|
|
|
| U.S. Govt |
|
Steve Terry
Member #1,989
March 2002
 |
In reality it's all pseudo money anyway. ___________________________________ |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
 |
I found this on reddit, a rant by former pro "wrestler" and Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura. Some notable quotes from the above. Quote: I see indications that the federal government is on a campaign to leach away powers from the states. We’ll become a lesser nation if that happens. One of our strengths today is that our states vary somewhat in their modes of thinking, and they can experiment with different solutions to the same problem. That gives us freedom of choice. If we don’t like the attitudes prevalent in one state, we can move to another. We’ve got to be on guard against allowing this diversity to slip away from us.
Quote: There are a lot of good causes out there, but they can’t possibly all be served by government. The Constitution guarantees us our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That’s all. It doesn’t guarantee our rights to charity. The government is not a parent. We can’t expect the government to always be there, ready to bail us out. When we make decisions in life, we have to be willing to live with the consequences. We can’t expect the government to help us get back on our feet every time we make a bad decision. We’ve gotten into the bad habit of overlegislating. I believe in the America people’s ability to govern themselves. If government would just get out of the way and allow them to lead their lives as they choose, they will succeed. Government only needs to be there to support them in their efforts. Remember that government doesn’t earn one single dollar it spends. In order for you to get money from the government, that money must first be taken from somebody else.
They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
 |
I dunno. If people were able to manage things themselves, the banks wouldn't have over-leveraged themselves on worthless derivatives. It wasn't illegal, or legislated, so it must have been ok! Except from a financial and moral perspective, it was 100% stupid as hell. Problem wouldn't have actually happened if glass-steegal was still in place. At least it wouldn't have taken down regular banks. who cares if a few securities traders went bankrupt. Sure, you can argue that we should have let every single defaulting bank crumble, and I sorta agree to be honest. At the same time, I don't agree. If it was done right, it would have been a decent idea. But the dumb ass fucking bush cronies gave them all free money (that didn't exist before that moment) with no strings attached. ANY public money that went into the banks should have given the gov't full control of those banks, and then the full profit of the sale price when the bank was sellable. So yeah, people as a whole can't manage these things without some rules and guidelines. Though too many is just as bad as not enough. Gotta find a balance. Enough to deter psychopaths and not so many as to deter honest people. -- |
|
Bob Keane
Member #7,342
June 2006
|
We’ve gotten into the bad habit of overlegislating. I believe in the America people’s ability to govern themselves. If government would just get out of the way and allow them to lead their lives as they choose, they will succeed. Government only needs to be there to support them in their efforts. So we don't need laws against drunk driving? We don't need stronger control over banks? People have proven time and again they cannot govern themselves. By reading this sig, I, the reader, agree to render my soul to Bob Keane. I, the reader, understand this is a legally binding contract and freely render my soul. |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Bob Keane said: People have proven time and again they cannot govern themselves. Part of human nature, you can't legislate it away. Politicians can't govern either. From time to time, the people who can govern, e.g. think, get so fed up they stop producing whatever useful projects they were involved in, and spank the politicians, whether by soap, ballot or ammo box. They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Chris Katko
Member #1,881
January 2002
 |
Checks and balances seems to be the best method so far. However, systematic apathy, ignorance, and fear of science of the voting public has managed to severely damage even that. Congress has around 10% approval rating. How many jobs could you keep if you had a 10% quality rating on your yearly evaluation? A surgeon? -----sig: |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
 |
Chris Katko said: How many jobs could you keep if you had a 10% quality rating on your yearly evaluation? Software developers. |
|
SiegeLord
Member #7,827
October 2006
 |
Chris Katko said: Congress has around 10% approval rating. How many jobs could you keep if you had a 10% quality rating on your yearly evaluation? A surgeon? As I said earlier, Congress is not a single person. Each individual congressgoon has a significantly higher approval rating. If they individually held such a low approval rating, they'd be voted out... but they don't, and therefore they won't be. "For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increases knowledge increases sorrow."-Ecclesiastes 1:18 |
|
Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
 |
Should have stuck with the commonwealth, suckers! Your government would be properly dismantled and replaced in it's entirety. "He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe" |
|
Bob Keane
Member #7,342
June 2006
|
Chris Katko said: Checks and balances seems to be the best method so far. Not really. Obamacare passed Congress and was upheld by the Supreme Court. It passed two checks and yet the Republicans are trying to kill it by holding up the government. And as to the face value of your words, it seems the only checks Congress are interested in are the ones they get from PACs and the only balances they are concerned with are their bank accounts. By reading this sig, I, the reader, agree to render my soul to Bob Keane. I, the reader, understand this is a legally binding contract and freely render my soul. |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Bob Keane said: Obamacare passed Congress and was upheld by the Supreme Court. {"name":"tax.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/3\/e37d0aadbcfd611babcaf9cf2cb8ff37.jpg","w":400,"h":400,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/e\/3\/e37d0aadbcfd611babcaf9cf2cb8ff37"} They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Ben Delacob
Member #6,141
August 2005
 |
What does this have to do with it being unconstitutional? That concerns Obama, not Obamacare. If you're suggesting that it's unconstitutional because Obama shouldn't have been able to sign it into law as president because he should have been stripped of office for typical politician BS equivocation then that's a stretch. __________________________________ |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Thomas Sowell said: Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans. There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for ObamaCare. This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.
They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
type568
Member #8,381
March 2007
 |
Aikei_c said: Yep, power is passed to different people usually every 8 years. Unless it is a great lie of our time which is intended to mask the one and only czar who's secretly ruling everyone, which I don't consider.
Somehow top cash contributors to the senators and presidents are the same big names like Boeing, GE, Bank of America & various petroleum companies. And them in addition to the U.S. policies(especially the foreign ones
|
|
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
 |
Now all we need to do is to KEEP it shut down and perhaps the debt could get paid down a fraction of a fraction of a percent. --- |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
NiteHackr said: Now all we need to do is to KEEP it shut down and perhaps the debt could get paid down a fraction of a fraction of a percent. Except now your unemployment rate has jumped like 5%, and a bunch of vital services are shut down. But sure, it'll help reduce your deficit a little. -- |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Read the first letter of each line of the first big paragraph on this weather service bulletin. They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Nice to be honest, why are the offices even open? The govt is shut down, they should send everyone home, and DAMN THE CONSEQUENCES. -- |
|
Michael Faerber
Member #4,800
July 2004
 |
The website Arthur linked to said:
.ANALYSIS AND UPPER LEVELS...
Nice. I wonder why the unprecedented NSA surveillance and law breaking is not a bigger scandal in the United States. Does it not concern you? -- |
|
Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007
|
The NSA surveillance program doesn't affect people directly. It doesn't hurt anyone. People don't care for privacy for the sake of privacy. Most people I asked how they felt replied "they have the data, but they aren't looking at it." So looking at the data (and using it) is wrong but as long as they aren't its OK. People just don't give a shit. And the people who do are only a few hundred thousand. Maybe a million. Maybe more, maybe less. But it is a very small percentage. Just label them crackpots and forget about the issue. So sit back down and don't even think of causing trouble little Jimmy. In capitalist America bank robs you. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Vanneto said: Most people I asked how they felt replied "they have the data, but they aren't looking at it." Did you point out that that's blatantly false? They can, and will look at it for any arbitrary reason they fell like. American's have been trained to be subservient. It sucks really. Just make sure they have their "football" and beer, and they are good to go. -- |
|
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
|
When the country was founded, it didn't rely on a heavily funded government, and was never intended to. To insist on continued spending when so deep in dept to save a few jobs is incredibly STUPID!!! --- |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
You also had a lot of starvation, boom and bust cycles[1], dirty business men that would regularly strangle markets, and massive amounts of pollution. References
-- |
|
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
The National Park Service blocked a lane on a public highway so people couldn't pull over and look at Mount Rushmore. How petty is that? They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
|
|
|
), do make me believe these guys are in charge and not the faces you see on T.V.
(To remind you, read the first letters of each line.)