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.

 

What matters to you politically... No Labels Allowed.

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Tell, in your own words, your political stance.

What should Our government do, or not do?

What problems are so important that we must solve them together?

Example:

I believe that the government must protect citizens from outside aggression, environmental devastation, and provide a level playing field for all its citizens, including food, shelter and a good education until such time as every member of our democracy can contribute to the greater good.

Notice, if you will, I never said Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative.

In this way, we may be able to find common ground between what appears to be an ever widening chasm of political polarity.

So, where are you?




posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
"I believe that the government must protect citizens from outside aggression, environmental devastation, and provide a level playing field for all its citizens, including food, shelter and a good education until such time as every member of our democracy can contribute to the greater good."

Sounds good to me, no objections, although I'd like to see the fine print on what exactly constitutes a "level playing field." I have a feeling there is room for disagreement within that broad and noble sentiment.

As a Chrisitan, I also want a government headed by Christians that protects and encourages Christian values.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


I was with you all up to the Christian part. I believe there should be a strong separation of religion and politics. No one set of beliefs should have a privileged position in society. Remember not everyone believes in the same things.


edit on 25-9-2011 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
Tell, in your own words, your political stance.
I believe that the government must protect citizens from outside aggression, environmental devastation, and provide a level playing field for all its citizens, including food, shelter and a good education until such time as every member of our democracy can contribute to the greater good.

I believe government should protect from outside aggression.
After that?
Nothing much else.

Leave it to the individual states for everything else.

2 Ameros



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


No interstate highways, national parks, federal disaster relief, or national certification for university accreditation?

What about food safety, and...

Minus that stuff, I can't think of many other good attributes.

Interesting!



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 


Does it have to be a specifically Christian government? Don't you want everyone to be represented in proportional measure? I doubt Christ himself would be quite so specific.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by beezzer
 


No interstate highways, national parks, federal disaster relief, or national certification for university accreditation?

What about food safety, and...



Exactly. The "get government offa my lawn!" folks love to engage in selective socialism, but would scream bloody murder if there was no aid for their state if a hurricane, earthquake, or tornado came through and decimated their towns and homes. Texas burned, and you had people in a state that always screams get government out of here wondering where their FEMA help was as they were suffocated by wildfire smoke. Get the hell out of here.

Most of these people are full of #. How many conservatives in Alabama refused aid when they lost their homes due to unforseen natural disasters? Not many, I can assure you.

Government can serve a positive purpose to the populace, if handled correctly. I don't trust people who always scream "states rights". There were states that had laws that were discriminatory towards people because of their skin color. States rights isn't some godlike, infallible concept.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl

Sounds good to me, no objections, although I'd like to see the fine print on what exactly constitutes a "level playing field." I have a feeling there is room for disagreement within that broad and noble sentiment.



It depends, do you believe that two children, one born to a single mother making $20,000 a year and one born to parents making $340,000 a year are on a level playing field? Some people believe so.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


To me, democracy means being involved.

While a republic is easier, it is making the populace lazy.

When people say 'smaller government,' I get a bit sad.

That means they don't want to participate, or they don't want someone else participating.

That is bad news, in my opinion.

Federal government is necessary in a 'country.'

More state rights may be applicable in certain instances, however.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by beezzer
 


No interstate highways, national parks, federal disaster relief, or national certification for university accreditation?

What about food safety, and...

Minus that stuff, I can't think of many other good attributes.

Interesting!

Fine. Highways, disaster relief.
Food safety? Let the industry regulate itself.
University accreditation? Federal government needs not to get involved. (get rid of Dept. of Ed.)
Nat'l parks? States.

See? We can find common ground.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:43 AM
link   
"As you're new president, I will talk about the elephants in the room and finally DO something about them...

I will cease the overdosing of the population using sodium fluoride....
I will bring all our troops home immediately and end these illegal wars...
I will revamp all the alphabet agencies members and structure....
I am also issuing arrest warrants for all the CEOs and politicians involved in crimes against humanity...
I will also... ***chirp chirp*** ............."

OMG someone shot him! There he goes, in that suit and tie near the grassy knoll...



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Okay let me see here… I believe in natural law and transcendent moral order, traditional values and customs are very important to me and I believe are necessary for a strong culture and sense of identity. Hierarchy I see is a natural result of human inequalities which can strengthen the functionality of a society if government recognizes hierarchy as normal rather than enforcing a state sanctioned egalitarianism upon people.

“Race, caste, etc. [e.g., gender, intelligence, strength (tr)] exist in the spirit before manifesting in earthly and historical existence. Diversity has its origin from above, and that which is related to it on earth is only its reflection and symbol. As we willed to be on the basis of a primordial nature or a transcendental decision, so it is. It is not birth that determines character, but vice versa. It is character in its widest sense, because here common words are deceptive, that determines birth.” – Julius Evola

Local, regional, cultural, ethnic, racial, religious, familial, and national identities are all critically important to the human composition and each requires a strict patriotism. Popular and low culture should be shunned and high culture or classicism promoted at every opportunity. Medieval paintings, sculptures, literature, music, and plays designed for nobility, aristocracy, and royalty are the greatest artistic forms ever presented in human history. All of these things draw out of rich cultural heritage the necessary materials which satisfy eloquent tastes.

A strong belief in small businesses, opposition to mass industrialism, and a reverence to non-industrial farmers and ranchers; these things can only be respected through a true reverence towards the land and protection of her from excessive abuse. This is why I suspect Thomas Jefferson was deeply skeptical of the urban cities for their corrupting atmosphere. How can you truly appreciate what has been given to us by a higher power without actually tending to it, learning from it, and growing up with it?

The person whom I admire most is Edmund Burke, an 18th century Whig politician in the United Kingdom from Ireland.

“Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites, — in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity, — in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption, — in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves.”

“It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the Queen of France, then the Dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she just began to move in—glittering like the morning star, full of life, and splendor, and joy. Oh! what a Revolution! And what a heart must I have to contemplate without emotion that elevation and that fall! Little did I dream when she added titles of veneration to those of enthusiastic, distant, respectful love, that she should ever be obliged to carry the sharp antidote against disgrace concealed in that bosom; little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fallen upon her in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor, and of cavaliers. I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished for ever.”

Source



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


As a teacher, no department of education makes me very nervous.

Could you make a case for it?

No standards?

What would be considered a 'good education' then?



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


It would be absolutely stupid for them to refuse aid. Not because of some political leaning of theirs but rather for the fact that they pay taxes for those services… and taxes are not voluntary. Yeah I pay taxes, although I think they are far too excessive and government does way too much, so should I pay my taxes then shut up if anything happens to me? The money I was forced by law to pay in taxes could have been better kept in an account designed specifically for such a situation.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by jimnuggits
 


The free market will step in and educate your kids, from flipping burgers to Franchise management an education for the jobs of the future. A McEducation comes with a free toy.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


I do not believe in a level playing field or equality. There is only liberty. If a kid is born into a family of millionaires who can afford a top notch education then that kid receives top notch education. If a kid is born into a family of desperately poor who can only afford public education then that kid should receive public education. Typically the kid in the wealthy family has a higher chance of success so why restrict those parents from providing their kid with the tools of success? We cannot go around and tell kids that when they come in last place in a foot race that they did just as good as the kid who won.

Some are born with privilege others are not. If you are born without privilege then your climb to the top is just that much more inspiring and self-fulfilling.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by beezzer
 


As a teacher, no department of education makes me very nervous.

Could you make a case for it?

No standards?

What would be considered a 'good education' then?

The Dept of Ed. has been doing a real bang-up job, haven't they? It grows and the level of education plummits faster than Charlie Sheen's carreer.

I'd say to make a case FOR this epically failed department.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


It would be absolutely stupid for them to refuse aid. Not because of some political leaning of theirs but rather for the fact that they pay taxes for those services… and taxes are not voluntary. Yeah I pay taxes, although I think they are far too excessive and government does way too much, so should I pay my taxes then shut up if anything happens to me? The money I was forced by law to pay in taxes could have been better kept in an account designed specifically for such a situation.


You missed the point. People scream that all government is bad, but then look to the government, that they finance, to help in a time of need...AS THEY SHOULD. The idiots screaming to eliminate everything are either very, very shortsighted, or absolutely stupid.

Too much Limbaugh, Hannity, and Glen Beck imo, influencing the opinions of people that can barely read above the 3rd grade level.


edit on 25-9-2011 by illuminatislave because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


I got your point in the first place, all I was saying is that people call on the state today who complain about the state because they are forced by law to pay taxes. If they could opt out of paying those specific taxes yet chose not to so as to receive help from the state while complaining or opted out then expected the state to help, then yes I would 100% agree with you. But at that point we are just playing hypotheticals which help nothing.



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
reply to post by illuminatislave
 


I do not believe in a level playing field or equality. There is only liberty. If a kid is born into a family of millionaires who can afford a top notch education then that kid receives top notch education. If a kid is born into a family of desperately poor who can only afford public education then that kid should receive public education. Typically the kid in the wealthy family has a higher chance of success so why restrict those parents from providing their kid with the tools of success? We cannot go around and tell kids that when they come in last place in a foot race that they did just as good as the kid who won.

Some are born with privilege others are not. If you are born without privilege then your climb to the top is just that much more inspiring and self-fulfilling.


Ah. Were you one of these people who were born desperately poor? I like to ask for some background information of the people that believe that the children that are born into poverty should be left to blow in the wind.

Climb to the top my ass. If the game is rigged, there's no such thing as a climb to the top, most people will be lucky to keep their heads above water no matter how hard they try. If you are poor and cannot receive a quality education, or if you do not have the money and resources to pursue a higher education, there is no climb to the top. That stuff about starting off as a damn janitor and rising up to the top of a company to own it is a load of jingoistic, dishonest horse#.

The days of this idiot mentality are soon coming to an end, because once this economy heads off the cliff we'll see how many people, especially those that have no concept of what it is like to live in poverty, are still singing that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" tune.

There will be a lot of hypocrites being exposed, I reckon.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join