Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
LOL! Not my intention to butt in, but Will was right about this one - and it tells me we would be better off without either party. Actually we would be better off without a federal government that could touch a citizen.

Comment Loc: California

Good morn Mr. Slatten49. What we are experiencing today in politics weas experienced by our founders. It's fascinating to me to read their debates. Federalist and antifederalists debated the things we are experiencing today. They formed a gov that they perceived would defeat despotism. But from the beginning despotism has eaten away the 3 branches of gov, 3 separate branches. But, the 3 are merged as one these days, Democratic. Socialism is so pervasive in gov that it may never be eradicated. Conservatives have been lead down the isle to despotism over the years. We have the utopian despot in Mr. Obama.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
:thumbup: :thumbup:

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

Morning, Tasine.

Maybe, but without order, comes chaos!

There has to be some reasonable distinguishment between groups to reach a working compromise. Inevitably, groups form "partys" to resolve differences between those groups.

Of course, that doesn't explain the "chaos" we currently have in D.C. :roll:

yafaleonidas

If you had misspelled just a couple of words, I would have congratulate you for exercising your mind. But, based on what I have just read, you are a real, committed imbecile who wouldn't know what values are if they jumped up and bit you on the ass that you think is your head. Conservatives have one value: Steal all that you can until you get caught.

yafaleonidas

Ignorance is bliss. Get your head out of Boehner's rectum

bmac32 Loc: West Florida

Try using the 'quote reply' to answer. Can you show us conservatives that steal?

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~
Howdy, Slatten!!
With all due respect, the absence of "government" is not necessarily the same as "without order" or "chaos". The "without order", the chaos is voluntary. But what you are saying is that the states could not create order - I find that states do a hell of a better job than does the federal government. There were days past when there was no government to take care of problems. The citizens took care of the problems. I happen to believe that the closer to home, the better the "governing".

I didn't even say "NO government". Actually what I said is, " Actually we would be better off without a federal government that could touch a citizen.". By that I meant leave all governing of citizens to the states and let the feds take care of what they are constitutionally allowed to do instead of micromanaging each and every citizen in every aspect of his life.

slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas

No disagreement meant, Tasine. I was referring to how "partys" were almost inevitable in the settling of differences between opposing factors in government. I not only caught your inference to governments' role, but agree.
Governing a large population, in and of itself, is chaotic... almost by nature.

Too often, however, without some governmental intervention, some issues/rights would not have been settled, possibly for decades, or longer. Civil rights comes to mind, as an example. Our nation could not have had some states recognizing the rights of citizens, and others not doing so.

I, like you and others, prefer that government does not intervene/interfere in most issues. Most agree with that stance, until that intervention is needed to enforce their own particular views upon others.

I dare say both partys are guilty of that distinction.

Comment Loc: California

My opinion as I can relate to the state of government. The Constitution was adopted by the 13 states. Their main concern was to control the power of the central gov. and protect the states from being over run by it. In 1789 the antifederalists believed in a strong central gov, (CG). but, that view failed and still, the proposed Constitution could not be adopted by the states until the 10 amendments were adopted restraining the power of the CG. The CD had very defined limited powers and only those powers. All other liberties and powers were left to the states. Today the CD controls every aspect of our liberty and we are the subjects of a despotic ruler. The states represent the individual people. The CD usurps all state law when it conflicts CD law and it does in every element of society, from v****g, to schools. To better understand our status as a nation and how we got to this point, I have a suggested reading list: John Locke, the ,mastermind of our original Constitutional Republic; The Tyranny of Utopia, Plato's Republic and the Perfect Society,; Thomas Moore's Utopia & Radical Egalitarism, Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan and the All-Powerful State; Karl Mark's C/M; Charles De Montesquieu anD Republican Gov.; or you can Read Mark Levin's book: AMERIUOPIA.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~
Bill, if I read you correctly, you are saying that we have devolved back to the period prior to the 13 states joining together to prevent our government becoming what it has in fact become. Our federal government over the years has so totally destroyed what good was left of the government after WWII, or perhaps prior to that time. The frustrating part is that none will take the time to assess the problems and arrive at solutions - NONE.

Comment Loc: California

Prior to the adoption of the constitution the states were proud independent states. They did not want to join a central gov. that would take that independence away. The intent of the final version of the Constitution , including the 10 amendments, (The Bill of Rights). Until the 10 amendments assured the states that they would still retain their respective powers, liberties and independence free from interference from the fed gov. they would not adopt the Constitution. Since that time the forces of evil, the social Democrats have worked relentlessly to make the central gov. the main source of power. The Supreme Court has been very accommodating in the socialist movement. The Supreme Court is not a check and balanced Body. It is a political unit of the Democratic party (The ACA is a tax not a fine). Justice ruled that a fine is a tax. Taxes are income tax deductible. Roberts didn't think about it but, he just deducted millions of dollars from the treasury. Now! We can call any kind of fine by the various govs. we can deduct it. Later, I will start a topic on who were the major movers and shakers in this t***sformation from states rights to a totalitarian central gov.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you. I look forward to your topic on the movement to this totalitarian central government.