to spill over into the job market. New applicants who expect to be paid the world for nothing. The entitlement society must end!
I am not sure how to define this problem, but it is rampant. You need to stop supporting a law/position/etc. if you wouldn't support someone corrupt with it. In other
words, your view of every decision the government makes needs to be filtered through a lens NOT of a party line, but what if a terrible person got in office, would this
work? For example, you may have trusted (hopefully not) George W's administration to run the bailouts/illegal wire tapping/etc. Do you trust it now? Would you trust it if
the most corrupt leader ever ran it? If not, then you shouldn't have trusted it in the first place.
Does that make sense?
It seems obvious that you are either an extreme liberal, or simply trying to stir the pot. Normally I wouldn't respond, but this issue is important enough that on the off chance you are sincere, I will. With a global currency, the problem is one of power, sovereignty and control. A one world currency brings us one big step closer to a one world government. One of the very big problems with a one world government (aside from the fact that most governing bodies have a hard time managing a country - even a state or city - much less THE WORLD) is that it significantly increases the risk of tyranny. If you think having a supreme leader is a good choice, think again.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Opus