Re: [OT] USA Elections
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Nov 07, 2012
- 2694 views
In fact, you've got it backwards here.
I don't think so.
Now that I think of it, I'm not aware of any literal Robin Hood cases where the federal government sent in agents with guns to take an individual's money and then directly sent it to another person (or group of people) who were poorer for the specific purpose of feeding, medicating, educating, clothing, or sheltering them.
Of course, a literal Robin Hood case would be someone taking money away from the government and giving it back to the people from whom it was taken.
I don't know about that. Sure, Robin Hood and the Nottingham sheriff didn't get along, but Robin Hood was still loyal to the King.
Republicans - The focus is on individual liberty and the free market. <- the greatest plan for prosperity this world has ever known
This seems inconsistent with an emphasis on corporate and state's rights.
What is a corporation but an assembly of people?
An oligarchy where a few rule the many.
What are the individual states but a government that is closer to the people than the Federal government?
True, but why should any government have inherent rights? Governments exist to serve the people.
How does taking away people's freedom to act when they (privately!) decide to act collectively enhance people's freedom to act?
It doesn't. I never said that it did. (Straw man?) I feel this is a good argument in support of unions, for example.
How does substituting a less responsive and more difficult to change form of government enhance people's chance at liberty?
Again, I never said this. I believe all levels of government should be made more responsive and easier to change. Allowing people to pick their own Senator, for example...
Democrats - The focus is on self aggrandizement and spending other people's money. <- fails society every time
My Response: George W. Bush.
Yes. It's really the Progressive nature of our government
Well, I'm complaining about tax breaks and rising debt and bailouts... Not too familiar with the Progressive movement of 1898 so I won't comment on that.
and George W Bush had a lot of that.
As did one of this year's vice presidental candidates.
http://www.dailypaul.com/248565/ryan-begging-for-tarp-great-time-to-run-it-on-tv
Of course, the Democrats have more.
Things like TARP were quite bipartisan. Though I seem to recall it was a few democrats who decried it when TARP passed the second time around...
So, your response seems to say that a little (OK, maybe a bit more than just a little) is bad, but a lot is good.
What I really mean is that the Democrats represent something else to me, beyond the money cost of (some of) their policies (some of which were quite bipartisan, mind you).
