In a nutshell:

[misterdecibel]

I wish I had written this:

Social conservatives are hypocrites ... small government, except when it comes to enforcing THEIR chosen moral code.

Neo-cons are not fiscally conservative (look at GWB deficits). They are imperialist corporatists. Thankfully most on the right have finally realized this (only took them 8 years !)

Libertarians live in a fantasy world where removal of government enforced rules and regulations, reduction of taxes and elimination of government social services somehow does not lead to a society where the rich and powerful ruthlessly exploit the working classes, and where the middle class ceases to exist as we have known since WW2. They also seem to believe that the US government cannot be fixed, so it must be defunded. Interesting then that other developed nations can apparently form a better working government. Perhaps American exceptionalism mean inability to operate a working government. Go USA !

Originalists apparently see no distinction between a "well regulated militia" owning muzzle loading rifles for defense from foreign armies and the right of every citizen to carry an Uzi in the glove box, or a Glock in their pants "just in case".

IMO the American right is morally and intellectually bankrupt, and the GOP are simply the hired thugs of the rich and powerful. The left leaves a LOT to be desired, but they are definitely the lesser of the two evils.

A friend on another board wrote it, I agree word for word although I'm not articulate enough to have ever been able to express it this succinctly.

[Eric]

I agree with some of this - especially the part about the neo-cons - but the comments about guns are typical left-liberal boilerplate; exaggerations and emoting in lieu of reason.

Virtually every adult male in the colonies had a firearm or could own one if he wished. The Second Amendment was not written to restrict ownership of firearms to "the militia" or for "defense against foreign armies." If you believe that, you have to explain why there were no restrictions whatever placed on the ownership of firearms by ordinary Americans until the 1930s. If the Constitution had intended to limit ownership of firearms to "the militia," then why did the American government as formed in 1787 fail to disarm the non-militia and heavily armed citizenry? The original poster's comment is ignorant in the extreme.

And:

An Uzi is a full-automatic machine pistol. How many have such "in the glovebox?" or want one in the glovebox? Maybe street thugs - but street thugs already ignore the laws against, you know, beating people up, raping and robbing them, killing them... but maybe laws restricting the average person's ability to possess a semi-automatic (more accurately, auto-loading) one shot per trigger pull Glock for "just in case" will keep the Uzi-wielding street thugs at bay.

The left and right are equally loathsome because both are fundamentally authoritarian. They don't rely on persuasion and voluntary consent based on the good sense of their ideas. They rely on force - to compel you to do as they wish.

Your friend writes about hypocritical social conservatives. Amen. Well, what of the hypocritical leftists who posture as peaceful and humane, but demand that guns be pointed at people who decline to "help" (or be "helped") by these peaceful, humane leftists? They love to dispose of other people's property as much as social conservatives love to control other people's private lives.



Libertarians base their politics on the non-aggression principle. No one gets to force anyone to do anything; anyone who uses force against others is a criminal. Otherwise, live in peace, as you see fit.

That was what the founding fathers had in mind when they talked about the "pursuit of happiness."

[dBrong]

Misterdecible don't get sucked into the Left / Right / Libertarian arguement. This is where they want us to go. Then we don't really look at the problem. Whatever party, they want to basically maintain the status-quo with accounting gimmicks and band-aid solutions.

I hope my response can convinence you (just a little), that our government is out of control and so are a lot of other foreign governments. It is really a global crisis.

....The left leaves a LOT to be desired, but they are definitely the lesser of the two evils.

A friend on another board wrote it, I agree word for word although I'm not articulate enough to have ever been able to express it this succinctly.

The country was founded on basic principles that you could persue what you wanted, as long as you didn't infringe on anyone elses rights.

.... Libertarians live in a fantasy world where removal of government enforced rules and regulations, reduction of taxes and elimination of government social services somehow does not lead to a society where the rich and powerful ruthlessly exploit the working classes, and where the middle class ceases to exist as we have known since WW2.

A right is not what someone else must pay for or provide.

Today's problem comes about when rule over rule / tax over tax / entitlement over entitlement become entrenched.

35% of the income in the US is provided by the Federal Government!! It was 10% in 1960:

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...-nearly-enough

A social service is supposed to be a temporary helping hand - not a way of life - ala Section 8, AFDC, school breakfasts, lunches, etc, etc.

You are correct that too much money has been accumlated by a few individuals. GE paid no taxes last year. But it's the horrible US Tax Code that got us in this mess.

For all the rules and regulations corporations outsourced our jobs to China and India - thus destroying the middle class with cheap wages and massive unemployment.

Don't forget it's our government that caused the whole credit mess with the housing bubble

....Libertarians also seem to believe that the US government cannot be fixed, so it must be defunded. .

To me our government has been building to this climax for 40 years. It is indeed broken and grid locked. Last month we had a $223 BILLION revenue shortfall - that's $1.8 TRILLION over a year. Don't you call that broken?

....Interesting then that other developed nations can apparently form a better working government. Perhaps American exceptionalism mean inability to operate a working government. .

If you look around this is really a global financial crisis:

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...nomic-disaster

....Originalists apparently see no distinction between a "well regulated militia" owning muzzle loading rifles for defense from foreign armies and the right of every citizen to carry an Uzi in the glove box, or a Glock in their pants "just in case"..

So you're saying we never will have another revolution - the government will just continue to consume our money, resources, more and more laws, more and more police, more and more rules, TSA, body scanners, survaillience, red light cameras, license plate scanners, radar cameras, portable DNA scanners, all in the name of making this a safer place. Soon you will see these at bus stations, train stations, downtown, malls, etc.

A government that refuses to address the flow of illegals / terrorists from the Mexican border.

A government that passes a 2,400 page health care bill - so large that it is incomprehensible for a human to understand.

A government that has spent all the SS / Medicare trust fund and replaced it with worthless, unmarketable special Treasury Notes.

A government that has increased education spending 100% in 8 years - with no change in test scores.

A government that has lent $41 Billion dollars to it's bankrupt states.

These are some of the reasons I think it's broken beyond all repair, and needs to be replaced.

[Eric]

One of the reasons, in my opinion, for the increasingly obvious dysfunction can be attributed to the notion that America can thrive as a "propositional nation." In other words, a heterogenous, polylglot stew of multiple ethnicities - but all (somehow) committed to the same ideals. It's nonsense. Different ethnic groups have different ideals; each quite naturally wants its ideals to dominate. When that is worked out within a given political system, the result is fractiousness and - eventually - chaos. What we have.

It is no coincidence that the decline and likely fall of America began to manifest and indeed to become obvious at the same time that America became ever more "multi-cultural."

When "American" was synonymous with English speaking European-descended caucasian, America was a first-world country. The system generally worked.

Bring the Turd World to America and America becomes the Turd World.

We're not supposed to discuss this openly, but that doesn't make it any less true.

[Ken]

One of the reasons, in my opinion, for the increasingly obvious dysfunction can be attributed to the notion that America can thrive as a "propositional nation." In other words, a heterogenous, polylglot stew of multiple ethnicities - but all (somehow) committed to the same ideals. It's nonsense. Different ethnic groups have different ideals; each quite naturally wants its ideals to dominate. When that is worked out within a given political system, the result is fractiousness and - eventually - chaos. What we have.

When "American" was synonymous with English speaking European-descended caucasian, America was a first-world country. The system generally worked.

We're not supposed to discuss this openly, but that doesn't make it any less true.

And that is exactly what we have over here in the UK. I have no objection to having, to some extent, a multi-racial society. Let's face it in the end we will all end up the same sort of Khaki color as racial interbreeding takes its toll. Multi-culturalism is a completely different kettle of fish - with dozens of nationalities all striving for their customs, their laws, (we already have demands for Sharia law to be imposed in the UK) and acceptance of their outlandish practices (feminine castration, arranged marriages, family interbreeding) - I cannot see how anything other than chaos and descent into barbarism can result. Everyone I know feels the same but spineless Gubmints will never correct the imbalances for fear of being 'racist'.

Ken.