Forums | MacLife

bratboy wrote:

StaticAge wrote:

And I thought Germany's problem was not the political system of election, but the inefficiency of their executive branch and the terrible economy. But power-wise, the people had tons of opportunity for representation- just form a new party and get a ticket to the big table. There were lots of political parties in Germany in their legislative branch. It was not that hard to organize and get representation in government- as if that is a bad thing. The bad economy made Hitler's speeches about abandoning the political smorgasbord in favor of a more centralized government gain popularity. Then the Nazi's took advantage of crises in order to continually gain more and more power.

Right, sort of like having a "public option" for health insurance!  We'll be a dictatorship by the end of the summer.

Health insurance is one issue.
Federal government is expanding at an alarming rate.

Pariah wrote:

resedit wrote:

That's not all that has happened.
Government is growing at an alarming rate, and people want the government to grow and take care of them.

The "great experiment" Thomas Jefferson spoke of us is failing.

Funny how the right applauded while the Bush admin pushed for the greatest expansion of government surveillance and police powers

What are you talking about?
Because we didn't bitch when the NSA listened in to phone calls from known terrorists outside the country?

And for the records, we disagreed with many of Bush's policies and actions.

resedit wrote:

Pariah wrote:

resedit wrote:

That's not all that has happened.
Government is growing at an alarming rate, and people want the government to grow and take care of them.

The "great experiment" Thomas Jefferson spoke of us is failing.

Funny how the right applauded while the Bush admin pushed for the greatest expansion of government surveillance and police powers

What are you talking about?
Because we didn't bitch when the NSA listened in to phone calls from known terrorists outside the country?

And for the records, we disagreed with many of Bush's policies and actions.

The government has always been a welfare state, its just been that recently poor people have been the ones who also get help sometimes. I guess that its okay for government to take care of businesses and corporations such as railroads back in the 1800's- I mean, that was really nice of them to give away millions of acres for free to railroad companies. But if you are some poor slob looking for help, man, democracy cant help you out dude. Its just too expensive!

Last edited by StaticAge (2009-07-09 5:10 pm)

The resedit "wow" quotient is high in this thread.  I may need to pour some vodka.

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

Health insurance is one issue.
Federal government is expanding at an alarming rate.

What is that "rate?"  Was DeMint making similar comparisons during the federal government expansion of the Bush years?

http://georgesavage.com/2009/01/obamas- … expansion/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/world … 74772.html
http://rationalliberty.com/index.php/20 … gns-schip/

etc

What does any of this have to do with Nazi Germany, or Iran, or Venezuela?  You claimed that DeMint was "absolutely right," so you obviously believe that the United States is "about where" Nazi Germany was prior to WWII.  How so?

Not only is government growing and controlling more, but people believe giving that kind of power to the government is a good thing.
That's how. It's pretty obvious, really.

Chickenhawk wrote:

http://rationalliberty.com/index.php/2009/02/05/obama-signs-schip/

OH NO POOR KIDS ARE GETTING HEALTH INSURANCE

THOSE MONSTERS!!!!

It's not the proper way to do it.
It is being paid for largely by the poor (cigarette tax - who smokes the most?)

If I stole your money and use it to do something that benefits you, would you not be pissed that I took your money?

The fact that some things the government is currently doing at least on the surface sound warm and fuzzy doesn't change that it is radical government expansion, and often providing services that the federal government shouldn't be the one to provide.

Chickenhawk wrote:

http://rationalliberty.com/index.php/2009/02/05/obama-signs-schip/

OH NO POOR KIDS ARE GETTING HEALTH INSURANCE

THOSE MONSTERS!!!!

Hahahaha

resedit wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

http://rationalliberty.com/index.php/2009/02/05/obama-signs-schip/

OH NO POOR KIDS ARE GETTING HEALTH INSURANCE

THOSE MONSTERS!!!!

It's not the proper way to do it.
It is being paid for largely by the poor (cigarette tax - who smokes the most?)

If I stole your money and use it to do something that benefits you, would you not be pissed that I took your money?

The fact that some things the government is currently doing at least on the surface sound warm and fuzzy doesn't change that it is radical government expansion, and often providing services that the federal government shouldn't be the one to provide.

So, just to clarify, and as Pariah points out above, your issue isnt much about how "the great experiment is failing," but about whose money is going where, right?

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

It's not the proper way to do it.
It is being paid for largely by the poor (cigarette tax - who smokes the most?)

If I stole your money and use it to do something that benefits you, would you not be pissed that I took your money?

The fact that some things the government is currently doing at least on the surface sound warm and fuzzy doesn't change that it is radical government expansion, and often providing services that the federal government shouldn't be the one to provide.

We end up paying for it, anyway--just in the least efficient way possible.

Government is not efficient at anything and never has been, especially when it comes to spending.

Also--nazi germany?  Because you disagree with an expansion of health coverage for children, we're on the verge of nazi germany? 

I guess all those guys with the Obama=Hitler posters at the tea parties had it right!

No, we are on the verge of nazi germany like conditions because we, the people, are willingly giving up personal freedom to to government to have them do for us what we should be doing for ourselves.

Watch some of the films on Germany before Hitler started making his war.
Seriously.

What Germany was doing was very beneficial to many of it's citizens - the price they paid to get it though is what allowed a mad man to gain complete control.

resedit wrote:

Government is not efficient at anything and never has been, especially when it comes to spending.

...and anyone who disagrees with you and the GOP is dragging the country towards a dictatorship?

No, we are on the verge of nazi germany like conditions because we, the people, are willingly giving up personal freedom to to government to have them do for us what we should be doing for ourselves.

What "personal freedoms" are Americans surrendering?  Be specific. 

Watch some of the films on Germany before Hitler started making his war.
Seriously.

What Germany was doing was very beneficial to many of it's citizens - the price they paid to get it though is what allowed a mad man to gain complete control.

Oh trust me, I'm completely convinced that you're well-educated on the history of Nazi Germany.  How could anyone doubt that?

Pariah wrote:

I want to know exactly and specifically what new restrictions of rights the Obama admin has either implemented or proposed.

He hasn't.
Who said he did?

bratboy wrote:

resedit wrote:

Government is not efficient at anything and never has been, especially when it comes to spending.

...and anyone who disagrees with you and the GOP is dragging the country towards a dictatorship?

No, we are on the verge of nazi germany like conditions because we, the people, are willingly giving up personal freedom to to government to have them do for us what we should be doing for ourselves.

What "personal freedoms" are Americans surrendering?  Be specific.

The same ones the patriotic took from us