It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why do a large number of anti war people whine about...

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Who in this day and age is saying anything about killing the brown people...who?

WE are Wrong for this war... for fighting the Taliban who take the weapons we gave them to be free from the Soviets and use them to erase history, to cover up women, to kill people for being human, who put 10 year olds with guns in thier hands into a mode of Jihadi?

We were wrong for Iraq? It was about the skin color... we didn't do our best to keep the people as safe as possible, it's us not Iran that has kept this fight going... we seek like Iran does to absorb Iraq? We fought a war as Iran did for a decade that was about Conquest? we will take over and absorb that peoples culture Identity and nation when this is sid and done?

NK was wrong? How many people live in NK with one radio station forced to worship a man as a diety... an omnipotent leader... This is what we have under Bush

I don't think so and I feel no need to apologize...

Because I wretch...wretch inside when after 30 years of sending food in tonnage to Africa 40 years of our college students volunteering thier "white" time to dig irrigation ditches... and bring them books... I still see pictures of children with extended bellies covered in flies... with no food and WHY? Because sick warlords burn the crops we build rape the women and cave thier childrens heads in with rifle butts fighting over 3 inches of land... and in the name of Islam, the same Isalm that sold thier people into slavery in the first place...

I have no apologies, when I see the bodies of people lined up for miles in places, women..not soldiers women killed for reading, for bearing children and my people have gone thier for decades to help and we can't even go help physically because ignorant people and propoganda freaks and libertarian organization infiltrated with communists scream race....

the only thing that disgust me more is the body of people here in the states that fall for this crap and by g-d I hope to get to deal with that situation in my time too...

all wars have 2 sides, they can use the fact that Oil might truely be part of the reason we fought this war...and it would be partly true... and they will say that the Civil war was fought over industry... and that korea was fought just to contain communism...

But it's not the Whole Truth...we fought in Korea to keep at least half that nation from the horrible nightmare it became... WE fought the civil war because alot of us knew slavewry was wrong and when Hitler came we fought white people in the bloddiest of affairs as fast as anyone else because we always have held a true moral high ground...

In Iraq a maniac dictator was in charge..it was at least part of the reason...In Iran there is a genocidal freak in charge right now, a man who would kill millions from a nation that fought a war against Iraq of Conquest not liberation, a system in polace that truely ssays the rest of us have no right to live that leaves women in bandage...

and we have always in this country done what was right

and I for one will not be made to feel bad for killing or fighting wars against dictators and apocolyptic madmen and self proclaimed dieties...

even if Bush did lie and that makes him on some level wrong we remove our leaders every 8 years max, we have a system of checks and balances that work, we did not go nuclear, we aren't raping women, we aren't intentionally killing children, Bush declared military victory in weeks and Iran has been pouring funds and equipment and they are causing the death toll not us...

Doing hard things for right reasons is okay, I'm sorry... we should be in Africa too and NK being allowed tro exist is a tradgedy of neccessity...

I am disgusted to watch some of my people loose thier will so quickly in life... some things are worth fighting for. Some hings are worth dying for and it's not the same statement as made by a fanatic reading a dead book, it's here and now right and wrong of human beings living in bondage and nothing going on in the states remotely compares...




posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Demetre
 


The sane among us all want the same thing you want. Unfortunately there are monsters in this world we live in. If we were to lay down our arms today they would have us for lunch tomorrow and spit out our bones. The only answer right now seems to be; have a military so powerful they dare not attack. If you truly want peace, you must support a more powerful military unless you lie to yourself.

Its a terrible thing to have to say, but we live in the real world and for now, peace is a thing of fiction for dreamers. Hopefully someday that will change. The irony is that if the peace at all costs crowd were to gain control of our country, we would be destroyed by war almost immediately. It takes powerful men of war to keep the peace. What a mess reality is.




posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
slackerwire, maybe you just need a little helping push in the right direction that mankind should and will go towards.....it is unstoppable and it will happen. Try this here; I think this will help you understand where many of us are coming from.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

[edit on 7/21/2008 by CaptGizmo]



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
Who in this day and age is saying anything about killing the brown people...who?


The Opening Post. It's in the title and leads into the first line.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by Demetre
 


The only answer right now seems to be; have a military so powerful they dare not attack. If you truly want peace, you must support a more powerful military unless you lie to yourself.


Did you know that the US has technology that is so powerful that people say it does not exist? The smoke and mirrors game of war is a sham. No one is coming here to attack us. A drop in the bucket death toll and some shoddy intelligence reports are an embarassing excuse to go to war.

If you want to protect America get the gangs off the streets and the kids to stop shooting up the schools. You can't hardly go out anymore without risking getting killed in the crossfire of some ignorant disagreement between people who probably don't even know each other. We're more concerned about securing a place I will NEVER go to than we are our own country that we are "defending" for our "freedom".

[edit on 7/21/2008 by Spoodily]



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I'm denying ignorance by saying this thread is ignorant.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Le sigh.

As the quality of ATS falls, we get more OPs like this.

Why couldn't your title be more descriptive? Did you make it obtuse so that you would get more views?

As for:

Originally posted by slackerwire
retarded leftists


This is like something you would read on a games forum, or on a youtube comment.

I always thought ATS was better than this.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by mopusvindictus
Yes we have a long history of anti Brown people...


This includes being among the first people world wide to not only abolish slavery but to fight a civil war over the very subject, lord knows no white people were killed in that war...


Well...yes but the British were first I believe(could be wrong about that)...and they did it without a civil war...and to be honest the slavery issue was secondary to the issue of the south seceding from the union...but for many whites slavery was the whole reason to go to war with some very brave church congregations leading the way so point well taken there...



Compare the US to Hitler? actual deaths in Afghanastan and Iraq and Vietnam and Korea put together killed less then the invasion of Poland... Yah, we are butchers...


Agree with you here but I wish our governments motives been clean in any of these cases and they were sadly not...and as with most wars there is much manipulation.....and when all is said and done - it is the average joe and jane that pays, dies and bleeds while the bankers, financiers, captains of industry, kings and queens continue unscathed to gather in their coin and consolidate their power...

Also the U.S. government escorted and incorporated around 2000 German S.S. officers, scientists, and operatives into our beloved country at the end of WWII for the purpose of absorbing their training, technology and knowledge...perhaps that was simply a smart thing to do but I think we import more than we bargain for when we make deals with the devil...


Yes... abolishing Slavery, civil rights, attacked ruthlessly by Japan... and then we escorted their troops out of China... where those 2 A bombs cost 200,000 lives when they surrendered our escorting them out of China saved aproximately 3-7 Million Japanese lives... that's how much we hated them and the kind of grudge we hold...

Ah yes the A bomb - well that one is controversial as to motive...certain elements in the Japanese government had been trying to surrender - some say those bombs were dropped as a message and warning to Russia (whose ships were on their way to "claim" their share of the spoils of war and perhaps continue their expansion aims) but it was effective and did end the war and your example of how the Japanese were treated then is not how we treated the Iraqi army - we disbanded the Iraqi army instead of including them in the process of restructuring the country - we did not use the Marshall plan in Iraq - big mistake...which I chalk up to the current leadership...

Yeah Barack is as white as they come, we are so racially non concious we have to fear going into Darfur where... hundreds of thousands of Brown women are being Raped and killed by Brown men... why Because Complete psychos who hate our success wuold yell race and maybe start civil problems here if we went in to save those poor womens lives

Actually their are a couple of reasons we have not intervened in Darfur: 1) we are stretched to the limit in Iraq and Afghanistan 2) The Chinese have Sudan's back - they have been leading oil exploration in the south of the country and the U.S. does not want to come into direct conflict over Darfur because we have trade agreements with China...ergo there is some strong public talk against the plight of Darfur but no action...has nothing to do with being seen as racist...


Certainly the Saudis wanted a powerful Iran and Iraq huh?

You are right on the money here the Saudis are terrified of Iran because the Saudi hold on power is by way of allowing the Wahabbi faction police their country...The Royal family is not is particularly popular just incredibly ruthless...and our


And of course during the slave trade never did one African attack and sell another tribe into slavery, and it was White people not Islamics leading those caravans to those tribes huh? White people with no resistence what so ever to malaria are responsable for the slave trade, it had nothing to do with brown middle easterners...


And who feeds Africa? Uhhhh Iraq? Ummmmm Afghanastan? ooooo wait we send countless tonage of free food to the Brown people there...


You know if your retarded and racist and support men who cut the clitorises off women, mass rape and believe everyone on earth should convert to a sick system where women have to wear masks... please by all means believe what you like...

Feel free to fight the USA Because ME and Millions like me will be here to DEFEND the rights of good Brown people everywhere like we always have from sick tyranical maniacs who Butcher, who Rape and who truely only wish to control the world or kill anyone who opposses them, we will rebuild those nations for those good people at our expense when we are done as we always have, we will spill our own blood for these purposes

and please come in here and write propoganda about us, please convince a handful of my own people who are that weak and that ill informed to switch sides, it's best to deal with those people who live among you appropriately and please...

Keep the fight going until the last of you on earth are dead at the hands of heros... because it is a tradgedy for the brown people of this Earth that they are starved and used as cannon fodder by psychos like Saddam, maniacs like the Taliban, butchered in the dirt in Dafur, not allowed to read, not allowed to feel pleasure, not fed, stolen from and lead lives of utter misery so warlords like lil kim can screw Kidnapped japanesse Actresses...

United we stand divided we fall... You can be sure pathetic posts about race designed only to inspire self hatred and racism among my good people will fail and Johnny will come marching all over the heads of people like ahmad and likl kim and... Darfur will see us there too one day, maybe a man like barack can pull that one off in the face of sick racist disgusting tyrants who would try and convince us we are the wrong ones while these women lay dead in the streets, while people are starved, while more women...more women have died this year In Africa and the middle east at the hands of some sick brown men that condone it then we killed soldiers...trained fighting men, in a war...





[edit on 21-7-2008 by mopusvindictus



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by observer
reply to post by slackerwire
 


Can you point me to anything in Sen. Obama's statements or policy papers/positions that indicate exactly what rights he is actively trying to take away from you? I mean, I rad alot of his white papers (his officially policy stances on his website) and watch a good majority of his speeches and I have yet to read or hear something from him that says he is going to go after your rights. Maybe I missed something so would you please clarify with some specificity as too what he trying to "take away" from you?
(well other than your right to privacy, as all the pols [both D's and R's] caved in on FISA)


Sure thing.

How about my 2nd Amendment rights?

Oddly enough, his position on gun control has vanished from his website. I typed up a blog post fully detailing his hatred of the 2nd Amendment. If you wish to read it, it can be found here

If that isn't enough, how about his blatant disregard for the Constitution through any one of the issues he talks about on his own website?

(note: I am certainly not defending the current retard in chief, his disregard of the Constitution is almost unmatched, unless that is, Obama gets elected. )

Would you like me to keep listing violations of our rights Obama plans on committing?



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
slackerwire, I have had a few discussions if you want to call them that about the race issue with you and you seem obsessed with race.


Obsessed with? Far from.

It's a topic I choose to debate because I find many peanut brained people debate the topic of race using emotion and political correctness instead of logic and fact, which is what I prefer to deal in.

Emotion has no place in such a debate.



JSince when is being against war a bad thing?


See above. Emotion has no place when debating going to war or not.

I despise being lied to, but lets face it: Right now this country needs oil to survive, and if we hit Iraq for oil, and only for oil, then it is completely justified. There is no better reason for war than survival. WMD's, liberating Iraqi's, yada yada yada who cares about that? If the Idiot in Chief had come out and said " We are going to invade Iraq and take their oil" I would have supported it 110%.


I would think if you are someone that is all for war then you should do some serious soul searching then.Also what I find interesting is many people that shoot their mouth off about being pro-war and kicking some butt and what have you have never been to war much less gotten their fat butts out of their house to join the service.


Been there, done that. Have any other ignorant assumptions to make?


Take the pointed sheet off your head for a while.


Yet again you make an ignorant generalization. If I am so wrong on the topic of race, why not prove me a fool by providing irrefutable, contradictory evidence?



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 07:39 PM
link   
seriously don't take it to heart when the race card is played against you.

it can be played in any situation. all thats needed is education and information to inform those who use the race card not to tar everyone with the same brush.

it comes at us from every direction in life. rise above it.
even goverments try to tell us what is racist and what is'nt and get it wrong themselves sometimes. an example being that in the UK they were talking about telling off children who say yuk to food from other countries.

george carlin did a sketch about 'brown people' it was a funny. but it's just a lighthearted way of looking at things. the reason he gave for WW2 was that the germans were cutting in on your action, don't take it to heart.
if anything george carlin hit the nail on the head in that sketch, most things are simply about 'dick fear', and i see some comments in this thread
that could be seen as the same thing.

the race card can be played anywhere at anytime about anything, challenge them when they do it, but don't take to heart.

people are simply grouped into catagorys, this creates the difference and gives people the cards needed to play against you.

discrimination, sexism, racism etc etc.

in reality there are no groups, the universe dos'nt judge by difference, we are all the same on the same rock, we are lifeforms.

lifeforms killing lifeforms for survival, greed and power. thats all it is all about. it has nothing to do with skin color.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 07:43 PM
link   
" displeasurable behavior"? social graces REQUIRED!!!!!!!!!? you must work for the government. You want ATS to be PC ??!!, whose web site do you think this is.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by slackerwire

Originally posted by observer
reply to post by slackerwire
 


Can you point me to anything in Sen. Obama's statements or policy papers/positions that indicate exactly what rights he is actively trying to take away from you? I mean, I rad alot of his white papers (his officially policy stances on his website) and watch a good majority of his speeches and I have yet to read or hear something from him that says he is going to go after your rights. Maybe I missed something so would you please clarify with some specificity as too what he trying to "take away" from you?
(well other than your right to privacy, as all the pols [both D's and R's] caved in on FISA)


Sure thing.

How about my 2nd Amendment rights?

Oddly enough, his position on gun control has vanished from his website. I typed up a blog post fully detailing his hatred of the 2nd Amendment. If you wish to read it, it can be found here

If that isn't enough, how about his blatant disregard for the Constitution through any one of the issues he talks about on his own website?

(note: I am certainly not defending the current retard in chief, his disregard of the Constitution is almost unmatched, unless that is, Obama gets elected. )

Would you like me to keep listing violations of our rights Obama plans on committing?


What part of the Obama quote


“We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions”
is he taking away your right to own a gun? Obama supported the recent DC gun ban decision. He is a constitutional law professor from the University of Chicago (which is one of the most conservative law schools in the country; Scalia is from UC). So I don't think this "He's a gonna come take away ma guns" argument holds up much. And I say that as one of those left leaning "retards" who actually owns a gun.
As for the sweeping generalization that he is planning on circumventing and destroying the constitution... you do so with no specifics. Where on his site does he say "you there, I am taking away your rights, the constitution is a goner"? In other words, do you have specifics or are you just trotting out right wing tropes?
Can I assume you are a McCain supporter? If so, do you think the man who is practically running for Bush's third term is gonna act any different when it comes to trampling on your rights? I mean, they are reading this exchange right now.

As for the original point of the thread.. I am a left leaning anti-war person because we are fighting the wrong people over the wrong thing. Al queda is not there in significant numbers, they were not there prior to the invasion, we have opened up Iran to almost unchecked power in the region by getting rid of the devil that kept them at bay. The Iraqi people don't want us dead, they want us gone. The fight needs to be refocused on Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan (which are going to hell in a bucket) and where al queda actually IS. On top of that I have 2 family members who are either in country or just getting back from rotation, I have several friends from spec ops to acquisition officers who say this is a pointless endeavor, costing us way to much military blood, civilian (Iraqi) blood and too much treasure and soft American power. My friends and family chose to join and serve and I thank them (and everyone else who feels called to duty in that way) but if we are going to risk their lives should it not be for the extraction and destruction of the real enemy and not ghosts in oil-fields?



Obs out
Edited for typos!

[edit on 21-7-2008 by observer]



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by slackerwire
killing "brown people"?

Is it a pathetic attempt to show the U.S. as a nation that discriminates in deciding who we go to war with?

You are correct, the U.S. does not discriminate.


Yeah, the U.S. hates every body henceforth it isn't discrimination.



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by observer
 


Odd you chose only one quote to debate. Who decides what is "reasonable" and "thoughtful"? Obama? You're kidding right?

You purposely avoided his other stances on the 2nd Amendment like:

Banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

and

Increasing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.

Why did you avoid those?

Ah, perhaps because they don't seem to reasonable and thoughtful huh?

By no means am I a McCain supporter, in fact I hate him just as much as I do Obama.

If Obama was such a Constitutional scholar, don't you think he would realize that a majority of the policies he proposes aren't authorized by the Constitution?



posted on Jul, 21 2008 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by mopusvindictus
 


Hey Mopus - I was trying to reply to your post and it posted before I could finish...lol and now I can't edit it...my bad


but what I wanted to say was aside from a few points of disagreement on historical details- the spirit of your post shows your heart in the right place...I personally hate war - it destroyed my father and my first husband...not because they lost their lives fighting but because it sucked the soul out of them into a dark place...but thats a topic for another discussion...but I hear where you are coming from and its deeply felt...and it is the kind of spirit that in the past made Americans loved despite our brashness...never lose it, man - it's appreciated...



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by slackerwire
reply to post by observer
 


Odd you chose only one quote to debate. Who decides what is "reasonable" and "thoughtful"? Obama? You're kidding right?

You purposely avoided his other stances on the 2nd Amendment like:

Banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.

and

Increasing state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.

Why did you avoid those?

Ah, perhaps because they don't seem to reasonable and thoughtful huh?

By no means am I a McCain supporter, in fact I hate him just as much as I do Obama.

If Obama was such a Constitutional scholar, don't you think he would realize that a majority of the policies he proposes aren't authorized by the Constitution?



I'll be honest, I only chose that quote as it was the only one from Obama himself in the site you provided. The rest are assertions (as far as I can tell) from someone who has an obvious axe to grind with no attributable sources linking the other gun quotes to Obama.
And you STILL have not told me or given any links to the "majority of other policies he proposes that aren't authorized by the Constitution". So can you give me these policy proposals or what?

Obs out



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by observer
 



From his own website:

- Obama will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepherd Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice's Criminal Section. ( A blatant violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment)

-As president, Obama will initiate a strategy to encourage all 50 states to adopt paid-leave systems. Obama will provide a $1.5 billion fund to assist states with start-up costs and to help states offset the costs for employees and employers. (Hmmmm, Article 1 Section 8 authorizes using tax dollars in this manner where? Surely you can point it out for us right?)

- Obama will also provide affordable and high-quality child care to ease the burden on working families. (Really? Since when is providing child care a function of the government?)

- As president, Obama would further raise the minimum wage, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing -- things so many people take for granted. (Ah basically he wants to make sure burger flippers make double digit wages. Nice)

- Obama will embrace the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty around the world in half by 2015, and he will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion to achieve that goal. (50 billion????
That sure as hell isn't authorized by the Constitution. )

- Barack Obama has consistently supported foreign assistance to Israel. He defends and supports the annual foreign aid package that involves both military and economic assistance to Israel and has advocated increased foreign aid budgets to ensure that these funding priorities are met. (Again, this is authorized by Article 1 Section 8 where?)

- Employers that do not offer or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees will be required to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of the national plan. (Nothing in the Constitution authorized the federal government to force private businesses to take part in any socialized healthcare program.)


Need I continue?

As for my assertions about his anti gun position, perhaps you should try watching the videos next time:



Thanks for showin up.



[edit on 22-7-2008 by slackerwire]



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   
reply to post by slackerwire
 


I will address these individually form my personal perspective but first I would like to begin by saying this is not an "Obama" issue. Everything you have pointed to are extensions of (many times) bipartican policies created some time back. I gather you are "strict constructionist"? The Constitution was written in the late 1700's and should forever be interpretted as if only white land owning men have any legitimate rights, any interpretation of that document as a living breathing entity that should change to reflect where the country itself has moved is strictly prohibited. If this is your understanding then all we will end up doing is barking right past each other with nothing being accomplished other than possibly higher blood pressure on both our parts. Unfortunately I am not a yeoman farmer but an urban dweller (one who plants a nice veggie garden! but still a city slicker). While you are correct that under a strict constructionist interpretation most of Obama's (and McCain's proposals) are "unconstitutional" I personally believe in a government that breathes and grows with the people. I don't advocate radical change, I consider myself more of a Burkean incrementalist and I do see need to readjust some of the system we have in place now.

Ok, on the hate crimes legislation I admit I am with you on that. I am not a fan. A crime is a crime, beating the snot out of a gay person is the same as beating the snot out of a redneck in a honky tonk.

Paid-leave systems. These are an extension of the Family Medical Leave Act and while I can see how this could be abused it could also be a blessing. If it were not for the FMLA I would have lost my job when my son was born as his first 3 weeks were spent in a NICU and then he needed to be (literally) attached to my waist for almost constant PIC line antibiotic infusion (my wife was fighting off a massive infection and was in the hospital herself). Now, I am a lucky lucky dude because I have a wonderful job were I had gobs of vacation time saved so I did not need paid leave. But I am a white collar worker in a fairly stable job. Prior to the FMLA I could have been let go simply for needing to take care of my family. You take that same situation and apply it to a non-union blus collar worker (like say a burger flipper) and they are serious financial hurt. To my mind this simply helps bridge that gap so poorer people don't have to suffer for having had a familial disaster.

Child care- again this is not boogy man Obama, this has been out there a long time. He just wants to make it better. Par tof the reason the gov had to step in on this is due to unchecked corporations driving salaries so low that both parents (if there are two) must work to make ends meet. Many families work low wage jobs that make affording child care difficult to say the least, so rather than force these families to choose living under a bridge, the gov steps in to help them offset the cost child care so they can afford to live in a crappy apartment (but it at least it's a roof over their heads).

Child health insurance, I see no reason to let poor children suffer because our health care system is broken.

As for the minimum-wage issue... I find it difficult to even argue. How on earth can anyone be against the working poor being advocated for? I mean OMG, you mean Obama wants the poor to actually be able to LIVE! How DARE he! Surely we do not want burger flippers to have the chance to eat or save. They are to serve me food and live, themselves, only hand to mouth.

World poverty reduction- no, not covered by the Constitution. However, since most of the terrorists that want us dead are from poverty stricken backwaters it seems to make sense to try to help those areas become prosperous thus reducing the venom and anger in those regions held against the West, since one of the main reasons, ultimately, that youth in these poors regions hate us is due to our affluence.

Israel - I agree with you on this. We don't need to be helping them build their military to such ridiculousness. The Brits started that mess with the Balfour Doctrine, let them clean it up. (sorry British friends on ATS!)


Employers helping offset national health care- Not a bad idea! One of the reasons American business is not terribly competitive on the world market is due to the costs of health care on corporations. If the leverage the Fed has can be utilized to lower that cost it makes the U.S. more competitive.

Now you are right, these policies are Unconstitutional but by that logic I hope you get offline and turn out your lights, since the internet was invented with unconstitutionally invested tax dollars. Your electricity is totally unconstitutional as the electrification of the U.S. was done under FDR and the New Deal, which by strict constructionist standards is almost the devil itself.
I can respect your views on these subjects I just don't want to buy a powered wig and go back to 1796 as it appears you do. In 2008 we have vastly different issues to deal with than did the Founders. I see nothing wrong with allowing the people to vote in people who want to guide our society to a better standard of living.

Obs out
Edited for egregious spelling errors!


[edit on 22-7-2008 by observer]



posted on Jul, 22 2008 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by observer
 


These al seem to make sense till you see exactly how these programs will be funded. I don't know about you but I already pay a rate of 28% in federal taxes already. You add in State taxes on top of it and I end up with a rate near 34%. Now with these new tax hikes needed to pay a deficit on top of the new monies needed it will be near 47%. And don't bother with that red hering that its the military budget cuts that will cover it. With the dollar tanking and oil prices what they are, to try and make the populace pay more for these cost of living hikes is a real problem. It will make the feelgooders sleep better at night but the common man and the everyday working 55-60 hours a day person get pinched to a point it won't be worth the effort. These programs will bring us down not make things better. It will take us more time and effort to earn a living and no one will benefit. If they pay for your health system, they can dictate how you live more closely than they already are trying to do. The nannie state will crush Americas resolve to maintain the status quo and allow the morons in charge to dictate to us our rights even more than they do already. Obama and McCain are headed in the wrong direction but Obama is going to be much worse on the American pocket book!!

Zindo




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join