With all this Obama talk -- I found this cool site...

How does the govt needing more $$$ differ from someone coming over and sticking a gun in your ribs and robbing you?

The govt has no 'fear of God.'

If they 'need' more money, they merely go out and confiscate it (or print it).

Representation? No, not really. The (so-called "OUR") 'reps' were not even allowed to catch their breath enough to READ the most recent confiscatory 'legislation,' ie: the "stimulus" bill.

To my way of thinking, that's $800+ BILLION of *NON-representative* taxation.

The govt opened its checkbook -- which is opening MY checkbook... HOW?

By sticking a gun in my (and your) ribs -- that's how.

It's as simple (and as sickening) as that.

-- TW

http://www.usnews.com/articles/opini...stitution.html

-- TW

TW,

When it comes to the writings of journalists and the media in these wonderful times...

It's always a Great little excercise and quite interesting to say the least, to readup on them...

In this case lets make a quick Googling quess and say... Heather Higgins republican...

Answer is... Drum roll please...
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&c...G=Search&meta=

Make sure you Carefully read through atleast the top 10 Google results...

And of course Heather Higgins had absolutely no hidden agenda in writing that article or opinion, right?

Just my take on things...

Phil

The article was in the *opinion* section, so I knew it was coming from one particular angle -- but I also knew it wasn't supposed to be unbiased reporting, which is why it was under the editorial/commentary banner. That's full disclosure, as far as I'm concerned. The biased quotient was in plain view, yes?

Being biased doesn't make it (necessarily) wrong/incorrect, either.

What else do you expect to be in the opinion page? Opinion = bias... no?

Analogy: As with google -- the natural results go in one section, and the 'sponsored' results go in ANOTHER section. The sponsored results are 'tilted' via BRIBES (ad revenue). That makes them agenda driven (profit is the agenda in this case) -- but it doesn't make them useless or evil or even 'wrong/incorrect.' It only means they need to be clearly marked as being in a different section. The article I posted WAS clearly in the Opinion section.

-- TW

[Ankesh]

I think everything is biased. There can't be a piece of writing that isn't biased. Not possible.

So that wasn't my problem with the article you shared TW. My problem was innaccuracies. Let me just note down one of the innaccuracies.

That understanding led them to create for the first time in history a government built out of and respecting these universal rights of man, a government that was "of, by, and for" the people, not the other way around.

Emphasis mine. America wasn't the first democracy. But whoever believes that it is the first democracy has no historical perspective.

Now go back in history. And see why the other democracies failed. And you'll find that it was because either the society tried to be fair all the time. Or it tried for equality all the time.

As an individual, I demand fairness. I'm a libertarian at heart. But I can see the big picture. If the society is fair all the time, it will break down. Because you can't have a hand with 4 average sized fingers and one finger 3 feet long. (Concurrently, you can't have a hand with all the fingers exactly similar. A balance has to be found.)

Oh - and if the constitution was perfect - it would never have required amendments.

And as my fav humourist says:

I keep hearing the argument that some things are constitutional while other things are not. The idea is that we should be in favor of all the things that were decided over 200 years ago by a bunch of slave-owning cross-dressers who pooped in holes. - Scott Adams

You may personally not like it. But you have to understand that if the society doesn't try to balance itself by trying to bring equality some of the time, it will break down.

Your passion is good TW. But you have to try to figure out how to make the best of things when the society tries to go the equality way for some time. Instead of spending all your energy in talking about fairness and just getting frustrated. The time for fairness will come too.

Ankesh,

Thanks for trying to elucidate what you Mean.

"America wasn't the first democracy. But whoever believes that it is the first democracy has no historical perspective."

YOU had better check your Facts. America is NOT a democracy. And it Never was - by America I mean the USA. What it is, is, a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC whose Citizens are protected by written Laws - regardless of what the Mob wants.

Democracy is Mob Rules. Plain and simple. If You think the USA is a Democracy you, like the tens of millions of Americans, have bought into it, because of its incessant repeating by the Puppet Leaders.

Onward.

Fair?

I am uttering a bunch of expletives under my breath.

Fair indeed.

ANY time someone says something about Fair, you are listening to talk about taking from the productive and giving to the non productive.

There is NOTHING fair in taking from one person Against Their Will via some form of Coercion and then Giving the fruits of that theft to someone (anyone) else.

Whenever you hear anyone talk about Equal you can be sure you're going to suffer a Great INEQUALITY as someone receives more favoritism than someone else. Again, it's usually the Productive getting screwed over.

Both words - fair and equal - are standards from the bleeding heart liberals. Used to steal from the productive to give to the non productive, used to help foister liberal Projects that couldn't stand on their own without the so-called Fairness / Equality deals.

I suggest you read - and think about - the story of Harrison Bergeron which can be seen here http://instruct.westvalley.edu/lafave/hb.html because THAT is what all the Affirmative Action and Forced Diversity programs and other liberal equality BS leads to.

And frankly, I am fed up with it all.

I suggest you also read The Fountainhead. And you'll see how the Groups that Wesley Mooch creates to undermine true talent and hold aloft talentless drivel as something to aspire to, is reflected in our world today.

Read the Wikipedia Page about that "kissed a girl" singer. Then scratch your head how people could make a big deal out of a nobody without a track record of anything. Wool over eyes. While people who can actually write lyrics and music and create vocal melodies and actual music are Ignored. Ignored in favor of meaningless sex up nobodies who can't sing, dance, act, write music or lyrics or anything.

People are not now, nor have they ever been Equal. People have varying talents and abilities. You cannot make them equal. And taking from one to help Equal the other is not fair.

Michael Ross

Originally Posted by Ankesh

But you have to understand that if the society doesn't try to balance itself by trying to bring equality some of the time, it will break down.

Your passion is good TW. But you have to try to figure out how to make the best of things when the society tries to go the equality way for some time. Instead of spending all your energy in talking about fairness and just getting frustrated. The time for fairness will come too.

Are you saying don't kick the rapist in the shins?

You seem to be advocating 'equality.' That's a nice ideal, I agree. But, the only way to make it a reality is through artificially synthasized FORCE.

And where should that FORCE come from? The govt.? What exact SHAPE should the 'equality' take? Who decides what's 'equal' or to what degree everyone should be 'equal?' Congress?

Are people who object to being FORCED to give up what they have (because things aren't 'equal' enough), "GREEDY?"

Is it GREED that has made some 'have' more than others?

If so, I ask you (or anyone who makes the 'greed' argument) -- what couch do you have at home? Is it the cheapest couch there is? Do you REALLY need a couch at all? There are people who don't even have ANY couch, you know. Wouldn't you be less 'greedy' if you were to take the money you spent on your couch, and give that $$ to someone else who doesn't even have FOOD?!? How about your TV -- do you have a tv? In fact, if you own ANYTHING that is not BARE MINIMUM, aren't you being 'greedy?' If you have more than even ONE other person does, aren't you enjoying your 'riches' at the EXPENSE of another citizen? Aren't YOU a part of the UNequality 'problem?'

Where does the attempt to FORCE equality on REALITY (which is always -- naturally -- UNequal) end?

It's a spectrum -- and a slippery slope.

Not to mention the crimp such artificial FORCES have on human nature. Why should I try to do 'better' (excel) when I know the govt. will make me equal to everyone else whether I excel OR NOT?

It is not the role of the govt to change market realities in arbitrary (or ANY) ways!

Yes, the constitution can go through changes -- changes to make it more STABLE in its ONE PROMISE -- and that promise is very SPECIFIC... the gov't shall be LIMITED.

Obama seems not to want to play the chess game to make the game better -- he wants to kick the whole table over and start another game that isn't even chess at all. He wants to change (or subvert) the entire BASIC intent of the FOUNDATION of the nation. And that basic promise is [or, is SUPPOSED to be], again, LIMITED govt. He's not headed toward that end of the spectrum at all. He's barelling as fast as he can toward the other end of the spectrum. I pray it's not going to work -- and he will be stopped (politically) or slowed down A LOT. If not, he will RUIN the country for DECADES to come, imo.

-- TW

Apply caution, think out of the box and who really knows...

Just maybe Obama...

These uncertain Global economic times are Full of interesting money making opportunities if you're a Thinker who's into a little Risk taking...

Remember, waking up each morning Definitely has it's Risks too..

Poll: Obama's rating at all-time high
NBC/WSJ poll shows gap between popularity of president and his policies
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29493021

Obama Says Now May Be Good Time to Invest in Stocks...
http://www.google.com/search?q=Obama...fficial&tab=nw

Phil

[Ankesh]

>And taking from one to help Equal the other is not fair.

Yes that is not fair. Fairness is the opposite of equality.

Not sure how I couldn't convey that.

That's an interesting viewpoint -- I'll have to ponder that one for a while.

Somehow I think America stands more for fairness, than equality, perhaps.

We would sooner let a murderer go free, than to convict him based on evidence that was gathered illegally, for instance. That is not the case in other counties -- the UK, for example.

-- TW