The Collapsing Global Left - Page 2 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:13 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by aardvark View Post
I checked "A"

It seems that the government is far from non-obtrusive. They are in fact domineering, and sucking our money and rights.
It is both parties, however.
The graphing I have seen is those are attributes of both parties, and actually the country is leaning at an alarming rate to not a centerist, but a stay out of my life and wallet stance. In other words "independent" with a bent on controlled spending (which neither dem's or rep's get). They are sounding strangely "Libertarian" in nature.

I can buy that!

You know, I'm a charitable guy and expect my dollar to get 90c to the person in need, but the government with the same dollar seems to only get 30c to the people in need, IF they get it at all. The governments credibility has never been lower, due to BOTH parties.

Aardvark
Very good. I checked "A" as well. The thing that is absent from the "social democracies" (or however you want to sweeten the term socialism) and the thing we're supposed to have is, simply, Liberty. That means we have the Liberty to do what we want up to the point that it infringes on someone else's Liberty. It carries with it responsibility for one's self. It doesn't mean or end with the ability to vote, as voting yourself part of someone else's wallet (aka, Liberty) is supposed to be constrained by constitutional limitations. I don't care what other countries do, that is supposed to be the foundation of our country. Neither party gets it. But I maintain it is a superior approach to social anything.

edfreeman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:15 PM
~BANNED~
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Posts: 41,649
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1761 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teutone View Post
What some 'informed' people here are calling the 'left,' would be considered 'centrist' in many Countries of the World.
Exactly, what he just said.
Shane is offline  
post #13 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:34 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfreeman View Post
Very good. I checked "A" as well. The thing that is absent from the "social democracies" (or however you want to sweeten the term socialism) and the thing we're supposed to have is, simply, Liberty. That means we have the Liberty to do what we want up to the point that it infringes on someone else's Liberty. It carries with it responsibility for one's self. It doesn't mean or end with the ability to vote, as voting yourself part of someone else's wallet (aka, Liberty) is supposed to be constrained by constitutional limitations. I don't care what other countries do, that is supposed to be the foundation of our country. Neither party gets it. But I maintain it is a superior approach to social anything.
But the Bill of Rights say nothing about that. Property can be taken and used for the public good as long as due process is followed. Congress is given broad rights to obtain property and money for the public good. It is charged with providing for "the general welfare", and in fact, one of the first historical acts of State Socialism occurred as part of the American Revolution, the right to a free publicly financed education, an idea originating with Thomas Jefferson himself, started there with the men who wrote the Constitution and it was considered just as radical and "left wing" as socialized healthcare is now. The US is not on some wayward path to liberalism, if anything, it is simply getting back to it. How easily conservatives seem to think that the Founders were "conservative". They were not. They were revolutionaries in every sense of the word. Liberty is not defined in the property sense as broadly as it is in political and civil rights, this is simply another myth, in fact a socialist government could easily exist Constitutionally in the US, and I beg for you to point out the clause in the Constitution that forbids or precludes it.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address

Last edited by FeelTheLove; 06-10-2009 at 04:37 PM.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #14 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:39 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
^ I would only like to point out that these are the types of arguments we should be having, rather than -- well, the moronic rantings that seem to dominate current political discourse.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #15 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:40 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Amendment 10.

edfreeman is offline  
post #16 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:46 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
I don't see how the oft mentioned and vague 10th Amendment takes away the right of Congress to tax and spend. In any case, it was tremendously damaged in the avalanche of amendments that followed the Civil War.

The 10th Amendment:
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Sweet and simple. For a lot of people on the right, the COTUS stops there. Just look at all the rightwing states rowing that boat, especially my home state:
Quote:
RESOLVED, That the 81st Legislature of the State of Texas hereby claim sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States; and, be it further

RESOLVED, That this serve as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers; and, be it further

RESOLVED, That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or that requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed;
But alas none are going anywhere because they ignore a fundamental Constitutional reality - later Amendments take precedence over prior ones. There are becoming precious few rights to "reserve to the states", what with income taxes, voting rights and all the other later amendmensts, but in particular, the 14th Amendment eviscerates it:
Quote:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

...

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Sections 1 and 5 combine to give the Federal government the authority to do much of what those Texas resolution paragraphs are claiming that the Federal government does not have. Section 4 gives the Federal Government incredible power to run up public debt, and to make any law it wishes on how it applies to the states, how it is spent and what the states must do in compliance to receiving any funds, even if it means requiring the states to spend money on its own.

Basically, the 14th Amendment fundamentally changed the balance of power between the Federal and State governments. It’s a very different view of the world than the Founders had - it’s actually very Hamiltonian in its view of central power, and opposed to the Jefferson/Madison view of a "state" centric nation. In fact, Hamilton's ideas dominated the rest of the 19th Century, back in the days when there was plenty of "big government" in the form of transcontinental railroads and such:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics)

In fact, what many Democrats want is a return to Hamiltonianism, not the idiot "marxism" as bleated by the wingbots, but a resurgence of the idea that massive Federal investment is needed to build the new American trans-continental railroad to the future, in other words, we got out Founding Fathers too, and many of these so-called "left wing" ideas are as American as Mrs. Hamilton's apple pie.


You see the 10th too much in a vacuum, ed. Rather than quoting the 10th and ignoring the 14th, it seems that those on the right should be talking about and striving for a return to the pre-14th balance of power, and be demanding their Congressionmen propose Amendments to revise the 14th Amendment instead of this constant nit-picking as they descend into chaos. It is time for all you right wingers to quit pussy footing around, bring it on, I say.

But you will have to face up to some hard questions:


Do the changes in society and technology, particularly the mobility of society compared to 200 years ago, have any impact on a modern definition of State Sovereignty? State borders are becoming just lines in the sand.

Wouldn’t a strict 10th Amendment interpretation imply a significant rollback on civil rights? Do we want to return to a world where Jim Crow lives?

And what "states rights", anyway? Why should states that take Federal funds not be subject to Federal restrictions on those funds?

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address

Last edited by FeelTheLove; 06-10-2009 at 05:16 PM.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #17 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 04:49 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
I do not believe anyone answering B, C, or D would have understood. Was I misunderestimating?
No, I think you developed and executed a brilliant bit of strategery. I was complimenting you. This way we have a whole crew of delusional leaning types remaining deluded.

Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #18 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 05:53 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 300SD
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 11,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
It would seem that people around the world are rejecting the message of the Left.
Looking at the latest elections in quite a few Latin America countries, one would conclude that it is the other way around.
p100 is offline  
post #19 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 07:37 PM
Forum Administrator RC Colas® & Moon Pies®
 
Digmenow's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2006
Vehicle: 1981 380SL 151K: 2001 E320 4Matic Estate 147K: 2008 E350 Sport 4Matic 120K: 2005 S500 116K
Location: The Land of Pleasant Living
Posts: 36,506
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Quoted: 1273 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove View Post
... Mr. John Voight...
Didn't George Costanza buy his car?


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Digmenow is online now  
post #20 of 26 (permalink) Old 06-10-2009, 08:17 PM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,510
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove View Post
I don't see how the oft mentioned and vague 10th Amendment takes away the right of Congress to tax and spend. In any case, it was tremendously damaged in the avalanche of amendments that followed the Civil War.

The 10th Amendment:


Sweet and simple. For a lot of people on the right, the COTUS stops there. Just look at all the rightwing states rowing that boat, especially my home state:


But alas none are going anywhere because they ignore a fundamental Constitutional reality - later Amendments take precedence over prior ones. There are becoming precious few rights to "reserve to the states", what with income taxes, voting rights and all the other later amendmensts, but in particular, the 14th Amendment eviscerates it:



Sections 1 and 5 combine to give the Federal government the authority to do much of what those Texas resolution paragraphs are claiming that the Federal government does not have. Section 4 gives the Federal Government incredible power to run up public debt, and to make any law it wishes on how it applies to the states, how it is spent and what the states must do in compliance to receiving any funds, even if it means requiring the states to spend money on its own.

Basically, the 14th Amendment fundamentally changed the balance of power between the Federal and State governments. It’s a very different view of the world than the Founders had - it’s actually very Hamiltonian in its view of central power, and opposed to the Jefferson/Madison view of a "state" centric nation. In fact, Hamilton's ideas dominated the rest of the 19th Century, back in the days when there was plenty of "big government" in the form of transcontinental railroads and such:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics)

In fact, what many Democrats want is a return to Hamiltonianism, not the idiot "marxism" as bleated by the wingbots, but a resurgence of the idea that massive Federal investment is needed to build the new American trans-continental railroad to the future, in other words, we got out Founding Fathers too, and many of these so-called "left wing" ideas are as American as Mrs. Hamilton's apple pie.


You see the 10th too much in a vacuum, ed. Rather than quoting the 10th and ignoring the 14th, it seems that those on the right should be talking about and striving for a return to the pre-14th balance of power, and be demanding their Congressionmen propose Amendments to revise the 14th Amendment instead of this constant nit-picking as they descend into chaos. It is time for all you right wingers to quit pussy footing around, bring it on, I say.

But you will have to face up to some hard questions:


Do the changes in society and technology, particularly the mobility of society compared to 200 years ago, have any impact on a modern definition of State Sovereignty? State borders are becoming just lines in the sand.

Wouldn’t a strict 10th Amendment interpretation imply a significant rollback on civil rights? Do we want to return to a world where Jim Crow lives?

And what "states rights", anyway? Why should states that take Federal funds not be subject to Federal restrictions on those funds?
No, the 14th amendment does not "take precedence" from the 10th and give the federal government the power you propose. The 14th was written to address some states who wanted to deny rights and privileges to the former slaves, now citizens of this country, and to address other actions taken by states and individuals who had taken up arms against this country. It gave specific new direction against that and empowered Congress to act to make it so. Nothing more. There is nothing about the 14th that needs to be changed provided it is applied as it was intended.

That amendment, and the others, were ratified by the states. Have you ever paused to wonder why the states must ratify amendments to the constitution or why the federal government isn't empowered to do it by itself? It is because we are states, united. It is another reason why the "general welfare" clause that many have perverted to mean unlimited federal power does not mean that at all. The whole phrase is "general welfare of the United States," which has nothing to do with providing the citizens with free stuff.

And, no, the progression of technology does not, in itself, warrant a change to the relationship between State and Federal governments. The Federal government certainly wants you to think so, and, if we think so, the amendment process in the constitution would allow any change we choose to make.

I don't see your logic in an assertion that returning to the 10th Amendment (and the rest of the Constitution) would erode civil rights. The folks who advanced discrimination in our country were as misguided as whatever point you were attempting to make.

You should be proud to live in a state that proposes to live by the constitutional limits on the federal government. I note that you chose not to deal with the premise of my post on the concept of Liberty being the foundation of our country. I don't blame you.

edfreeman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    whats up with collapsing bridges?? theboss Off-Topic 8 09-01-2007 03:34 PM
    Bridges collapsing is no flook benz rider Off-Topic 29 08-09-2007 06:33 PM
    Forget Global Warming - Be scared of Global Cooling 430 Off-Topic 13 08-05-2007 08:36 PM
    Is the Iraqi government collapsing, with this? cascade Off-Topic 53 08-02-2007 08:57 PM
    A refresher on Global Cooling. errrr Global Warming 430 Off-Topic 67 04-07-2006 06:55 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome