Insanity: Socialists, communists serving in Congress

WorldNetDaily ^ | 6/10/05 | Devvy Kidd

[Archon of the East]

Of course people can vote for whoever they want but the big deal is that socialists by ideology are an enemy to the very principles of the Constitution. This is not to say that they haven't been helped along by some so called Conservatives or the GOP at times. I have often wondered why people are in fact democratically electing tyranny over liberty? The problem is what will the world be like once all the people are "contained" by "social" dependence? Do you believe your life or future generations of people will be better off? Just a bit unnerving to me and the thought of what the future brings

[Sam Cree]

"I have often wondered why people are in fact democratically electing tyranny over liberty?"

I suppose the people are trying to vote that the property of others be used for themselves or given to themselves, or they are trying to vote for security or even for whatever good cause (social justice, the environment, etc.) politicians may tell them that the power of the state may be used in the service of.

The Constitution does not give the federal government power to do any of these things, but the federal government has been outside of its boundaries for so many years now, that I can only think that our current freedom is now at its consent, instead of its power being at ours.

The trouble with giving the state awesome power to do good is that it can use that same power to do evil. As Mr. Hayek said, we should not sacrifice our principles for expediency. Having successfully taken power not given it, government still has the Bill of Rights to contend with, but our politicians are doing what they can to smooth that problem over. CFR comes to mind, as does proposed regulation of the internet. Not to mention RKBA. I'm sure that back in the 1700's McCain and the rest of the GOP, in their quest for egalitarianism, would happily have tried to censor handbills, posters, the Federalist Papers, and whatever means of communications existed then.

[Archon of the East]

You know Sam the sad part is that you are right. I have also maintained for the most part that as long the Constitution remains we have a shot, as long as we can reverse some atrocious judicial decisions and interpretations of that document. I'm sure back in the 1700's McCain and lets say many in the GOP and all in the Disloyal party would have been hung for treason or would have never had the courage to be here in the first place.

Its a shame about McCain, he did suffer tremendously as a POW. One has to wonder about the effectiveness of brainwashing?

[Sam Cree]

I do think McCain to be an honest man for the most part, doing what he thinks is right, travesty though that may be. Bush signed CFR for that matter. A sacrifice of principle for expediency, in my opinion.