[251-275] of 326

Posts from Jack, Green, OH

Jack, Green, OHJack, Green, OH
Jack, Green, OH

If what you say is true, Mike, how do you explain the sea change that occured last week? The officials who were given "priestly reverence" are gone (except the chief priest - and his days are numbered, maybe fewer than he imagines). You are too cynical of the way this government and its Constitution work. It may be cumbersome and slow at times, but that's the way the founders wanted it. I give the quote three stars on being half right, though. It may usually be true tyranny arises from the poor choice of the people, but it is not limited to that. It can come from outside or a coup from within and not at the choosing of the general public.

Jack, Green, OH

The quote is all the more poignant and meaningful when one considers it was Madame Roland's last word before placing her head upon the guillotine - her testament to the trumped up charges which put her there.

Jack, Green, OH

Politics is the art of governing - nothing more, nothing less - the science of guiding or influencing policy - getting parties to give up something in order to gain something. It is a worthy and necessarry science and it does no good to give it narrow definitions out of context.

Jack, Green, OH

All right, David, maybe there is a better example than the do-gooder, high moral values, faith-based GOP, but it was the best I could think of at the time. You go ahead and name your own best if you can. Remember, I am talking about proven evidence, not hypothetical possibilities.

Jack, Green, OH

Do not confuse an illegal invasion of a sovereign country with a declared war. No war - no demand for silence.

Jack, Green, OH

The best example of people putting others in order instead of themselves was the GOP in their brush with power the past few years. They had radical ideas of changing things for others not of their persuasion, and got changed themselves big-time. ...privatizing Social Security, tax cuts for their other Greedy-Old-Party contributors, like tobacco companies, drug companies, energy companies, the Holier-Than-Thou Christian Right, etc They "beheld the mote in their brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in their own".(Luke 6:41) Where are they all now?

Jack, Green, OH

Open your eyes, David. Those who would oppress by religion go far beyond NYC. We have them here in Ohio, too. It's a constant batle to keep them from putting their radical beliefs and practices into our school curricula and public assemblies. Just this past election we finally removed the coterie of state school board members who had managed to get Intelligent Design (euphemism for Creation), and doubts about Darwin's theory of evolution, into our high school science classes. And this is not even the "Bible Belt". There are hundreds of examples all around us, of religious oppression (I think that's an apt word for it). They were up in arms last Christmas when stores said Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas -- demanding a boycott of them -- the same folks who used to complain stores commercialized the word Christmas. They should have been delighted when they made it a more public holiday instead of a commercialized Cristian holiday. What do they want? The very fact you can't see it, David, is testimony to the blindness of such practitioners of religious "oppression".

Jack, Green, OH

The analogy of shepherds to elected officials is hardly a good one as a shepherd is not selected by his sheep, nor can he be removed by them. I don't think many shepherds are concerned about convincing their sheep of any common interrests either. That's what elected officials do to maintain their positions.

Jack, Green, OH

Yeah, like give up some liberty because we are in a fantasy war waiting for some hypothetical terrorists to come crashing down on us. Giving up freedoms will not prevent them. There is, indeed, that possibilitiy, but cowering behind a false hope of security will not make it go away. That is giving into their desire to handicap, or hinder us. Would giving up freedoms in 1940 or '41 have prevented the Japanese attack on Pearl? Defense is one thing. Denying basic freedoms thru delusion is another. The way to greater security would be to go after the chief terrorist/s like bin Laden instead of wasting our time and resources in a country which never had any terrorists before we invited them in.

Jack, Green, OH

You are quite right, Joe, loss of liberty is NOT self-evident, but, what I said was; the recognitiom of the loss is so obvious it is meaningles If one doesn't even realize how much he has lost, then maybe there is no problem. After all, Bovard was such a strong Libertarian -- to the point of paranoia about government -- he saw invasions of his liberty all around him. I give the quote a weak two stars. I am well aware of cases like the last election of the Weimar Republic in 1933 with the rise of the Third Reich and the election of Hamas in Palestine. or Hesbolah in Lebanon, etc. but I don't feel those are the intrusions Bovard is looking at. For me the actions of our present administration sacrificing basic freedoms for a measure of security are enough.

Jack, Green, OH

Democratic elections don't guarantee a democratic governmant, as in the last election of the Weimar Republic in German and the rise of the Third Reich, or, more recently, Hamas in Palestine, or Hesbolah in Lebanon, or our own elections of 2000 and 2004. Free elections are important, but an informed public is essential

Jack, Green, OH

Too general an exaggerated reproach to have any meaning other than humor, and someone like Rush Limbaugh might take offense and demand an aplogy. Some people don't understand sarcasm, even though they are often the biggest purveyors of it..

Jack, Green, OH

The first step in any endeavor is to recognize the situation. The statement is self-evodent. The second step is to evaluate it correctly and then determine a course of action. That's where the dissention is. I doubt if Bovard's libertarian views would coincide with mine. The statement is true, as far as it goes, but is almost meaningless

Jack, Green, OH

Madison was trying to explain, in too many words, his reasons for putting the checks and balances of divided government into the Constitution. "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare", etc, etc., and on and on, ..then, "..the power of Congress ....would subvert .... the limited Government established by the people of America." Good thought, but could be said in about a dozen words. Only three stars for being too verbose.

Jack, Green, OH

You are correct about Carter, Joe. He was a man of authority who never thought criticism of him was dangerous, as Commager claims they always do. If ever there was a man of humility it was Jimmy Carter, but I still say George W. Bush was the best example of Commager's claim. I think I'll lower my rating of the quote to four stars because he said they ALL are like that.

Jack, Green, OH

You are correct this time, Mike. It should be obvious that Paine was making a sarcastic joke ..much as we do by calling our leaders those idiots in Washington. It was the same tone employed by Kerry when he said, keep up your grades or get stuck in Iraq. A rational person would know what he meant and should be able to see what Paine meant as well. Words were Paine's only real success, outside of a few patented inventions like an iron bridge and a steam engine. He had been a failure at everything he tried in England before emigrating to the colonies where he joined the Continental army against the British. He knew how to use words, writing numerous papers and pamphlets, having a huge influence on American independence. It was this knack that was a significant contributor to the Declaration of Independence. I give the quote five stars on his sarcasm

Jack, Green, OH

It is hard to believe that Commager, my favorite historian since the late 40s in my college days, was not even aware of the biggest example of his premise in history. I always knew he was a brilliant observer of American history but didn't realize just how prophetic he was.

Jack, Green, OH

How well I remember the first year I could vote and the 1948 Tribune headline: DEWEY WINS, I was a Republican then and voted for Dewey, who was the certain winner Of course Truman won. So I know all about polls.

Jack, Green, OH

Bet on what, David? That Pelosi will not bring up a bill of impeachment, or that she will not be Speaker? Obviously, she won't if she isn't. The drawbak to removing Bush is that the second in line is equally bad. No gain.

Jack, Green, OH

Don't worry, David, Congress will be under new control next year and I don't think this administration will leave office unscathed. Nancy Pelosi's statement she does not intend to call for a bill of impeachment notwithstanding, the pressure to do so will grow so fast she will almost have to. There is no doubt there have been serious violations of the Constitution. Archer was absolutely right about declarations of war and I just wanted to point out that FDR was the last presiedent to wage a "legal" war, as Vietnam and Iraq were declared under false pretenses. The invasion of Iraq was a declaration to find and destroy Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction per S.C. resolution 1441, which resolution did not grant US authority to go it almost alone. What was done was an act of aggression

Jack, Green, OH

I can't entirely agree with you, Archer. The Great Depression was what put FDR in office in 1933, having begun three years earlier in 1930, after the stock market collapse of 1929. The Hoover administration did not admit it until about 1931. Actually, FDR did not really get us out of the depression -- WWII did, but it's for sure the previous administration would have only made matters worse, if that was possible. I remember the 30s well. As for a state of emergency since then, the only official war has been WWII. Korea was never even a declared war, but a "police action" and Vietnam and Iraq were sort of declared on trumped-up causes like the Gulf of Tonkin and Iraq's failure to comply with Security Council resolution 1441 - excuses, not reasons. I really don't see any perpetual emergencies during the 60 years since VJ Day either. I do agree severak times the various presidents have tried to claim emergencies. After all, the only real emergencies the country has faced were the initial Revolution. the Civil War and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The others have been merely frivolous exercises having nothing to do with defense or emergency.

Jack, Green, OH

For 40 years, Mike, I professed to be a Christian and I knew all the platitudes you do. I argued them in college as you do today. But when my kids were getting old enough to question those myths I could no longer defend them. I first decided I might be an agnostic, but soon I realized I didn't even have the doubts of an agnostic. I just didn't believe any of the dogma. The days of justifying Santa Claus were over and it was like a huge weight lifted off me. I spent these last 40 years admitting my true beliefs and felt so much better for it. Now I know where I'm going when I die (probably not too much longer, being I'm over 80) and that's nowhere. Pretty soon the lights will go out and I'll be back where I was before I was born. Try to describe where you'll be ...many years later, I hope. If it pleases you to think you'll be in a place called Heaven, more power to you. I couldn't accept that fate any longer.

Jack, Green, OH

I know Christians will say they don't BLAME God for anything, but what do you call it when God has all the power? Mike is right, Christians have a different (and stranger) perception of 'Unlimited Power' than others

Jack, Green, OH

It may be said there is no absolute liberty, or lack of it. There can be no unrestrained freedom for anyone, to the expense of others. There have to be SOME limits. Nor can there be total lack of liberty, as even someone in shackles can still think, for example. It has to be a measured quantity.

Jack, Green, OH

This is another way of expressing an often misunderstood axiom, "It takes an exception to prove the rule" What that really means is, it takes an exception to TEST the rule. Test is a synonym for prove and would make the meaning more apparent if used.

Get a Quote-a-Day!

Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box daily.