Note to Conservatives

[Jim Craik]

Re: Note to Concervatives

I am an independent, I don't vote Republican. But don't try to tell me how wonderful Democrat policy decisions are for this country. American history shows that the greatest losses in personal freedoms have always occurred during the tenure of a Democrat president.

So, you must remember a womans right to vote (Wilson), civil rights (Johnson) Please let us know what loss of personel freedom under Democratic presidents out weigh these gains in personel freedom!

Now that I think of it, I got drafted under Nixon, I consider that a loss of personal freedom.

 

[Ron Earp]

Re: Note to Concervatives

American history shows that the greatest losses in personal freedoms have always occurred during the tenure of a Democrat president.

That could be somewhat debatable. Regardless of the reasoning behind it, the Patriot Act is considered by many a fairly serious decrease in privacy/personal freedoms of the American public. It was signed into law by Mr. Bush, a Republican.

 

[Jim Craik]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Ron +1

 

[Roark_John]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Don't like the draft? Go live in another country where they don't have it. I consider serving in the military to be a small price to pay for the freedom you have. Otherwise, don't be so quick to elect people who will send your neighbors kid to die in some 3rd world shithole. Somebody has to serve...what makes you so special that you shouldn't be one of them?

Now that I think of it, I got drafted under Nixon, I consider that a loss of personal freedom.

 

[Roark_John]

Re: Note to Concervatives

I completely agree. I wasn't being a cheerleader for the Republican camp.

Notice that Obama didn't let the Patriot Act lapse, he signed the bill that made it permanent.

Both parties use the "advances" made by the other side to bolster their political arsenal. Neither side is interested in repealing efforts made by the other. The fact is that has always been about power and control, regardless of whether they are Red or Blue.

That could be somewhat debatable. Regardless of the reasoning behind it, the Patriot Act is considered by many a fairly serious decrease in privacy/personal freedoms of the American public. It was signed into law by Mr. Bush, a Republican.

 

[Jim Craik]

Re: Note to Concervatives

So, you must remember a womans right to vote (Wilson), civil rights (Johnson) Please let us know what loss of personel freedom under Democratic presidents out weigh these gains in personel freedom!

Wyoming, you have not answered the question.

You think personal attacks will let you avoid it?

 

[Ron Earp]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Notice that Obama didn't let the Patriot Act lapse, he signed the bill that made it permanent.

Maybe Obama did sign the bill, while he was a senator. But President George W. Bush, a Republican, signed the bill into law.

Many of the act's provisions were to sunset beginning December 31, 2005, approximately 4 years after its passage. In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make its sunsetting provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberty protections. In July 2005, the U.S. Senate passed a reauthorization bill with substantial changes to several sections of the act, while the House reauthorization bill kept most of the act's original language. The two bills were then reconciled in a conference committee that was criticized by Senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns.<sup id="cite_ref-0" class="reference">[1]</sup> The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9 and 10, 2006.
​

 

[Jim Craik]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Ron +1 again

 

[Ron Earp]

Re: Note to Concervatives

I'm not taking sides, just presenting facts.

Fact is, the initial premise of this thread of GM paying back the government and taxpayers is still incorrect, unless of course you think that We The People need to be in the car business.

 

[Chris P.]

Re: Note to Concervatives

One of the other big differences between the Great Depression and now is the FDIC which came into affect after and because of the financial collapse back then. Also, stock trading worked differently. Banks were the main brokers and they were allowed to use person A's money to finance person B's risky margin purchases and short selling. When things started to fall apart, people that weren't invested in the stock market at all lost money because the bank couldn't replace it - imagine that?

I personally believe that GM HAS NOT paid their debt yet because they need to buy back and resell to the market what the government owns. Also, all because the government owns stock doesn't mean they run the company, the board still runs the company.

How about this - instead of bailing out the banks, why not let capitalism run its due course and THEN if the general market is hit too hard by it, use the money to help the general market and those who are innocent of Wall Street's gambling. It is now known that there are hedge funds out there that specifically pretty much created and then both bet ON and hedged AGAINST the financial mortgage instruments that created this. Many big banks claim they didn't see anything coming. Bullshit. I saw it coming starting 10 years ago and I am not an economist by any means. I didn't see the behind the scenes shady financial deals, I saw the rocketing real estate prices and compared them to the crawling wage increases... things just didn't add up.

 

[Jim Craik]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Chris,

I like your idea!

In no way do I like these bail-outs, its just that the alternative is so ruinous that failing to stop the on-comming crash/collapse is worse.

 

[Roark_John]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Obama Signs Reauthorization of Three Patriot Act Provisions – Main Justice

In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New Arguments Are Worse Than Bush's | Electronic Frontier Foundation

Again, no matter what party affiliation a politician claims, they all flip-flop on the "issue" when it comes to using the ill-gotten gains of the other side.

Maybe Obama did sign the bill, while he was a senator. But President George W. Bush, a Republican, signed the bill into law.

Many of the act's provisions were to sunset beginning December 31, 2005, approximately 4 years after its passage. In the months preceding the sunset date, supporters of the act pushed to make its sunsetting provisions permanent, while critics sought to revise various sections to enhance civil liberty protections. In July 2005, the U.S. Senate passed a reauthorization bill with substantial changes to several sections of the act, while the House reauthorization bill kept most of the act's original language. The two bills were then reconciled in a conference committee that was criticized by Senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties for ignoring civil liberty concerns.<sup id="cite_ref-0" class="reference">[1]</sup> The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9 and 10, 2006.
​

 

[Roark_John]

Re: Note to Concervatives

That wasn't personal, that was a reality check. What makes you such a unique snowflake out of the 330 million Americans, that your life shouldn't be committed to the military actions of this country like other able-bodied men?

I have nothing against women getting the right to vote. That happened 50 years before my birth. Just like the implementation of the Social Security Administration. Which is now bankrupt, because the funds were used as a federal cookie jar. Contributions to which were mandatory...contributions that I nor anyone in my generation will never see or be reimbursed for. Taxation without representation is not only tyranny, it is slavery...which brings me to my next point.

Had everyone put on their thinking caps, there was no need for the Civil Rights Act. There were no federal laws, nor Amendments, which forbade blacks, browns, yellows, reds, purples or greens from having equal status and protection under the Constitution. All state laws to the contrary should have been repealed. Problem solved.

The issues are simple...those acts singled out and gave SPECIAL privileges to groups that were already represented and accountable under our laws. A law that gives special treatment to some, at the expense of others, IS a loss of personal freedoms.

I am still waiting for the Single White Male act, that protects MY interests.
Because regardless of the assumption, I am not already covered by the Constitution and attendant federal laws, unless you care to shade me with the same umbrella that would have covered women and different skin-tones. Which only reaffirms my assertion, not degrades it.

I'm sorry that your generation, and the generations before you, were too ignorant to behave as logical and rational people, thus forcing these special interest legislative measures. All because the powers-that-be and the contributing populace didn't know how to behave themselves...they needed the Nanny State to tell them how to get along.

Is that what "good" has come of all your cheerleading for this political party, or that? That I am not allowed to do something, because others couldn't behave themselves? If you do not consider that a loss of personal freedom, I don't know what would constitute it in your mind.

Wyoming, you have not answered the question.

You think personal attacks will let you avoid it?

 

[Mike Christian]

Re: Note to Concervatives

wow, this is going downhill fast

 

[Roark_John]

Re: Note to Concervatives

I didn't mean for it to sound that way, I was merely pointing out that government meddling in private matters (business is pretty private, considering it involves property) is never a good thing and the Law of Unintended Consequences always rears its ugly head soon afterward.

wow, this is going downhill fast

 

Re: Note to Concervatives

wow, this is going downhill fast

Mikey,
Stop being sarcastic ,,,,,,don’t you know sky is falling ,,,,black folks becoming president (after SOOOO many old wothless white men), Government subsidizing Car companies, providing healthcare, regulating banks/wall street.

All this I can deal with. BUT, what is next ,,,TAKING OUR machine GUNS?? NOW THAT will cause my hemorrhoid to explode. We JUST can’t,,,,, have ,,,,,,that.

 

[Jack Houpe]

GM paid back the government out of the escrow account that was originally part of the bail out package. So it looks good on CNN TV but it really is nothing more than a shuffle of the cards on the Liberals to paint a pretty picture. This administration will be over this Nov. Things will start changing in the other direction but then again is that direction any better than the one at power? We need change but left and right both need an overhaul.

 

[Dave Wood]

Re: Note to Concervatives

Many big banks claim they didn't see anything coming. Bullshit. I saw it coming starting 10 years ago and I am not an economist by any means. I didn't see the behind the scenes shady financial deals, I saw the rocketing real estate prices and compared them to the crawling wage increases... things just didn't add up.

I agree. I was talking about the same thing when Reagan,Bush (1) and Clinton were protecting us from....WHAT.
I also recall when the govt. owned Brit cars went down the tubes.
"It doesn't take a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."(Dylan)

 

[Dave Wood]

Re: Note to Concervatives

That wasn't personal, that was a reality check. What makes you such a unique snowflake out of the 330 million Americans, that your life shouldn't be committed to the military actions of this country like other able-bodied men?

.

There are 2 implications in that statement that I find totally objectionable. One is that the only way to serve your country is in the military. I did, but feel there are other uses of our young besides fodder in some poorly conceived agressive act. Secondly, that every military excursion by the same pinhead leaders that are orchestrating the current mess are somehow O.K. with you. We don't have the draft again, however they are getting it all lubed up for use. WW2 showed us we could divert attention away from economic problems by waving the flag of patriotism...even if we facilitated the mess. If I was 18 again, I'd boycott selective service because it is a sexually discriminating law. Only young men have to register. If they don't it is a felony. I guess the best way to circumvent any needed changes in this country is to kill or criminalize those that may be able to get it done. I blame all the kiss a$$ members of my generation for becoming exactly what they fought against.

 

[Jim Craik]

Dear Mr Sheik,

Faili, you do not post often and you dont post long but you are one of the most quick witted and entertaining people around!!