Free Republic

“Something needed to be done, yes, but it is the HOW that has taken so many off guard. This plan was set up in a HEAVILY government, centrally controlled manner and is so far from free market that it came as a shock to all who understand it's serious implications.”

It seems clear that you have not looked at the 1965 entitlement which made much of what you complain about a fait d’accompli long before this bill. You are correct “we bear the responsibility for our choices”, but blame can not be laid on the current administration for a battle lost in the 60s. If you were around at that time I hope you caused a fuss.

“This bill was vote pandering that will yield little benefit to the republicans but will leave huge burdens to their kids. Pathetic and very poorly thought out.”

I agree, but I point out that the privatization mechanism might be the key to ultimately dismantling it. If Gore had been elected, you’d have had the bill without privatization.

“I have heard no one claim that Bush is "not ideologically pure, " as you say they claim with your straw man. No one ever made the assertion that he was or even should be. What I hear people claim is that Bush is not a conservative, or, at best, a mixed bag.”

Not a conservative is the ideological purity to which I refer.


“Not many presidents accomplish great things, and if one does, he is wildly unpopular during his lifetime. I take issue with that statement. Of the presidents you know who have accomplished great things, which have been wildly unpopular? Certainly not Reagan.”

Whether Reagan should be cited depends on who you talk to--ask a Democrat. I would cite Lincoln and Truman off the top of my head, and it is always a matter of debate whether an accomplishment is great or villainous.

“Only the virtuous should demand virtue of others. Wrong. I may concede the call for some to be less shrill. But I will never agree with that statement”

Plato is quoted as saying, "Good people need no laws to act responsibly, and bad people find a way around the laws." Benjamin Franklin addressed the issue by saying, “As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Theodore Roosevelt said, “No prosperity and no glory can save a nation that is rotten at heart,” and Judge Learned Hand offered: “Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it.”

James Madison cautioned, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other", and Thomas Jefferson warned, "Peace, prosperity, liberty and morals have an intimate connection."

The consensus is that for a nation to be a free and virtuous, the citizenry must manifest those qualities first. The whole is equal to, but never greater than the sum of its parts. The notion that we can be better collectively than as individuals is a fallacy. Morality begins with the individual and is reflected in how they are governed.

This theme was most clearly enunciated by Alexis de Tocqueville, a French historian, who in the 19th century concluded that, "America is great because America is good. When America ceases to be good, it shall cease to be great."

Perhaps I am a pessimist. James Branch Cabell said, "the optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true;" while George Bernard Shaw observes, “the power of accurate observation is frequently called cynicism by those who don't have it. " I can’t help believing that a saintly nation requires a nation of saints, and we would be hard pressed to find one.

As for ideological purity, how many conservatives, on principle, forego government handouts for which they qualify? Conservatives should be less shrill. Only the virtuous should demand virtue of others.

Nor was Christ God.

Good take. We see in the story what a miserable failure government is when it tries to be philanthropic. e.g. workhouses, poorhouses, etc., and what a difference individual charity makes. If nothing else, individual giving hits the intended target.

Microsoft word thinks its Jovan. My favorite line is: The sugarplums dancing in their heads can’t be defended in any other way.

You buy the land then. I am not saying they are the only ones who get to bid.

As for taxes, even a non profit has to pay taxes on earned income.

How about a society that can distinquish between culture and licentiousness between judgment and judgmentalism. Reason and liberty are the answer not rules and strikes.

Personal responsiblity, quite right.

So much for the often promoted idea that the Church's problems will all go away if they weed out homosexuals.

Sorry I gave offense.

Thanks, I tried to look up 'Mr. Mulliner' in your dictionary, but couldn't find it, but if you liked the article, I assume it is not an insult. :-)

Libertarianize the GOP is an interesting idea, but a major stumbling block would be the superstitious view of Christianity held my most Americans. If you could convince them to be Deists, it could work.

It is only a cut in the growth. Every year government programs get more. If they want 8% more, but get only 6% that is called a cut.

sorry no. http://robertwolf.blogspot.com/

I grant you that this single quote may be limited in the way you suggest, however, Derrida believes that no author's work can be taken at face value. He believes that in order to understand a piece of writing one has to know the background and philosophcal mindset of the author and from that insight one derives the author's intended meaning, despite what actual words appear on the page.

Wolf

It's the 18th Century and that century and America are one.

What does that mean?

Too many after the 16th deal with civil rights issues, hard to eliminate and do no real harm. Women and Blacks should have equality and the right to vote.

I'm not good at organizing such things. I prefer to observe and comment, however, if you would like to spearhead such an endeavor, I would he glad to help.

I do not lack vision. How's Natasha?

Not that it matters, except to you perhaps, but I have no problem with the concept of a prime mover. I do have a problem with demeaning Jesus by turning him into some Elysian mystery figure. Jesus was not a god, never intended to be, and would be horrified by Christianity were he alive today.

Just because I wish you well does not mean I want to share your opiate.

"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
- Galileo Galilei

The writer or the baboon?

I am glad you have found peace, few do.

You can't distinquish between someone trying to tell you you are wrong and an insult. I really don't have time for the uneducated. Now you have been insulted.

You've put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5. Stop digging.

Your defense of the 'saintly' Romans is simply wrong.

This is a bit grandiose, don't you think? Does everyone, everywhere have to have your approval, or just those writing on religious topics?

I don't know what you think you read, but I wasn't what I wrote.

You are probably correct, he was fastidious about observing Jewish Law. I'm sure he remembered his ritual bath after every homicide.

I stand corrected.

That is very interesting. Thank you for that link.

You don't know what you are talking about. Believe whatever you like.

That may be incorrect, although it is true that she no longer heads the organization. But what is true is that she has not repudiated the newer industrial strength approach.

My own view is for no limits and vastly stiffer penalties. Some people handle alcohol better than others. Those that don't should practice moderation or be put away for a long time.

You are correct, of course, but accountability is never the outcome; no heads will roll, no one will walk the plank.