Any media or anything else for that matter that has the word "public" in it is suspect to Mike, Jim and Carlton, and especially Archer. I am sure that they are not nor do they want to be members of such an entity as the "public". I assume they wish to convine folk of their views but the conundrum is that if more than 50% of us agree with them they will then change their mind and position, since they are eternally afraid of a majority view point.

You need to read the famous essays and philosophical treatises on the subject to understand how if not developed at least promulgated, distributed, and handed down etcetera. We still need to promulgate them, explain them and uphold them. As JFK said "On earth God's work must be done by man." For examples of the infringement of our inalienable rights especially the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" I suggest you sit in any county court house or just watch the TV news one day and you will learn of the murder, mayhem, thefts, etcetera of one citizen upon another that will make your head swim. Government my friend is doing something to correct these infringements of others inalienable rights. If folk would stop these infringements government could fade away.

That is why we need NPR!

I agree especially on this site which only publishes selective quotes and quotes that distort a writers full point of view. Like Jefferson recently was quoted as sympathetic to secession while he made equally powerful quotes abhoring secession. Others wish only to see comments agreeable only to their points of view. This site could be a learning place if heresy were allowed some accomodation.

Cal most transactions among people is still conducted in accordance with the concept of "good will", "fair and honest dealing". It is amazing that those who are skeptical about government are also skeptical about there fellow man. To be always distrustful or think others are mostly dishonorable is a to me a show of weakness and temerity, I am big enough and flexible enough to recover from the occasional knave, and thankful that most people are decent, honorable and believe in the Golden Rule.

Mike you show your bent towards or love of tyranny by calling my remarks "mis directed" or "off topic". In a group meeting I feel confident that you would cut off my microphone. You show yourself to be the very similitude or likeness of the tyrant that you say you detest.

If yuou are correct Mike why are their court cases all of the time and governmental that is court rulings to protect and guarantee freedoms and rights? Some governments deny rights some governments protect and expand rights. Do the Chineese have the use of all of these God given inalienable rights? Hell no they don't! And what is the difference betweeen them and us? It is our government and our Constitution. I suggest that the term "our government" can be a much larger concept than just the constitution, it is the total of our Western/British heritage concerning the rights of man. While you may believe or construct a theology that these things fell from heaven, if you will read history you will find that they were developed over time and guaranteed and protected by "govenment" and taken away be government as in Greek and Roman and American and Comunist slavery. There are folk in every walk of life that would be willing to take away your inalienable rights at the drop of a hat, most of them are not in government. The government and the Courts protect the individual from infringement of his righths by others. Your entire mind set my friend, your personality, like Lysander, and Thoreau is your problem. End your blind hatred for government as a modus operandi and you may be able to right more lucidly, thoughtfully, and intelligently. Having inalienalbe rights Mike and having the use of them is two different things. All individuals have them not all have the use of them, as I said above, like in China, Muslim and dictatorial countires. Learn the difference!

Honorable people should live by the Golden Rule. Thus they expect honorable actions from others. Living this way generally works out. When the other fails in this regard then the honorable person should change their opinion and appreciate how dishonorable the other is. To distrust all others as a matter of policy is a lousy way to live. Do you expect to be trusted, are you a person of your word and of honor? Do you think you are the only honorable person in the world? If so, had sad!

Yeah and do you know what your big boss is doing or the President of your corporation or the Board that controls the holding company that owns your company. That we, that is every American from the age of majority (that is 18), should know what every move is, of the mayor of our town let alone the Governor of our state and the President of our country is, is one of the most stupid things ever published on this site. And this site makes a great effort at publishing stupid stuff and there are so many on here just ready to grovel for the slop and crumbs that are published. I guess Mike thinks he should know every thing that the CIA is up to also.

Yep! But before you speak be sure you know what tyranny is. To speak against non-existent tyranny is to be tilting at windmills Don Quixote style.

Money is seldom stolen for a public swimming pool, Generally it is a not for profit entity, financed and run by bond issues and paid for by an entrance fee. Further "public pool" does not mean "government pool" it is any pool at which the general public are invited to partake of or is open to the public for business such as a hotel or club pool. What country did you say you are from Ken? Public swimming holes have existed from the dawn of time, wake up man, and enter the millenium! What did Mike say above, does anyone lknow? I am surprised that he did not counter by asking that if the majority said one must spit on the sidewalk daily would we have to do it. While most of you all hate the idea of majority rule the only reason I defend it is because it is most commonly correct and wise that is the reason it is the majority. Now does it make mistakes, does it change, absolutely. Does it differ from culture to culture, absolutely. Does it bend and sway with the times and new evidence certainly. Has it shown iteself over time to be the best way, of course. The reason that it is the best way is because it is based on the golden rule, giving each individual the right to have his view and position heard equally with all others in the matter of public matters. While the vote may be divided 51 to 49 using the 51 percent solution allows the most individuals to be happy. A rule of the minority all of the time would obviously be worse. Why does the world throughout the globe in all of our know so called civilized cultures use this rule. You all might just prefer being Talibanized. Like you they all know the answers to any matter of public policy, behaviour, etcetera. It does not matter what the majority thinks or wishes.

And you Ken are a personality type. Nothing you say ever has any evidentiary support you like Mike and Lysander are just nuts with a warped personality. It is really great to be seen as sincere I wish I could see some of these others that way, RBESRQ.

I assume that Archer also believes that people throughout the world have freedom of speech, religion, assembly etcetera. Since he believes those things exist without human effort. He should try living in a Hussein or radical Muslim environment sometimes. You never cease to amaze Archer, never! It now appears that Archer and Carlton above feel that we can just throw away The Constitution and Bill of Rights as a meaningless rag. Who knows what they will say next if we continue on this blog another few years or so!

Just don't point them at government or police!

Voila! and hurrah! finally Mike has accepted the logic of a 51% solution. There is a glimmer even if just a slight glimmer of hope, a crack in the irrational armour that he surronds himself with. I feel so great and successful today. It has been years in accomplishing this, I have lost track of how much time has been involved.

What do you say Mike when 51 individual sovereigns out of 100 get together and say that there will be no spitting on the sidewalk contrary to the opinion of the other 49 sovereigns. Are the 49 then oppressed? Should no rule thus be made and all continue to do as they please? Can no group, city, state etcetera have any consensus contol of their society and environment? If in your view they should not then is not all hunmanity subject to the will of the individual and ultimately the strongest, meanest, and cruelest and first to draw individual sovereign, while the gentle, courteous, agreeable sovereigns in the 51 group have to hunker down in their miserable humilty and slip and slide along on the spittle.

Lysander has shown himself to ba an ass. When did government actually go bad Mike and become all the things that you say it is, in your opinon?. Thoreau in 1830 and Lysander 20 or 30 years later felt the same way as you do today 150 years or so later. I have told you once and I will tell you again, it is not the government now and it was not the government in Thoreau's or Lydander's time it is simply a personality type that you have in common with these guys and a certain penchant for a certain phiolosophical outlook. None of your or their observations or feelings have much to do with reality, now or then.

What does he mean by oppressing? In New Mexico the MAJORITY, the government makes INDIVIDUALS shower before swimming in a public access pool. Does this fit the definition of oppression? Some feel oppressed all of the time when they are asked to follow any common rule of social behaviour, such a feeling is some form of social pathology. I give it a one for being to shallow and obtuse..

Lysander has shown himself to be a** in every quote he has made, but this is the worse. I wish we could ask him what government he would like. How can Mike in Jim who always defend and would like a return as they call it to The Constitution defend this quote and this quy who says all defeneders of it are of1, 2, or 3 classes of imbicility.

Not a great quote or construction but I believe true none the less. Freedom of expession like we have on this site which to me is one of the hallmarks of democracy cannot exist in an insecure, violent, dictatorial world.

Cal any man or women who does not ask for the respect due them or their office is denigrating or disrespecting both. A Senator represents a lot of people especially in California. We have plenty enough disrespectfully and ugly behavior in this country for someone to bring street behaviour into the halls of Congress is uncalled for. Senator Boxer was correct to require the respect due her office not only for her but for the entire US Senate.

I don't think the people are being ignored. As stated above state and federal laws are on the books to protect people from unsafe swimming pools, their are laws and safety standards for spa manufacturing etcetera, ad infinitum to portect people. I disagree that we are being ignored.

No Archer I was not but I do recall punching a Safety right in his breast badge when I was in fifth or sixth grade. I guess Archer does not care about law unless it carries a jail sentence. I reviewed some of the NM statutes and violations can result in pool closings by the state. All pools are regulated except home pools for personal and invited guests. I would assume that those operating a state closed pool would eventually wind up in the jail house. Archer thinks bathing before swimming with others is a police state issue. Get your head out of the clouds and your feet on the groudn Archer.

See Jeffersons quote from his letter of 1820 when he said he was ready to cry because of the hullabaloo for secession. The fact is the greatest liberty is in Union. All those seeking secession are really not seeking self-governmnt but SELF government or in the end DICTATORSHIP of the SELF. Aaron Burr tried to accomplish such a thing. Lets get it straight that near his death Jefferson was forsquare for Union and The Constitution.

Absolutely, it was caused by Hoover moving to slow. The 2008-2009 debacle was successfully resolved by Bernanke studying the eras of Hoover and company and moving much more swiftly.