Posted on 08/29/2002 1:00:30 PM PDT by feelin_poorly
Shortly after 9-11, TV talk-show host Sean Hannity said, "Thank God, we have an honest man in the White House!"
And when you think about it, a great deal of what you might believe about the so-called War on Terrorism is based on statements from George W. Bush. You have only his word, or that of someone in his administration:
Since America is endangered by the "you're either with me or against me" tactics of the Bush administration, it becomes vital to know whether we can trust the man in charge of our government.
The record
So does George Bush's record inspire confidence in his honesty?
Unfortunately, this is the same man who has referred to trillions of dollars in budget surpluses – even though the federal government hasn't had a budget surplus since 1956. (The appearance of any "surpluses" was created by taking excess receipts from Social Security and applying them to the general budget, even as the politicians swore they were protecting Social Security.)
Mr. Bush even has the chutzpah to refer with a straight face (well not exactly a straight face, he loves to smirk) to corporate executives "cooking the books." He neglects to mention that many of the corporate bookkeeping methods the politicians are so incensed about today were motivated by rules imposed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
And George Bush is the same man who in 2000 said he believed in "limited government." Most people assumed he meant a government limited by the Constitution. In fact, he took an oath in which he swore to uphold the Constitution.
But he's violated virtually every one of the first 10 Amendments – especially the Ninth and 10th Amendments, which are meant to impose precise limits on his power.
So his belief in "limited government" apparently means government limited to what he wants to do.
George Bush is the same man who in one breath tries to ingratiate himself with you by saying, "It's your money, not the politicians' money" – but in the next breath, he says he's entitled to one third of "your money."
George Bush is the same man who said he has learned more about political philosophy from Jesus of Nazareth than from anyone else. But he's proven by his actions that he doesn't really believe such things as "Blessed are the peacemakers." And "the meek" who Jesus said would inherit the earth are in Mr. Bush's eyes really just "collateral damage" in his plans to tell the world how it must live.
Is honesty important?
In these and in so many other ways, George Bush has proven that he's not an honest man – and that we shouldn't trust him with the safety of America.
In fact, Thomas Jefferson understood that we shouldn't put our trust in any politician. He said we should bind them down from mischief "by the chains of the Constitution." And a truly honest man wouldn't even ask you to trust him.
Contrary to what you might have thought, this isn't an article about George Bush. It's an article about you. Are you going to demean yourself by putting your faith in a man who has done so much to demonstrate the folly of such faith?
Are you going to let politicians stampede you into throwing away the Bill of Rights, based on "evidence" you never see, reassured by politicians who have proven that the truth is secondary to their own ambitions?
Don't you have enough respect for your own mind to make your own decisions, refuse to accept conclusions without evidence, and be something better than a cheerleader for a politician or a political party?
More rational retorts I guess? NO sir, That's not how I would describe your responses. You are much like most of the .02%rs around here..... Anme calling bitter people
Ah, the actual mark of a liberal. A "conservative" seeks to conserve what is currently in place, the Constitution in particular. Contrast your statement with:
"Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction." --Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas, 1803.
Into which category do you fall?
"Where a constitution, like ours, wears a mixed aspect of monarchy and republicanism, its citizens will naturally divide into two classes of sentiment, according as their tone of body or mind, their habits, connections and callings, induce them to wish to strengthen either the monarchical or the republican features of the constitution. Some will consider it as an elective monarchy, which had better be made hereditary, and therefore endeavor to lead towards that all the forms and principles of its administration. Others will view it as an energetic republic, turning in all its points on the pivot of free and frequent elections." --Thomas Jefferson to James Sullivan, 1797.
So I noticed. You are more like the lemmings "over there".
BRAVO!!!
The in your most recent post to me you now assert the 911 event is insignificant
Me- You sincerely believe this?? I know of a whole country who'd disagree with you here, particularly the 3,000 families directly effected.
Your statement is absolutely appauling. Disgusting behaviour on your part which is quite unacceptable. Many a person would do physical harm to you had you said this to them in person. Making comments like these, you should be more worried about your personal security than you seem to be. Or perhaps you are far less willing to express such foul dropping in public than you are to disgrace this fine forum. It's far to easy and cowardly to sit behind your keyboard and monitor and spew that unforgivable HorseHillary. Take it somewhere else
FMOKM
Absolutely! Compared to the way you pseudo-conservatives are lining up to swap your rights for the pretense of security, that event is insignificant!
Would you tell those who died in this Nation's wars that their sacrifice to safeguard your freedoms was "nice and all of that", but I'm going to trade those freedoms so that I can feel secure?
I will make this point face to face with anyone. I will indeed defend the Constitution against all enemies, including your ilk! Look around, dude! You are giving away all for which those people died! I would not want my death to cause this Nation to discard its way of life just because some loopy enemy killed me. Do you think you serve their honor, both soldier and innocent victim, by trading away the life they once had? I don't think they would condone the use of their own deaths as the instrument of abdicating the Rights enumerated in the Constitution.
Grieve them? YES! Avenge them? YES! Remember them? YES! Honor them? YES! Throw away blood-won rights and freedoms for them? NEVER!
Is none of this getting through to "your kind"? Are you actually reading my posts for comprehension?
Disgusting behaviour on your part which is quite unacceptable.
You repeat this. I have not displayed disgusting behaviour. You are unable to cope with frank discussion. You are from the "I'm OK, You're OK", "touchy-feely" class of bed-wetters. The people who died on 911 are no more valuable than those we send to die to protect our way of life. Don't make these deaths go in vein. The Nation survives because of this sacrifice.
Been in the military? I have. You are just the talk part, aren't you?
Fair enough.
Not one single American has lost a right that they didn’t already have before this Administration took office.
Well, maybe except the rights to be secure in our papers and persons. The Patriot Act took care of that with providing a mechanism for the FBI to enter our HOMES, remove and/or copy whatever they see fit and then not even tell us about it, again, unless they see fit. Private property rights are one of the fundamental rights that all others stem from. If we do not posses a right to be secure in our persons and personal papers, then the government pretty well has carte blanche to do with us as it wills. Something else regarding the Patriot Act that you may or may not be aware of - it was drafted and written months before 9/11. I suppose they just had it lying around just in case something happened? This would have been passed under Krintoon if they thought they could have gotten away with it without the folks in 'fly-over country' stretching their precious necks.
Until you have a single ruling made by the Supreme Court that anything currently taking place is unconstitutional then by definition the above statement is fact. It may well be that they do make a ruling in the future that something being done was unconstitutional but until that time you have no basis to assert that the Bush Administration is knowingly and intentionally violating anyone's constitutional rights.
I point out yet again that it would appear that most of those in DC right now believe our Constitution is printed on rubber instead of paper just like they did when Clinton was in the White House. Nothing has changed there. We still have judges effectively legislating from the bench and no one seems to care. Laws passed by Congress are subject to a 'constitution check' by the Supreme Court who is charged with deciding whether their laws are constitutional or not. Sadly, these black-robed justices, for the most part, have forgotten what it is they are charged with doing. It strikes me as funny that when lawyers working for the government say a certain thing is so, that many people just blindly accept it, yet, when lawyers in everyday life ascertain something, it is immediately questioned because most folks thing they're all ambulance-chasing crooks. Double standards, anyone?
There has been a tremendous amount of Federal Government creep in our country that has occurred ever since the civil war.
Does this somehow make it right? No, of course not. It's just that a great many people have grown so accustomed to only knowing how it's been done during their own lifetimes that they can't see how far we've regressed during just the last 40 years! The federal government is growing exponentially and nobody ever seems to really care unless it's someone in the 'other' party doing the encroaching. Some of us don't care which (or any) party is subverting the ideals that this Country was founded on. We only seek to point out that it IS being done and that it is not right.
It is something to vigilantly monitor and address but it is separate from the current discussion of preventing further terrorist attacks against our nation and removing Saddam Hussein from power. The spirit of the two and the motivating factors involved are wholly separate.
The two can not be separated like that. As Ben Franklin once said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety." (November 11, 1755.) You can't have it both ways. We either have liberty or we have government 'guaranteed' safety (which is, as we all know, simply not possible). If the Federal government were really interested in any national security, our borders would have been locked down tight instead of spending time removing GI Joe toy guns from plastic dolls in airports and an entire of other high-visibility, accomplish-nothing measures instituted simply to make it look like something was being done and make the masses feel better. Makes people feel better is not increasing their safety. Maybe, instead, the powers-that-be could better spend their time explaining to people how their personal safety and the safety of their loved ones ultimately rests with themselves and not some bureaucrat. I've even go so far as to tell you how big a joke all this federalized airport security is in case you didn't know: while the now federal employees are busy confiscating plastic toy guns, key-chains shaped like pistols, nail clippers and finger-nail files, a passenger took a gun through security in Atlanta and my very own son (who arrived to catch a plane too late to check his largest bag) was handed that same bag back AFTER security found his pocket knife inside it. They handed the bag to him and TOLD him that he couldn't have a pocket knife on the plane so would he make sure that he had someone place that bag in the cargo area when he got down to the jetway!!! Here's the REAL clincher - my son is 6' 5", 19 years old and has long dark hair and VERY dark brown eyes. I would say that he fits the profile of a terrorists hijacker pretty closely and, yet, he was sent on his merry way with airport 'security screeners' KNOWING that he had a knife within his reach!! Were they afraid that if they confiscated it they'd get sued for 'profiling' because of his appearance? Who knows. It's just another example of how much intrusion and 'show your papers, please' the masses are willing to tolerate all in the name of some perceived safety. Very few are being vigilant anymore. They're too busy screaming for the 'state' to keep them safe.
No law has been past removing a single right any American has. No law has been passed that unlawfully detains any American.
Not hardly. As discussed above, we have lost the right to be secure in our persons and in our papers and up until just a few years ago we all understood that road-blocks by the police just to check for papers was blatantly unconstitutional. My, what short memories we all have nowadays. Unless we are plainly suspected of doing a certain illegal thing, the police have no constitutional authority to detain us and make us show our 'papers'. That in and of itself is enough to upset any person who is concerned over the current set of pre-Hitler-like behavior being carried our in the name of safety while our law enforcement is afraid to pull over anyone who looks middle-eastern for fear of being branded un-PC. Guess it's just easier to pick on real American citizens to, at least, LOOK like they're doing something constructive. After all, most folks will never that the time to question their tactics and they know it.
TIPS isn’t a law and even if it were it wouldn’t remove a single right spelled out by our forefathers. Detaining Americans as Material witnesses is a legal practice and has been for decades.
TIPS didn't get off the ground because a great many people found out what was going on in plenty of time to let their Congressmen and women know exactly what they thought about it. It will be back under a different name when the people are looking the other way unless I miss my guess. What TIPS seeks to do is train (on our dime, of course) and then empower basically everyone who may enter your home on, what you consider, legitimate business to snoop to their hearts content. Can you imagine the potential for some of these folks to get mad at a home-owner who is, say, rude to them and get even by 'turning them in' for some reason? Don't just think in the here and now, take things to the next (il)logical conclusion and see what potential for abuse something has the next time we have a Bill or Hillary Clinton in the White House.
Our Nation is under a very cogent threat of Biological as well as nuclear attack. This is not 1776 where we’ll be able to rally the minutemen to protect the Nation from a developing invasion. ...Prevention is the only way to orient ourselves towards and overcome these threats.
This makes as much sense as saying let's go out and shoot a certain kind of child because they will more than likely grow up to be hoodlums. Prevention should have started with more closely guarded borders and stern immigration and visa policies. Until I see these things being done, you'll have to pardon me for believing that everything that IS being done is mere smoke and mirrors to appease the masses. Pre-emptive strikes are something that the US people wouldn't have tolerated even 20 years ago. Dare I say it? -- It is simply not the American way.
Adolescent, knee-jerk outbursts at the hint of responsible Government action is not. The Government is tasked to promote the welfare and maintain the peace in our nation.
When I see some responsible government action, I'll be sure to admit it. So far, I've seen very little that will REALLY do anything to stop the first school from being blown to bits or the first mall and most of this is thanks to the amnesties and, still, illegals in this Country that our government (remember, the very same one that is SUPPOSED to be defending us??) has only encouraged during the last 10 - 15 years instead of halting in its tracks. Friends of ours who are border patrol are simply appalled that they are still not allowed to do their jobs even after 9/11. A thinking person has to stop and ask themselves why that is...
…and completely contrary to any decision that our founding Fathers would make. Does any one here want to assert that Thomas Jefferson would sacrifice millions of American lives [remember that there were only three million when he was around] because our government wasn’t doing exactly what he wanted it to do, how he wanted it done right here, right now?
I must have missed that remark. I honestly don't recall anyone advocating having Americans die to have his/her ideas upheld.
I think that if our Founders were alive today they would be more appalled at our interventionist policies and the lack of any REAL national security measures that they would see than anything else. Well, I take that back - I think they'd be pretty darned disappointed in all the people who are clueless (no personal slight intended) about what they stood for during their lives and what they and countless others here have fought and died for during our brief history. Thomas Jefferson (among others) tried to warn us - "Friendly relations with all nations, entangling alliances with none.". Too bad we forgot to hold the feet of our elected leaders to the fire to make certain that they didn't forget.
One single Nuclear detonation in Washington DC with our government in place would easily lead to worldwide economic collapse, invasion of Democratic South Korea, Israel, Taiwan and possibly even the United States itself by foreign powers as well as the immediate suspension of civil law and the ordinance of Military rule. You wanna see your rights chewed up…wait for that to happen…
Do you honestly believe this?? Even using tanks, etc., there are extremely few countries that would even attempt to 'take over' these united states for the exact same reason that Japan wouldn't try it prior to and during WWII. The part about some economic collapse might be right. After all, the US taxpayer is pretty well propping up the rest of the world and those folks would be left to figure things out for themselves without our government robbing from us to give to them. Bears thinking about.
None of that is far-fetched or unreasonable to predict. It is the logical process were terrorists to detonate a Nuclear bomb in our Nation’s capitol.
Thankfully, once again, our Founding Fathers had the wisdom and foresight to plan for just such and eventuality. It's called the chain of command. We might be shaken but I seriously doubt that we would crumble.
You may not like the fact that we now have these sort of responsibilities for other Nations but your personal like, dislike agreement or disagreement as to its constitutionality has no affect on the fact that the responsibilities are indeed there. Ignoring them or brushing them aside as unconstitutional is remarkably capricious.
Accepting the status quo because it's more convenient is what is capricious and whether I like it or not has absolutely nothing to do this. The nations of the world are NOT, repeat, NOT our responsibility and they have only become so since WWII through the bureaucratic processes that we've allowed to take place in Washington. It's not just me that thinks so either. There used to be tons of folks who posted here regularly that thought the same thing - now - they no longer post here or post here rarely due to drivel such as this comment about our having responsibilities for other nations. I know, I got FReepmail from quite a few of them last night and this morning welcoming me back to posting here.
At what point do you sober up and admit that the 1700’s are gone and they are never, ever coming back? At what point do you sober up and admit that this Government of ours or the relationships we now have with the rest of the World will never be dismantled from within to the size of our original government or the responsibilities shrunk to pre-1800 levels?
Yes, the 1700 and 1800s are gone and water under the bridge. Something comes to mind here that I heard many years ago, however; right and wrong and morals do not change, only people's perception of them. Mankind does not change and neither do governments. Our Founders knew this and hoped they had laid enough groundwork for us to maintain and carry on their vision. Guess that's why Patrick Henry thought the tree of liberty must be periodically watered with the blood of patriots. Real men, all, who weren't afraid to put their own lives on the line for what they knew was right. Now, instead, we have keyboard party supporters who wouldn't know a tyrant if they voted for one.
I am the first person to fight for our freedom of speech, our right to bare arms, free press, freedom of religion etc etc. and I am also the first one to admit that in order to defend all 280,000,000+ of us [Where we are today, not where you want us to be] from the threats we face, we are going to have to evaluate what priorities we have…
What would the Founders have thought about your statement? I think we can turn to Patrick Henry for the answer to this one: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Our Constitution is indeed the foundation that this Nation stands on but to honestly believe in the possibility of a return to the original state of national and international affairs that our Nation enjoyed when it was written and established is willfully infantile and ignorant.
Alas!! Now we finally get down to the truth! Thank goodness! You seem to be of the belief that the US. Constitution and its founding ideals are outmoded and outdated and not suited for discourse in the modern world! I can think of NO situations that are essential to either our safety as a Nation or our personal liberties that are not addressed and planned for in that noble document. To read it in the light in which it was written is to understand just how deeply the Founder's understanding of basic human nature went. People still have the same failings and the same admirable traits that they possessed then only, it would seem, with a greater profusion of the later.
If you do not agree then I find difficulty in you identifying yourself as either Conservative or American.
Frankly, I couldn't conceivably care less what you find difficulty with, sir. I am an American. Period. And proud of it. You see, I think that the United States IS the best Country on earth and don't mind taking the time to explain all they whys most days. Everyone from my father on up the family tree have served their Country with pride during all of the wars I could name. The fact that during the 20th Century they were sent places that our military had no business partaking in to begin with doesn't change the fact that they went, some of them died, and they did it due to a love of land and of family. Patriotism is a love of one's homeland. Nothing more and nothing less and does not necessarily include a love of one's government. I am very proud of my ancestors and the ancestors of my fellow AMERICANS who have fought and died for what they believed. Nothing will ever change that and your being asinine enough to question my personal beliefs or how I identify myself borders on insanity.
Step to the side and argue your purpose amongst yourselves but for now, Real Men are required to stand up and act [not talk] in order to defend our Nation. Right here, right now those actions will make our Nation safe…your rationale will not.
That are a lot of us who wish that we actually had REAL MEN running the show instead of a bunch of politically correct bureaucrats who are afraid to make anybody mad or hurt their feelings unless somebody wants their oil-fields. Do you know ANYTHING about the proposed oil pipe-line that crosses Afghanistan but could not be built due to an "unfriendly regime" being in charge? Maybe you should do some real digging on what is wrapped up in this 'war with Iraq' before you continue spouting off that we should dictate terms to their government or assassinate their rulers. I know that you won't listen to anything I've said but I also know that there are lots of people who lurk more than they post that will take my advise and do their own research instead of simply believing the propaganda machine that tells us what they want us to hear.
Stay well, Stay safe, have a good Labor Day - it IS the citizens holiday, after all.
On the contrary - I don't believe in a wimpy Gospel :)
Jesus called the Pharisees and Sadducees a brood of vipers and whitewashed tombs. He also drove the moneychangers out of the temple with a whip.
Myself, when I see someone picking wrongly upon a younger sister of mine, I tend to defend them. "South Buttocks" is merely a play on words. And btw - would you prefer, say, "brood of vipers"?
Sorry you can't handle that. If you actually ARE a Christian yourself, you're in for quite a surprise when you see Him in His glory. "Gentle Jesus, meek and mild" was just one aspect of Who He is :)
Hmmmm...
This statement alone demonstrates how much you much more you need to learn about Christianity.
You question the heart of another Christian and whether his/her belief is real and then further exalt yourself to imply that you have special knowledge of the glory of Jesus?????????
You do all this while excusing your off-color comment????? I don't know what type of youth ministry you headed up, but I sure hope you didn't teach as you behave.
Truth is like that for those who aren't familiar with it or who fear it. As someone who recently married a woman in her forties, I can tell you that FIJC is quite correct in her assessment of many middle-aged women - they don't just have chips on their shoulders, most of them are damaged goods.
My wife thinks and acts like she's still in her 20's - except for her Christian maturity, which, even though she's only known the Lord for about 5 years, is quite beyond most of the people here on FR. She's innocent, vibrant, and undamaged - and wise in the ways of God, because she loves Him so completely. The odds of finding someone like her, in their forties, amongst the throngs of damaged know-it-all frumpets is slim to none - which is precisely why I know that she was given to me by the One who made her :)
When you do trade your freedoms for illusion of security, that is a significant event.
Very well stated. Thank you.
Nice freudian slip, Bub. That's PRECISELY what we've lost - rights that we already had before this administration took office. You obviously don't know much about the so-called "Patriot Act," which was passed without even being read by the congressslime in DC and signed by Junior.
re: post 1063 - nope, it's mine too.
You don't utter the slightest sound of caring for many others than yourself and those who agree with you. My Bible tells me that's wrong.
Where did you read that you are supposed to be boasrtul, proud and arrogant? I must have missed those chapters.
So I noticed. You are more like the lemmings "over there"
LOL - I'd rather be in the 2% that has a clue than in the 98% falling over the cliff ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.