Not One of the Ten Commandments Is in the Constitution

Categories: ,

There are no democratically elected leaders in the Christian bible. I know – it’s shocking. But, if you catch the rhetoric pertaining to the US Constitution, you’d think the Ten Commandments are its bullet points. They’re not. The whole idea of a representative democracy (a Greek word) comes from Ancient (think then-solvent) Greece. The leaders in the bible were all kings and/or tyrants and the Bill of Rights is nowhere in the New or Old Testament.

bible constitution ten commandments
Cartoon by Bob Englehart – Hartford Courant (click to reprint)

Simply: Democracy isn’t biblical. But neither is the combustible engine, CAT scans or GPS – it doesn’t make them any less awesome.

So when fly-by-night pontificators, the loudest being the scholarly Sarah Palin, claim this country’s laws are ordained by God via the bible, she needs to show her work – because freedom of the press, due process and freedom of speech are not through-lines in biblical teachings. Nor is the citizenry bearing arms.

“Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant – they’re quite clear – that we would create law based on the God of the Bible and the Ten Commandments,” Palin sputtered on Fox News earlier this month.

Evidently, just because it’s “protected speech” doesn’t make it “factual.”

When you break it down, three of the Ten Commandments are universal laws with zero controversy (do not murder, do not steal, no false witnessing). The teetering point to make half of the most widely accepted version of the Ten Commandments actual laws have been fought over by the states. Blue Laws, laws prohibiting things on Sundays based on the Commandment to keep the Sabbath holy, are still on the books in some places. They’re some of the sillier laws in the country. In Texas you couldn’t buy anything on Sundays you could do work with. So hardware stores had to put blue price tags on things like hammers up until the law was overturned in 1984. There are still places where you can’t buy a car on “the day of rest.” Let alone booze.

Talk about an over-reaching government dictating what businesses can and can’t do.

Other attempts to pass laws to abolish cursing, an interpretation of using the Lord’s name in vain, have been tried. The most amusing one was by the real Victorian-era sheriff of Deadwood, South Dakota, Seth Bullock. He cracked down on cussing in his rowdy mining camp only to have the most curse-laden HBO show in the history of television about it 140 years later. Then adultery is still illegal in some states while the Supreme Court overturned sodomy laws in 2003.

So to recap: Three of the Ten Commandments are covered by federal laws and three are laws in some states. But the other four are nowhere to be found in US law.Which from a statistical stance sums up the debate about religion and our government: a third of people think this is and should be a Christian nation, others waffle yet most think it’s not a good idea in practice.

In fact, none of the Ten Commandments are in the US Constitution. The Constitution is the charter of the government outlining the rights of the people and the limits of government. Comparing the two is like apples to a red herring.

“The Constitutional protections are on what they [the Founders] thought was right and wrong, and what they thought was right and wrong is based on the Ten Commandments,” claimed Bill O’Reilly on his cable show.

The question is: do we really want to live in a country that makes not honoring your mother and father a crime? Is it wise to have a law mandating you can’t have any other gods or make false idols or covet your neighbor’s spouse? The Founding Fathers (ahem) clearly thought it wasn’t.

Why, if you want America to be more religious, do you need to co-opt history to accomplish it? Have the courage to stand up for your convictions without creating fiction about the founding documents. I don’t agree with the Founding Fathers about everything (slavery, women’s rights, native peoples rights). But that doesn’t make the US Constitution, in my eyes, any less of an amazing feat for humanity.

So go ahead and stand up for your faith and be proud. But lying for it is, ya know, after all – bearing false witness.
“””“

Tina Dupuy is an award-winning writer, editor and columnist for Cagle Cartoons. Follow Tina on Twitter @TinaDupuy.

Want to run Tina’s column in your publication? Contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.


Comments

112 responses to “Not One of the Ten Commandments Is in the Constitution”

  1. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    The question is: Is it "bearing false witness" if one is totally blind as to what is in the Bible and Constitution yet "have a heart full of God, and Country"?

  2. geoff Avatar

    "Why, if you want America to be more religious, do you need to co-opt history to accomplish it? Have the courage to stand up for your convictions without creating fiction about the founding documents."

    Yeah. Just basically assuming that the American people are too dumb & or lazy to go & look it up for themselves; that they'll take everything Bill O'R or Rush or Glen Beck on faith.

    "Lying for it is, ya know, after all – bearing false witness."

  3. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    There are so many that take O'R, Rush, or Beck as prophets. It is close if not actually a religious feeling when they listen. The majority have never been trained to listen or evaluate in a logical way. They have been trained from birth to listen to the words of a spiritual leader, regardless of what that leader says. As I point out often, religious leaders do not always teach the facts of the Bible, but rather what they want to believe and teach. In the same way, the prophets of radio ignore the vast majority of facts in order to present those few facts that will invoke the emotional (religious?) results that will keep the listeners emotionally dedicated to come back day after day. Just as the minister invokes emotion to bring back the faithful week after week. Telling the congregation that what they want to believe is not correct is a fast way to crucifixion. Keeping them in emotional turmoil is retirement insurance.

  4. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Good Life,

    Invoking emotion? Isn't that what the Democrats have been doing by parading out those who have had problems with health care, or showing us some poor single mother who doesn't have the means to care for her children? Emotional responses work equally as well for both parties, yet you make it sound like it's a one sided thing. Why is it always bad for the reps but not the Dems. Let's face it there is equal blame to go around and emotional arguments work for both sides equally as well since the "dumbing down" of America has succeded so well. I believe there are more people today than ever before who just don't want to have to think and therefore will believe whatever their side tells them to believe.

    You, however, make it sound like it is a problem only found in Churches and talk radio. You may not have meant to make it sound that way but that is how it comes across. Maybe you are just too "emotionally" involved in the argument to see that it is a problem on both sides of the fence.

  5. Stug Avatar
    Stug

    "Emotional responses work equally as well for both parties … I believe there are more people today than ever before who just don’t want to have to think"

    – Agreed

    Interesting though that the Dems attempt to invoke compassion: "showing us some poor single mother who doesn’t have the means to care for her children" whereas the GOP tends to invoke fear. I'm not saying that either is unjustified or irrelevant, just an observation as to priorities. The Dems want to take care of people, the GOP to project strength, neither of which is of much use without the other if the desired end result is a strong country overall.

  6. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Yes, both parties use emotion. Aristotle said that in the end all human decisions are made on emotion. Little has changed.

    The difference is the emotion that is invoked. Is it an emotion of compassion or an emotion of fear and hate? Are you being told that there are people suffering that need help or are you being told that you are under attack and there are those trying to destroy you so you must go to war with those that oppose you. Are you being told to bring out your best in order to improve the world or are you being told that you should be paranoid about "others" that are not a part of "us".

    Emotion, YES. Are the emotions positive emotions of LOVE and GENEROSITY or negative emotions of HATE and FEAR?

    "God is Love" except when someone wants to stir you to hate, injure, and kill in the name of …….what? Protecting the nation? But the nation has nothing to do with religion and religion nothing to do with civil government. But combining the two can control people to the point of fighting for that which would logically go against their lawful best interest and against their religious foundation.

  7. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    "The Constitution is the charter of the government outlining the rights of the people and the limits of government."

    Maybe someone should pass this along to Obama.

  8. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Maybe someone should pass this along to Obama.====If anything goes against the constitution take it to court. Your problem is: If something isn't specifically denied to the government it is constitutional.

  9. geoff Avatar
    geoff

    ArtW: correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Obama teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago law school from 1992 to 2004? You don't suppose he knows something about the subject, do you?

  10. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    "Your problem is: If something isn’t specifically denied to the government it is constitutional."

    Well, I suppose that is because it is.

    "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." – Tenth Amendment.

    Seems pretty clear. No?

  11. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "Just basically assuming that the American people are too dumb & or lazy to go & look it up for themselves; that they’ll take everything Bill O’R or Rush or Glen Beck on faith."

    In March 1776, the Continental Congress agreed to the following resolution:

    "In times of impending calamity and distress; when the liberties of America are imminently endangered by the secret machinations and open assaults of an insidious and vindictive administration, it becomes the indispensable duty of these hitherto free and happy colonies, with true penitence of heart, and the most reverent devotion, publickly to acknowledge the over ruling providence of God; to confess and deplore our offences against him; and to supplicate his interposition for averting the threatened danger, and prospering our strenuous efforts in the cause of freedom, virtue, and posterity.

    The Congress, therefore, considering the warlike preparations of the British Ministry to subvert our invaluable rights and priviledges, and to reduce us by fire and sword, by the savages of the wilderness, and our own domestics, to the most abject and ignominious bondage: Desirous, at the same time, to have people of all ranks and degrees duly impressed with a solemn sense of God's superintending providence, and of their duty, devoutly to rely, in all their lawful enterprizes, on his aid and direction, Do earnestly recommend, that Friday, the Seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said colonies as a day of humiliation, fasting, and prayer; that we may, with united hearts, confess and bewail our manifold sins and transgressions, and, by a sincere repentance and amendment of life, appease his righteous displeasure, and through the merits and mediation of JESUS CHRIST, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; and by inclining their hearts to justice and benevolence, prevent the further effusion of kindred blood. But if, continuing deaf to the voice of reason and humanity, and inflexibly bent on desolation and war, they constrain us to repel their hostile invasions by open resistance, that it may please the Lord of Hosts, the God of Armies, to animate our officers and soldiers with invincible fortitude, to guard and protect them in the day of battle, and to crown the continental arms, by sea and land, with victory and success: Earnestly beseeching him to bless our civil rulers, and the representatives of the people, in their several assemblies and conventions; to preserve and strengthen their union to inspire them with an ardent, disinterested love of their country; to give wisdom and stability to their counsels; and direct them to the most efficacious measures for establishing the rights of America on the most honourable and permanent basis–That he would be graciously please to bless all his people in these colonies with health and plenty, and grant that a spirit of incorruptible patriotism, and of pure undefiled religion, may universally prevail; and this continent be speedily restored to the blessings of peace and liberty, and enabled to transmit them inviolate the latest posterity. And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations, to assemble for public worship, and abstain from servile labour on the said day."

    I can provide example after example citing evidence of our (not your) Founders Christianity . . . but I'm sure it will not matter one iota.

  12. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Good Life,

    “God is Love” except when someone wants to stir you to hate, injure, and kill in the name of …….what? Protecting the nation? But the nation has nothing to do with religion and religion nothing to do with civil government. But combining the two can control people to the point of fighting for that which would logically go against their lawful best interest and against their religious foundation.

    Then once again I ask you to take an honest look and quit defending either side in politics. Have you not seen lately how Pelosi, President Obama, and John Kerry have been invoking faith based initiatives to help further their agendas. They are doing exactly what you would cry fowl for in the Bush error, and no that isn't a misprint. We are seriously compiling error upon error and their are far too many "Dem" first and "Rep" first people out there who seem to have lost any real intellectual thought processes.

    You are right to say that the emotions invoked are important. But both sides use fear and compassion as much. Quit looking through those "Dem" colored glasses and buying that all republicans are hatemongers and racists. No matter how you look at it you can push an agenda to the point of bankruptcy and then it doesn't matter what you try to do, you will no longer be able to finance it and all your well wishes will have been in vain. There was too much spending in the Bush error and there is still too much spending. Look at how often fear is used when talking about global warming. I'm not completely convinced that man has as much of an impact as we think he does. Have you actually look at who has reacted violently in protests and the likes, I have yet to see any footage of a tea partier throwing rocks or garbage at police officers. I have seen footage of union workers beating up a tea partier though. I've seen immigration protestors throwing garbage at police officers. Neither side, as far as I can tell, has a monopoly on compassion or hate.

    Look, the answer is not in the extremes. It is in level headed, fiscally sound, common sense. All we have had since Clinton left office is either one extreme or the other, and the Executive branch has been grabbing up all the power it wants.

    Oh and just because Aristotle said that in the end all human decisions are made on emotion doesn't make it a true statement. I personally do not think that to be true.

  13. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "ArtW: correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Obama teach constitutional law at the University of Chicago law school from 1992 to 2004? You don’t suppose he knows something about the subject, do you?"

    Highlighting you ignorance . . . again? Come on Geoff, as a professor you should nknow better than that. And, even if you don't, do you not remember other posters (attorneys) that already addressed your silly arguement?

    To directly answer your query however: Yes, he taught some constitutional law classes . . . as do all law professors (more on the title later). Given that fact, he should know better, but frankly (and obviously), does not care.

    From Factcheck:

    "Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as "a constitutional law professor," most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution." A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obama’s remarks, pointing out that Obama’s title at the University of Chicago was "senior lecturer" and not "professor."

    "UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined."

    I'll give you another example of a Lawyer that 'should know better' . . . but yet continues to prove himself utterly incompetent: Eric Holder, the US Attorney General.

    Ugh! I've just reaslised I have, yet again, fallen into your usual trap and was led down another rabbit-hole. Kudos!

  14. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Another before I head out to lunch:

    November 1, 1777 – Thanksgiving Proclamations (Journals of Congress, November, 1777, pp. 854-55):

    Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty GOD; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased him in his abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also to smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war, for the defence and establishment of our unalienable rights and liberties; particularly in that he hath been pleased in so great a measure to prosper the means used for the support of our troops and to crown our arms with most signal success: It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the eighteenth day of December next, for solemn thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor; and that together with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favour, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of JESUS CHRIST, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessing on the governments of these states respectively, and prosper the public council of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and by sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all human blessings, independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labour of the husbandman, that our land may yet yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under his nurturing hand, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth "in righteousness, peace and joy in the HOLY GHOST. And it is further recommended, that servile labour, and such recreation as, though at other times innocent, may be unbecoming the purpose of this appointment, be omitted on so solemn an occasion."

    "Why, if you want America to be more religious, do you need to co-opt history to accomplish it?"

    Pffft. LOL.

  15. Murray Avatar
    Murray

    The point is completely missed, which is not surprising, since Tina is hostile to Christianity.

    It isn't that the constitution is a Bibilical document, it is that it is based on a premise: specifically as humans we are endowed with certain inalienable rights, from GOD, and government cannot take those away.

    Take away God, and we are left with just government, granting us, or denying us, rights.

    .

  16. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Tina’s right. Er, correct. (Sorry Tina. No offense.) What’s missing from her article is that the word “democracy” doesn’t appear in our founding documents either. The Left would like to replace the word “republic” with democracy. (Not all liberals, of course, but there’s a clear trend toward using the latter word in favor of the former.)

    Our founders abhorred and ridiculed the idea of a democracy. Much of the Federalist Papers are devoted to the concept of republican (small “r”) government. Other important topics were union, citizenship, and federalism. While the only mention of anything overtly religious is the statement “they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” it is true that both the Bible and the concept of natural law did influence the Founders’ thinking. Every literate person read the Bible along with a series of other books and all men understood what each meant when they spoke of the concepts that undergird our constitution.

    I’ve told Good Life many times we are NOT a Christian nation. We are a secular nation with a majority of people who claim Christianity as their religion of choice. The constitution, not the Bible, not the Torah, not the Koran, is the centerpiece of our legal and judicial systems. We don’t go to war in the name of Jesus Christ and we are not a theocracy and not even the “dreaded GWB” wanted America to become one.

    Sarah Palin is wrong in the level of influence she places on the Founders’ reliance on the Bible but she IS right in principle to some degree. The far Right’s religious wing places enormous emphasis on their perception that we are Christian nation with a constitution based on the Bible. The Left (for all practical purposes) disdains the Bible except for passages they feel promote social justice and sees the constitution as an antiquated guide at best. Both extremes miss the simple truth. We are a secular nation founded on the _principles_ of Biblical morality and natural law. One of the Founders’ intentions was for all religions to be able to flourish without interference from the government and for any person to be able to enjoy the protections of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness with or without any religious preference.

    I agree with some of what Dupuy wrote but it was typically one-sided and written to criticize rather than to inform. But for her, this is about as close to journalism as we’re likely to see.

  17. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    buying that all republicans are hatemongers and racists——-I never said "all". Probably not even a majority. But there is a foundation that worships the hate of certain "spokesmen". And the party has built on that foundation. And you cannot deny that a significant minority are more emotionally involved because Obama is black and Clinton was white. They are also a part of that foundation that the party can rely on.

    Was there some hate toward Bush? Of course. But a recent report stated that assassination threats against Congressmen are up 300%. I don't know about the president, but I'm sure if they are that high toward Congressmen we can only imagine toward the president. Seeing how the hate is growing and knowing that there is a certain percentage that go beyond even basic reason, I would be surprised if Obama lives to leave office. I would have been surprised to see Bush killed even though the majority of the country realized his incompetence. The difference is the "leaders" weren't using the same type of language or stirring the flames.

    you will no longer be able to finance it —–There is a time for debt and a time to tax and pay off the debt. Reagan cut taxes for a recession, then raised taxes (the part the disciples forget). But when the recession recovered we didn't raise taxes and pay debt, instead we followed the recession model and continued to cut taxes and spend into debt. There is a season for everything. A time to sow and a time to reap. For 30 years we continued to sow, continued to put out expenses rather than reap the improving economy and prepare for the next season of lack. In other words we ate our seed rather than storing it for the next recession. Now is the time again to spend and invest. Ask any farmer, the spring is a time of debt. The trick will be to see if we are smarter this time and increase taxes and cut spending when the harvest comes and we have extra income.

    just because Aristotle said—Aristotle wasn't a god. He made mistakes. Thought slavery was the natural order of things. But much of what he said, including his observations on decision making, have stood the test of over 2300 years of investigation. Humans like to think of themselves as reasonable creatures motivated by logic. No study in the last two millennia have shown that to be true.

  18. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Murray—The government is based on Greek thought with some influence of Roman. The basis of the government is preChristian.

  19. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Gosh Cal!! I could have written that post.

  20. geoff Avatar

    Murray: "It isn’t that the constitution is a Bibilical document, it is that it is based on a premise: specifically as humans we are endowed with certain inalienable rights, from GOD, and government cannot take those away."

    Did God give these "certain inalienable rights" just to Americans (and, in 1776, just to property owning white American males), or are they universal?

    Take away God, and we are left with just government, granting us, or denying us, rights." Possibly. But can you prove that God is even in the equation? that you don't just have gov't?

  21. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Good Life,

    A little late reading your response…

    I personally don't know how any study on what motivates peoples decisions can be based on anything but opinion anyway.

    People have a hard time understanding their own thoughts most of the time, so a study on what motivates decisions can not be based on anything but conjecture. All I was saying is that I do not believe all decisions are emotionally made.

    You did avoid the fact that there has yet to be any footage of tea party people actually commiting violence but we have seen Union Members beat up an African American tea partier, and immigration activists throw garbage at police officers. Why is the only footage available showing the liberal movements being violent and not the other way around? Where do you get that there is a foundation that worships hate? I would definitely like to hear quotes of certain spokespersons if that is the case. I think you still need to strip the "Dem" colored glasses off and look at a little reality.

    I do not support the "Republicans" or the "Democrats". I would gladly vote for the best person for the job no matter what their party is. The problem is we do not have any truly independant thinkers in government any more. They all seem to adhere to their party lines too closely.

    Where is this report that says threats against congress are up 300%? That sounds like a lot, but if it was 1 threat last year thats only 3 threats this year. Don't let percentages fool you? As far as imagining threats toward the president, I would never assume anything, what are the facts?

    Time to tax and time to pay off the debt? Sure, but look at what the money is being spent on, look at the pork, and tell me how fiscally responsible our congress is. I personally don't mind paying taxes for the right reasons, but there is too much being wasted.

    There are certain ideologies of both parties that are good mores to live by. Helping the poor if you're a Democrat, being fiscally responsible if you are a Republican. (Not saying that they actually do these things all the time, but it seems to be common in their talking points) I just have a problem with any government forcing me to do these things. I have seen Vets standing on the side of the road and taken them to a restaurant and fed them. The gratitude I saw in their faces was more rewarding than you can imagine. When my government spends that money to "help the poor" it just doesn't seem to be the same. There is too much waste in government. I simply do not trust them to do the right thing.

  22. Murray Avatar
    Murray

    Set aside proof, or disproof, of God; that is a question we will never resolve. Not the least of those reasons is that logic doesn't apply to something folks are so strongly vested in.

    Just ask yourself this question. What totalitarian government, anywhere, any time, has ever been benign? Communist government? Fascist government? Petty dictators? Absolute monarchs?

    If no total government has ever been a positive force, then why would we want to move down the path towards more government control? Which is exactly what we are doing when we postulate that rights are granted to us by the government.

    I think the single biggest error people make is they think of the government as some sort of entity. It isn't; at the end of the day the government is people, with their own motives, biases, and limitations. It sounds one way to say we are going to let the government, say, regulate health care, and another to say that Dr's Jones and Smith, and Mr's White and Johnson, and Ms Dupuy and Brennan, are going to form a committee and tell YOU what health care you can have. But that is how it will go down when the government starts regulating. Do you trust those people? Should you trust those people?

  23. geoff Avatar

    Murray: rights are not granted to us by the gov't; where did you get that idea? Rights are enshrined in a constitution; people sat down and agreed on what they're all about; defined what "gov't" means. That seems to be a whole lot sounder than your premise based on "a question we will never resolve."

    As you say: the gov't is people, with their own motives, biases, limitations. And some of those people happen to believe Elvis lives, that Obama was born in Kenya, and that God granted human rights to a relatively small number of people living in part of the North American continent.

    Of course there are no benign totalitarian gov'ts: that's almost contradictory. A straw man.

    I know I trust my gov't more than I trust a whole lot of corporations.

  24. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "I know I trust my gov’t more than I trust a whole lot of corporations."

    Interesting statement, coming from a German . . . whose government murdered about 11 million people less than 70 years ago.

    But I know Geoff, Enron is the real villain.

  25. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Just ask yourself this question. What totalitarian government, anywhere, any time, has ever been benign? —Russia under Lenin. But then who's talking of totalitarian government?

    are going to form a committee and tell YOU what health care you can have. ———–Try to collect a big one from a private insurance company. Some committee that cares only for money and not keeping the voters happy makes the decision. At least you have the right to appeal to your congressmen and get an answer—Try that with any private company when you are trying to get them to pay out.

    Do you trust those people? Should you trust those people?——Again, try to collect from a private company. Heck BC/BS wouldn't pay for a doctor to look at a newborn 2 minutes after it was born because it wasn't sick. Their committee decided that they don't pay for well babies or even to have a doctor look at a newborn to see if it's well. I was told that I should have been able to determine that it was well on my own and wrap it in a blanket (that I provided) and take it home without a doctor looking at it. Those are the people YOU trust?

    And that's just one of several I could give.

  26. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    I do not support the “Republicans” or the “Democrats”. I would gladly vote for the best person for the job no matter what their party is. The problem is we do not have any truly independant thinkers in government any more. They all seem to adhere to their party lines too closely.

    AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!!!! But they are a reflection of who votes for them

    Helping the poor if you’re a Democrat, being fiscally responsible if you are a Republican.———–And why can't we have both? They are not mutually exclusive.

    There is too much waste in government. ……..Have you ever worked for a big business? I don't know one that doesn't have massive waste. The difference is when the government does something right you are able to travel, eat, sleep, work, do everything in your life with little worry and there will not be headline one. Remember "news" is the unusual not the normal. The normal is that government is doing right. That's why it's news when something goes wrong. Would you really like to live where the good is "news" because it is the unusual? When the government does something wrong it is headline news and changes are made. Everyone knows when government makes a mistake or has a dime of waste.

    When a business does something right they make money. When a business does something wrong, YOU will not hear of it unless a government regulator calls them on it. Most business screw ups and waste are not in the papers or on the air because their screw ups and waste are "private". I guarantee that business has more screw ups and waste than government because they have virtually no one trying to find their screw ups and waste. Every reporter in the country wants to find a government screw up. Reporters have no interest in business screw ups and waste unless they become a danger to the public (which is when everyone demands to know where the government oversight was.)

    In the "good old days" people simply died or were injured and business went on. Food need not be safe. toys need not be safe, working need not be safe, travel need not be safe, water need not be safe (remember when the river caught on fire), air need not be safe, etc. The only goal of a company is profit. Not one business thinks of anything else. A business cares not if you are safe (if they didn't want to contend with government fines). They owe you NOTHING. YOU have no say and no appeal. (Except an appeal to government regulation)

    You want to know of a totalitarian government that did good? Name ONE industry that was regulated BEFORE it abused their workers or the public. Just ONE industry that did the right thing BEFORE it was regulated. If business was a benevolent as you would like to believe there would be NO REGULATION.

    Government owes you EVERYTHING. You know of EVERY screw up. You know of EVERY waste. 300,000,000 people demand every problem in government be solve as best as politics allow.

    How can you possibly compare the safety and efficiency of business (of which you only have the information that government requires they give) to an operation where the safety and efficiency is 100% public.

    No I'm not against business. As long as there is competition it is the only way to have innovation and advancement. It is the only way to actually create wealth. But business without control is far more evil than a free government with a free press and the right of the people to protest will ever be.

  27. Stug Avatar
    Stug

    "Interesting statement, coming from a German . . . whose government murdered about 11 million people less than 70 years ago."

    – What does that have to do with Geoff's statement today? You might as well add up the total number of people that were held in slavery over the years to benefit the players in free market economies, or the total number of people killed in the name of Christianity, and yet you still sing the praises of Christianity and the free market. The difference is that the government of Germany has changed significantly since Hitler was in power, free market profiteering and religious zealotry, not so much. Of course, slavery and killing in the name of religion are no longer tolerated in our country, damn the government and their secular interference in traditional conservative values.

    Slavery and killing in the name of religion are no longer traditional conservative values you say? Why, how very liberal of you.

    No Art, Enron isn't the real villian. The people who allow and enable those who use the political and financial power of large corporations to take advantage of the citizenry are. Murray pointed out that the government is not an entity, well neither is a corporation except in a legal sense. A corporation is a tool, not unlike a hammer or a gun. In and of itself it is neither good nor evil, hero or villian. It is how it is used, how it's directors exercise their power that determine if it is beneficial or detrimental to society as a whole.

  28. Stug Avatar
    Stug

    "The point is completely missed, which is not surprising, since Tina is hostile to Christianity."

    – Tina doesn't strike me as being hostile to Christianity so much as hostile to the Theocracy that many conservatives seem intent on installing, in fact if not in name.

    Cal's post was pretty much dead on in its analysis of the topic.

    Of course, he couldn't resist the dig that Tina's commentary was meant to criticize rather than inform, with which I disagree, I think it does both. As far as being journalism, it is certainly as close to it as any of the liberal or conservative articles on Cagle get, and closer than most.

  29. Stug Avatar
    Stug

    "Take away God, and we are left with just government, granting us, or denying us, rights."

    – Take away God, and we are left with just reality.

  30. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Good Life. Yesterday you claimed I said something I didn’t about global warming and now you’re saying something as equally bizarre and totally unfounded with this: “But there is a foundation that worships the hate of certain “spokesmen”. And the party has built on that foundation.”

    I take great umbrage at your remarks as they are both unsupported by fact and simply don’t hold true. I don’t have the time to listen to Limbaugh for more than a few minutes a day but I’ve listened to him since 1993 and Hannity since he was filling in for Limbaugh. I’ve yet to hear either say a single “hateful” thing unless you classify satire and parody as “hate.” Time and time again I hear the Left make accusations about something he said as being “hateful” and it never ceases to amaze me how they can arrive at their conclusion after I hear the complaint.

    I hate NO man. I listen to Limbaugh. I am well-educated, well-traveled, well-read and I can certainly distinguish humor, sarcasm, and snide remarks from hate. Everything the Left has ever claimed has been a misguided attempt to twist something he or Hannity said and use it as “further proof” these guys spread “hate.”

    Shame on you for stooping to their level. The next time you have the “audacity” to accuse someone of only believing what their ideology will allow, remember this little gem of a post from you. It is YOU who are of the opinion that these guys are spreading “hate” because they dare to speak the truth about the people and principles you support. I’d say “blindly” support but I’ll give you the credit you won’t give others for having done some reading and study of your own. It doesn’t seem to have had much effect but I trust you’ve done the reading you say you have.

    Glad you liked my previous post. (I’m assuming that was really you and not someone else just pretending to be nice!)

  31. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Stug: "Take away God, and we are left with just reality."

    Take away God and there is nothing but an empty vacuum of nothingness . . . where, I'm sure, you suppose the 'big bang' occurred.

  32. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Stug: "“Interesting statement, coming from a German . . . whose government murdered about 11 million people less than 70 years ago.”

    – What does that have to do with Geoff’s statement today? "

    You missed it . . . I will type this post more slowly, just for you.

    Geoff's statement was “I know I trust my gov’t more than I trust a whole lot of corporations.”

    I merely pointed out that it was the government in Germany (and where Geoff lives) who murdered over 11 million people.

    THAT is, quite simply, what it has to do with Geoff's statement.

  33. geoff Avatar

    ArtW: "Interesting statement, coming from a German . . . whose government murdered about 11 million people less than 70 years ago."

    First: I'm not a German. I'm Canadian.

    Second: that was not my gov't: the Federal Republic of Germany is democratic. We have real elections here, and the constitution has been changed since the Weimar Repulic and the version the Nazis altered.

  34. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Good Life,

    When a government gains too much power they answer to nobody. Ours is heading down that path and has been heading that way since 911. It just hasn't stopped since Obama took office. Government on the other hand does not have to turn a profit. That is why when we look at the real numbers for social security, medicare and medicaid, and even the post office we find that they can not operate within budget. If a business did that we'd go bankrupt.

    But I also have to say that I have always believed in Government regulation of business. Once again I believe the government has the responsibility to referee the business world but not become the competition. That is one song I have been singing for quite sometime. Greedy capitalists are just as harmful as greedy polititians, and I don't like either of them having too much power.

    Don't know if I really believe that news is the unusual, I would think some stories may be buried for other reasons. Still if the government regulators during both Bush and Obamas administration had just stuck to the rules we would not have the big black sticky gulf of mexico that we currently have. There is a case of both greedy government personel and greedy capitalists. (You just need to learn to distrust everyone and you'll be much better off. LOL)

    I am just against having too much power in anybodies hands, be it the government or big business. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Just the way I see it.

  35. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Face it you are all correct:

    The enemy is both big government and big corporations, and I trust neither!

  36. geoff Avatar

    Art: "Geoff’s statement was “I know I trust my gov’t more than I trust a whole lot of corporations.”

    "I merely pointed out that it was the government in Germany (and where Geoff lives) who murdered over 11 million people."

    Yes, and someone responded with the consequences of American slavery; you could also add in US genocide in, say, the Philippines, but… who's counting?

    But I still stand by my statement: I can vote the bums out. I have no control over who runs the local corporations, let alone how companies like Lehman Bros or AIG can gamble with the global economy. Do you trust Wall Street? Want to buy some Florida swampland from someone over at AIG or Lehman?

  37. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "ArtW: “Interesting statement, coming from a German . . . whose government murdered about 11 million people less than 70 years ago.”

    First: I’m not a German. I’m Canadian.

    Second: that was not my gov’t: the Federal Republic of Germany is democratic. We have real elections here, and the constitution has been changed since the Weimar Repulic and the version the Nazis altered."

    Oh . . . alrighty then. So, I guess it is ok to fully trust governments again. Thanks Geoff.

  38. geoff Avatar

    ArtW: Did I say anything about trusting "all gov'ts"? You seem to have implied that I was wrong to say I trust the gov't we have now, with the rule of law and a pretty secure constitution, because of something a totally different regime did a long time back. That's like saying America is not a democracy because, some time ago, American women, blacks, and even men who did not own a certain amount of property could not vote; because Americans of Japanese decent were rounded up, had their properties confiscated; that… but you get the picture. Please do try to consider thinking a little before you rush out the first thing that comes into your head; too many of your attempts to score points go too far of the goal.

  39. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "But I still stand by my statement: I can vote the bums out. I have no control over who runs the local corporations, let alone how companies like Lehman Bros or AIG can gamble with the global economy. Do you trust Wall Street?"

    Did I say I trusted corporations? I don't believe I did. And I'm not sure why you felt the need to specify "local" corporations (and, I'm not really sure what you mean by it) – because you normally only refer to Enron, Microsoft and the like. Seemed odd. Actually, we both know that shareholders CAN 'vote out the bums' that control corporations. Shareholders vote on Board Members and Board Members vote on Officers of the Corporation.

    "Yes, and someone responded with the consequences of American slavery; you could also add in US genocide in, say, the Philippines, but… who’s counting?"

    Did I say I 'trusted' the US Federal Government? I don't think I did . . . and I definitely don't trust it with a zero-business experience, zero-military experience president at the wheel AND with liberals in control of the entire Congress.

    For all you apparent intelligence, you and Stug are like the dynamic duo of poor reading comprehension.

  40. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    I wonder if it is Sestak that is lying . . . or the Obama administration?

    Given the track record thus far, an early guess would be . . .

    Aw, who cares? It is our government . . . just trust them.

  41. geoff Avatar

    Artw :For all you apparent intelligence, you and Stug are like the dynamic duo of poor reading comprehension.

    You have no right whatsoever to point out my reading skills.

    I am an excellent writer and my writing skills are exemplary.

    Does it not mean anything to you?

    Good Life, stug and Syncopation can attest of my vocabulary.

    Do you know anything about proven skills?

  42. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Relax . . . I am just joking. The idea of you and Stug running around in a cape is amusing to me.

  43. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Obama Holds Press Conference. Nation Learns Nothing. Posted by: Kevin Glass at 2:58 PM

    Well, we learned nothing new today at what was excitedly billed as a very rare Obama full-length press conference. He spun his administration's lackluster response to the BP oil leak away by claiming that he's been on top of it since day one. (He must have consciously avoided using that phrase since taking such heat for it earlier.)

    President Obama claimed that nothing that's been done has been done without his administration's oversight and approval, all but claiming that he was currently acting BP CEO when it comes to spill cleanup decisions. He stated that BP has had a "scanalously close relationship" with the government but neglected to mention that he has been the number one recipient of BP campaign contributions.

    In other news, Obama neither supported nor impugned other states' boycotts of Arizona in light of their "controversial" immigration law, a measure that was lampooned as having "voted 'present' on the boycotts "

    We also learned that there will be an official Obama administration response "soon" on the allegations that Obama attempted to "bribe" Dem nominee for Senate Joe Sestak with a high-ranking job in order to get out of turncoat Arlen Specter's way.

    It was exactly what we expected the press conference to be: blame-shifting, claims that Obama has it under control, spin, and deflections. But it just wouldn't be an Obama press conference without those things, right?

  44. geoff Avatar

    ArtW: "Obama Holds Press Conference. Nation Learns Nothing." Do you miss Ari Fleischer?

    Let me see if I understand this, Art. You're criticising Obama for not having the gov't interfere in something that is supposed to be a corporate responsibility? After all the lecturing you folk on the right have been giving us over time about how we should all be responsible for our actions, and how gov't shouldn't interfere in everything, you don't want BP to be responsible, but blame the gov't for not taking charge right from the start?

  45. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "You’re criticising Obama for not having the gov’t interfere in something that is supposed to be a corporate responsibility?"

    Ok, Captain Comprehension, let's try again. From the piece:

    "President Obama claimed that nothing that’s been done has been done without his administration’s oversight and approval . . . "

    First, I did not write the piece and despite the fact that Obama will no doubt try to take credit for plugging the hole . . . and may even give the impression that he, personally, scuba-dived a mile down to the leak and spread his very own bubble-gum over the hole . . . it will have been BP that stopped the leak. It will have been BP that spearheaded the clean-up and it will be BP that will pay for losses. As it should be. The governments role will amount to; causing endless delays in every step along the way.

    Did you even read the piece? Seems like you are attacking it from a position of ignorance . . . just like Eric Holder and the Arizona Immigration Law (who said it may be unconstitutional . . . and then later admitted, in front of Congress, that he had not read it yet. It is a whopping 16 pages long).

  46. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    I am well-educated, —–etc. etc. etc.——-But I didn't say ALL. I didn't even say MAJORITY. Again, black and white thinking. I said minority. There is a significant minority that can easily be fanned to hate and that don't understand their "marching orders". Not everyone is totally hinged and those that have a "worship" rather than listening for entertainment develop the thinking of the brainwashed. The constant negative emotional bombardment causes "cognitive dissonance" much the same as advertising does on a milder level with far less negative emotion. Advertising uses emotion but usually positive. The same thing takes place with constant negative input. We don't hear a constant bombardment of "Buy a Mcburger" 8 hrs. per day and yet people buy McBurgers. People subject themselves to the same type of persuasive messages from the time they get up until (at least) they get home from work. The vast majority only become entrenched in the black and white thinking and parrot what they hear with no depth of thought. I know these people exist. My brother-in-law is one. Another is a person that used to be one of my 5 best friends. I can't carry on a conversation anymore because everything in life for him is CONSERVATIVE VS LIBERAL. No discussion of fishing, hunting, movies, it matters not the subject. Every word from his mouth starts with "Rush says". I don't think either of these people will become violent, but they have lost there ability to think of any other part of life.

    I don't hear Limbaugh often, although when I do he says things that can be described as "hate". Hannity is less emotional but yet says things that can be "code words" for those in that minority.

    I'm not scared of more than 1/10% of the people that subject themselves to this constant dissonance, but it doesn't take many to pull the trigger. Selling pumpkins each year I have several stop that give me literature to join the "militia" in order to defend. There words are not their own. Their words are those of a zombie programed by what I have heard on talk radio.

  47. geoff Avatar

    Geoff: “Are you blaming me and stug of belonging to the KKK?

    You think I am Robert Byrd?”

    ***That's somebody else using my name.***

    "There are a lot of people that seriously believe Obama is the Anti-Christ. " There are also a lot who seem to honestly believe Elvis lives, that Obama was born in Kenya, that the Holocaust & Global Warming are both hoaxes, etc.

    "The governments role will amount to; causing endless delays in every step along the way." Right… Just like, although "it will have been BP that stopped the leak," it was also BP & Halliburton which caused the leak. And the gov't regulations weren't stringent enough, and the watchdogs didn't "interfere" enough in the first place, etc.

    Where have I heard this all before? Something like… complaining about the stimulus being too expensive while it was going through, then complaining that it didn't do enough when it had been watered down to the point of being ineffectual…

    I don't know what the Germans think about bailing out Greece. I don't think most people care as much about that as they did about, for example, Obama's stimulus package last year. Or about GM & Opel. Or about the flooding in Poland and the tornado that killed a kid in Brandenburg over the weekend (Germans aren't used to tornadoes).

    Overall, though, Germans like having the Euro; I'm sure they like being in a strong position where they're looked to as being the ones to bail everyone out. Some headlines have criticised some of the bankers who will be rescued (like last year there was a lot of criticism that money was going to help American banking CEOs but not the people who risked losing savings). But I think Germans, after bailing out East Germany, recognise the value of playing the game according to John Nash's rules.

  48. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Hemstead—I agree.

  49. geoff Avatar

    Artw,

    See this for your reference http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518
    This is how we actually helped the greek.

  50. geoff Avatar

    Please disregard my previous post.

    That link was a mistake.

  51. geoff Avatar

    Artw : Relax . . . I am just joking. The idea of you and Stug running around in a cape is amusing to me.

    Are you blaming me and stug of belonging to the KKK?
    You think I am Robert Byrd?

  52. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Artw : Geoff . . . how do you (and your fellow Germans) feel about bailing out Greece with German money? Still ok to “spread the wealth”?

    I hope you understand that Ultimately this is about whether Germany is ready to lead, and leading means compromising, rather than only insisting on red lines."

    But that's not what I asked you. Is it so hard to give a direct answer, even if only your opinion?

  53. geoff Avatar

    Thanks geoff. Very kind of you. "Greek" should also be capitalised, and in the plural form if you are refering to a people/nation and not an individual (i.e. it is not as though Germany is only going to bail out Zorba).

  54. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff . . . sorry, I did not see your later post.

  55. geoff Avatar

    Direct answer, Art: "But I think Germans, after bailing out East Germany, recognise the value of playing the game according to John Nash’s rules."

    Would you prefer "yes"? How about "42" seeing as it was "World Towel Day" on Tuesday)?

  56. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    An interesting comparison is Greece has an economy about the size of Michigan. Germany closer to California. And what happens? California pays taxes that go to rebuild Michigan for the common good.

  57. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    "I’m sure they like being in a strong position where they’re looked to as being the ones to bail everyone out. "

    Maybe they can spare the US a few sheckles . . .

  58. geoff Avatar

    geoff: "I hope you understand that Ultimately this is about whether Germany is ready to lead, and leading means compromising, rather than only insisting on red lines." You mean "you're either with us or against us" is not real leadership? Whereas Obama's attempts (however misguided) at achieving some form of bipartisanship is?

    Interesting. I'm sure a lot of people on this list would disagree.

  59. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Good Life: "California pays taxes that go to rebuild Michigan for the common good."

    Ah, yes, Comrade . . . I am forgot about the common good. Off to the gulags I go.

  60. geoff Avatar

    "Maybe they can spare the US a few sheckles . . ." Well: not until you get your banks fixed. "Won't be fooled again," as Mr. Daltrey sang.

    Why do you think the Germans had so much interest in seeing Obama push the stimulus package through? why there are so many banks being bailed out here (and in Iceland), which made the mistake of lending you a few sheckels back in the day…?

  61. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Comment from geoff

    Time May 27, 2010 at 10:07 pm

    geoff: “I hope you understand that Ultimately this is about whether Germany is ready to lead, and leading means compromising, rather than only insisting on red lines.” You mean “you’re either with us or against us” is not real leadership? Whereas Obama’s attempts (however misguided) at achieving some form of bipartisanship is?

    Interesting. I’m sure a lot of people on this list would disagree."

    Interesting . . . Geoff responding to his own quote? Looks like another hijacking.

  62. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: “Are you blaming me and stug of belonging to the KKK?
    You think I am Robert Byrd?”

    Hey, you never know. There are a lot of people that seriously believe Obama is the Anti-Christ. LOL.

  63. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "“Maybe they can spare the US a few sheckles . . .” Well: not until you get your banks fixed. “Won’t be fooled again,” as Mr. Daltrey sang.

    Why do you think the Germans had so much interest in seeing Obama push the stimulus package through? why there are so many banks being bailed out here (and in Iceland), which made the mistake of lending you a few sheckels back in the day…?"

    Come on Geoff, we are GOVERNMENT . . . just 'Trust Us'.

  64. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Art—In a way the nation is like a big insurance company. Those that are doing better pay in and those who are doing worse collect. What is interesting is the states you would list as Liberal generally pay in, those you would say are Conservative generally collect the welfare of government money.

  65. geoff Avatar

    ArtW: No, you're not gov't, your Wall Street and Banks. We thought your gov't had regulations and "checks and balances" in place, but it turns out we were wrong. So why should anyone trust AIG, Lehman Bros (you know the role they played in this Greek mess, don't you?), Citibank, GM, etc.? We always figure you have laws & you enforce them.

  66. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff . . . how do you (and your fellow Germans) feel about bailing out Greece with German money? Still ok to “spread the wealth”?

  67. geoff Avatar

    geoff: ArtW: No, you’re not gov’t, your Wall Street and Banks.

    Sorry I meant No, you are not gov't. You are Wall Street and Banks

  68. geoff Avatar

    Artw : Geoff . . . how do you (and your fellow Germans) feel about bailing out Greece with German money? Still ok to “spread the wealth”?

    I hope you understand that Ultimately this is about whether Germany is ready to lead, and leading means compromising, rather than only insisting on red lines.

  69. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Geoff: "We thought your gov’t had regulations and “checks and balances” in place, but it turns out we were wrong."

    No, you were right. We have plenty of government oversight. Just so happens that those on charge were (and are) incompetent (namely, Dodd and Frank).

    "We always figure you have laws & you enforce them."

    What made you figure that? The way we enforce our immigration laws?

  70. geoff Avatar

    Good Life: Art—In a way the nation is like a big insurance company. Those that are doing better pay in and those who are doing worse collect. What is interesting is the states you would list as Liberal generally pay in, those you would say are Conservative generally collect the welfare of government money.

    Yes. remember, that is the reason why the rich keep getting richer and poor keep getting poor.

    No wonder we blame the insurance companies for all the wrong in the health care market today.

  71. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Good Life: "What is interesting is the states you would list as Liberal generally pay in, those you would say are Conservative generally collect the welfare of government money."

    That is interesting. Let's take a look at the predominate party affiliation of the top 15 according to a recent CNBC report:

    15 – Oregon . . . Democrat

    14 – Pennsylvania . . . Democrat

    13 – Michigan . . . Democrat

    12 – Rhode Island . . . Democrat

    11 – Indiana . . . Democrat (and voted for Obama) – Rep Governor

    10 – New Mexico . . . Democrat

    9 – Washington . . . Democrat

    8 – Minnesota . . . Democrat across the board, but have a Rep Governor

    7 – New York . . . pfft . . . Democrat

    6 – District of Columbia . . . Democrat

    5 – Vermont . . . Democrat across the board, but have a Rep Governor

    4 – Massachusetts . . . pffffft . . . Democrat (ah, but now with a Rep Jr. Senator)

    3 – Tennessee . . . Republican, but have a Democrat Governor

    2 – Maine . . . Democrat

    1 – California . . . pfffft . . . LOL . . . Democrat (and if you want call him one – a Republican Governor).

    That Darn Tenn . . . prevented a clean sweep.

    What was it you posted earlier . . . "I am well-educated, —–etc. etc. etc.——-"

    Uh . . . think again chuckles.

  72. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Before I am asked for it . . . the link:

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/31910310/The_Biggest_US_We

  73. Good Life Avatar
    Good Life

    Art—You might be educated but you can't read or at least comprehend. I didn't say anything about "individual" welfare. What I said was the STATES that get the most from the Federal Government considering what they pay in. In other words those that do the best under the take from the rich and give to the poor Federal System of helping each other.

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.ht

    1. Virginia

    2. Montana

    3. Hawaii

    4. Maine

    5. Arkansas

    6. Oklahoma

    7. South Carolina

    8. Missouri

    9. Maryland

    10. Tennessee

    11. Idaho

    12. Arizona

    13. Kansas

    14. Wyoming

    15. Iowa

    16. Nebraska

    17. Vermont

    18. North Carolina

    19. Pennsylvania

    20. Utah

    21. Indiana

    22. Ohio

    23. Georgia

    24. Rhode Island

    25. Florida

    Now tell me. In this system of "insurance" where we pay in and those in need collect, exactly which states are collecting from the Feds and which ones are paying in.

  74. max Avatar
    max

    One should not be inconsistant with their views of when and under what circumstances religion can be theroized as permissible or unpermissible in evaluating how one determines the signifiance of religion and law. Both of which must learn to live together in peace.

  75. geoff Avatar

    Good Life: "Just ask yourself this question. What totalitarian government, anywhere, any time, has ever been benign? —Russia under Lenin." I'd sort of quibble with that a bit. Although the idea of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" was, in theory, totalitarian, post-revolutionary Russia did not have the infrastructure in place to see it through, what with the Civl War and all. The real crackdown with the famines, expansion of the Gulag system, etc., came under Stalin.

  76. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Good Life,

    Once again I ask why is the only recent news footage of violence from the left? The Unions and the protests against AZ law are all from the left side of the political spectrum? I am not for either but a blatent look at the results of each ideology seems to have only resulted in actual violence on the left and not the right. What about the union marching on the Bank of America Executives house in California? Another law breaking situation that created much fear in a 14 year old boy's mind, and another act from the left, clearly on tape and blatently meant to create fear.

    The actual eveidence seems to point at more violence in a mob histeria type of situation from the left and not the right.

    And I must by saying this also reiterate that I do not fully agree with either party but from my perspective the rhetoric doesn't match the results.

  77. ArtW Avatar
    ArtW

    Good Life: "Art—You might be educated but you can’t read or at least comprehend. I didn’t say anything about “individual” welfare. What I said was the STATES that get the most from the Federal Government considering what they pay in. In other words those that do the best under the take from the rich and give to the poor Federal System of helping each other."

    You are apparently also disingenuous. The link you provided was for 2005 data (how do you think a state like California factors in 2010?) that does not even match the list in your post above! Even using the aged data you provided, the top 5 "welfare" (as you called it) states are:

    1. New Mexico . . . Democrat

    2. Mississippi . . . Democrat

    3. Alaska . . . Republican

    4. Louisiana . . . Split

    5. West Virginia . . .Democrat

    Your link: http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.ht

    "Now tell me. In this system of “insurance” where we pay in and those in need collect, exactly which states are collecting from the Feds and which ones are paying in."

    According to your data: The Democratic states seem to be the top moochers. Happy now?

    I was happy, however, to see my state (Connecticut) at #48 🙂

  78. geoff Avatar

    hemstead: "a blatent look at the results of each ideology seems to have only resulted in actual violence on the left and not the right." Apart from the guy who flew his plane into an IRS building, you mean? and the "militia" up in Michigan (?) that was planning to start some kind of rebellion? And all the references in the rhetoric of Cal on down to "civil war" and "explosions," etc.? I also saw a video where Glen Beck was crying (does he ever do anything else?) because he was worried some of his disciples would take him at his word and real violence would ensue.

  79. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Good Life. _I’m_ the black and white thinker? You’re the poster boy for that prize, my friend. How can you miss the irony of that when you “know” you’re right on every, single issue and those who disagree with you are wrong?

    Go back and read your quotes. Your “minority” comments were limited to the issue of racism. You said there is a _foundation_ that worships the hate of certain “spokesmen.” That implies a very large number of people. I don’t know a single one of them. Do you? Or is this yet another in a never-ending line of things liberals “just know?”

    Secondly you have no examples to support what you didn’t just imply but said outright that these “spokesmen” speak hate. That leads me to believe that in addition to being an expert on global warming, the Bible, charitable giving, and pretty much everything else, you’re now a pseudo-psychiatrist who understands the effects of talk radio on its listeners. I see. I guess you think it’s not possible to listen, have your own opinions, and be unaffected by what you just heard. However, we DO know it IS possible because we have a living example. Barack Obama listened to Rev Wright for 20 years but was somehow unaffected by the hate. (Even more impressive was how he missed those “few” days when it was being promulgated.) But then he’s a liberal and able to think for himself no matter what he hears. Conservatives, on the other hand, are dumb, dumb, dummies as CarlE told us. They couldn’t possibly already hold the beliefs Limbaugh does and just enjoy listening to him. No, they are mostly mindless robots receiving mental energy and marching orders from talk radio hosts who then go out and spread the racism and hate because they’ve been programmed to do so. We all know listening to Maher, Olbermann, Schultz, and Maddow has no negative effects. After all, they’re telling us the truth. Truth is light. Light is virtue. Limbaugh and Hannity preach hate and sedition which is evil and therefore their “followers” are evil and on the verge of “pulling the trigger.”

    Trigger? Pulling the trigger? Are you serious? (Don’t bother answering. I know you are.) This is one of the most ridiculous, unfounded statements you’ve ever made and there a lot. But I’m sure you have a Bible verse to justify this claim like you said you did for your crassest of all comments about “caskets and the military” knowing my son was killed in Afghanistan. You’re such a great example of Christianity, Good Life…

    hemstead. Great posts lately. Here’s a link to Canada’s plan to spend almost a billion dollars for security at the G-20 summit. Good Life. Is it against liberals or conservatives the money’s needed for? Who’s really the violent ideology? Not the one cast as violent but the one that commits the violence? From the Vietnam war protests to today, it’s the Left, not the Right that’s angry, getting arrested, and violent. (I sure hope to read about the 2-3 nutjobs who killed abortionists as “proof.”) I’ll add the SEIU thug beating the black conservative selling “Don’t Tread on Me” flags to your list.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100527/ap_on_re_ca/c

  80. Graeme Phillips Avatar
    Graeme Phillips

    It is clear that Tina Dupuy is setting her mind on earthly things rather than divine things. If God gives us the right to vote out leaders we don't like by means of democracy, then ok, but the beauty of God's kingdom is far bigger than any earthly system, be it democracy, libertarianism etc.

  81. calicocat7 Avatar
    calicocat7

    I've heard a lot about this argument lately. I think that most people, Christian and non-Christian alike, are missing the point when they argue over whether our nation was/wasn't founded on "the ten commandments." Direct quotes from numerous founding fathers reveal that they knew this form of government would only work for a people who had a respect for a higher authority and obeyed a commonly recognized set of absolute moral values. Several of them also publicly and repeatedly petitioned God for wisdom.

    Interestingly, though the Bible does not endorse or mandate a democracy, Exodus chapter 18 verses 13-27 lays out reasons for forming a representative form of government and details the formation of it during the time of Moses.

  82. GodChaser Avatar
    GodChaser

    This article is so lame in so many ways. to long to address everything, but I will try a couple.

    1) this is not a democracy, it is a republic. Tina needs to study the difference.

    2) The Bible has a lot more than The Ten Commandments, it has moral absolutes. They founding fathrs quoted the Bible directly and through the works of other people who quoted the Bible more than any other book. It is also clear, it was the number one influence for their decisions.

    3)The three commandments she says are universal, she complete misses the fact, than when they were written, they were not universal. They were far from it. They are universal now, because of the influence Judaism and Christianity have had on the world.

    I could go on and on, but it is obvious she is just a liberal that tries to change the facts.

  83. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    Geoff,

    Footage??? I still have only seen actual footage of mobs of people on the left doing actual violence.

    The guy flying his plane into the IRS building, very weak tie to any real right wing group.

    The militia in Michigan, where is the actual footage of them committing violence? You aren't citing any actual footage that can be tied directly to the tea party or any other extreme right wing group.

    Don't get me wrong, left or right side of the spectrum to me, still means extremism and can point to extreme passion and emotions, but at this point I do feel the media is a bit one-sided in their approach to saying they fear for their lives because of the tea partiers, but they are OK with the other rhetoric from the left and their methods, which do involve beating up a black tea partier, and throwing garbage at police officers, and a large group of union members marching on one man's house (private property) because he was a top exec for Bank of America.

    One side has already led to action, more than once. The other side has for the most part, peacefully protested. So Beck has cried because he wanted to make sure no one committed violence, isn't that the responsible thing to do? How come the Union leaders aren't telling their thugs to quit beating people up. Where is the leadership on the left telling their people to NOT be violent?

    This tendency to violence exists in all cases of extremism hwether left or right.

  84. geoff Avatar

    hemstead: "The guy flying his plane into the IRS building, very weak tie to any real right wing group." That's what they kept saying about Timothy McVeigh, too. When it comes down to it, no one can provide "actual footage" of the Holocaust in action; of Napoleon at Waterloo; of the cruciifixion. So?

    With the Michigan militia, as I understand it, there was a conspiracy to kill some police officers, which seems to be a crime, whether or not there is any "actual footage." Whether a crime has been committed, or whether there is enough evidence to make a case, will be for the courts to decide.

    "So Beck has cried because he wanted to make sure no one committed violence, isn’t that the responsible thing to do?" Well, he probably shouldn't have put himself in a position where he had incited his followers to the point where he felt he had the need to do that. Isn't "inciting violence" a crime? didn't he realise he had gone too far and might be held responsible?

    After that, you can't deny that there are a whole lot of "teabaggers" talking about "civil war," and "explosions." All a whole lot of violent imagery from people who don't seem to understand the difference between, say, "news" and Bill O'Reilly.

    And I really don't know what you're talking about with "Union leaders" and their "thugs." Sounds as fantastic as the "welfare queens" riding around in Cadillacs.

    Then again: I see little or no evidence of a "left" in American politics. You have centre right (Democrats) and further right (Republicans).

  85. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    geoff,

    You definitely have an extremely skewed perspective. You haven't seen footage because you are obviously getting your news from a very limited news source. Both the "welfare queens" riding in Cadillacs?!?!? Well if you are refering to those who would pay for there food with food stamps and yet have extremely nice brand new Cadillacs to drive, I had seen that first hand in Las Vegas back in the 80's when I worked in a Supermarket. So if you are thinking that is as far fetched as Union Thugs beating up a black tea partier well then I guess Union Thugs beating people up is more common place than I would want to admit. In other words, it's an extremely poor reference. Some people refuse to believe the evidence when it stares them in the face. The footage exists on youtube and other sites, but lets not let that cloud your already skewed judgement.

    I have said time and again that it's the extremes that create the problems, but you seem to think that we in America are so far to the right and have moved that way since when? This country used to be further right than it is now. I do not see your historical reference showing we have moved to the right. Perspective is probably a big part of the already distorted view that many have. Could this be the case with you as well?

    I personally have stated time and again, that I do not wish for my Federal Government to dictate too many of my social mores. Just the obvious ones, don't kill, don't steal, don't rape, etc… But I also don't want them taking too much of my tax dollars for other wasteful things, arts, healthcare, other entitlement programs. They are the referee and they need to do just that.

    If you are extremely left but consider yourself a centrist, then a lot of people are too far right for you. If you are extremely right but think you are a centrist then there exists a huge group of liberals out there. To me, to think of the Democrats as right, in a historical perspective, is unfathomable.

  86. geoff Avatar

    hemstead: "You definitely have an extremely skewed perspective. You haven’t seen footage because you are obviously getting your news from a very limited news source."

    Do you really think I am an illiterate like you?

    "But I also don’t want them taking too much of my tax dollars for other wasteful things, arts, healthcare, other entitlement programs. They are the referee and they need to do just that."

    You mean to say the government should just stand on the sides and see people making money, while we in the government just slave for you. That is not going to happen.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/government.
    The dictionary clearly states government means system of rule. No where it says to take orders or to referee.

    "To me, to think of the Democrats as right, in a historical perspective, is unfathomable."

    The democrats were never right, neither now nor historically. If we were right, we would never have let the civil war happen. Neither would we have let the blacks slave around till 1960. We believe in letting everybody follow their ways except for the majority. Do you get it?

  87. geoff Avatar

    Hey, geoff: you're going to have to fix up your grammar and spelling (little things like putting a capital on "Democrats").

    Hemstead: "Some people refuse to believe the evidence when it stares them in the face. The footage exists on youtube and other sites, but lets not let that cloud your already skewed judgement." Well, I've seen some Teabaggers insulting a guy with alzheimer's, I've seen Teabaggers yelling for the gov't to keep its "hands off Medicare," I've seen Teabaggers holding semi-literate signs, but it seems I would get into trouble if I tried to argue that Teabaggers are illiterate, intolerant, old, white, and threatening violence. So: you obviously can't believe everything you see posted on youtube, can you? As I think I mentioned: some people have trouble distinguishing "news" from "infotainment," BS & propaganda these days.

    You "in America are so far to the right and have moved that way since" some time in the 1970s. You seem to have learned your lesson for a while after Nixon, then brought in Reagan and have been heading off ever since. And I use the perspective that's usually taught in political science and history courses. Plus there have been numerous references in American media over the years about how even the German conservatives (Christian Democrats) and Canada's Conservative Party, although both "right" according to traditional definitions, are somewhere to the left of your Democrats. As in: Germany's conservatives (like the Danish Conservatives) are "green" and environmentally friendly; Canada's Conservatives aren't serious about dismantling our health care system because they know that isn't popular. And even Obama has stacked his staff with a pile of Wall Street fat cats. Etc.

    You are moving right in the sense of an increasing divide between rich & poor: something like 1% of Americans own 90% of its wealth; you are moving further away from democracy and closer to plutocracy (ever heard of "lobbyists"?).

    Otherwise, how do you define "right"?

  88. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    I’ve seen leftwing violence all my life, but I’ve never seen rightwing violence. I’ve seen individuals who are on the Right commit murder or acts of violence but never as a group that I can recall. For the last 45 years protests that are violent are leftwing. When Nancy Pelosi brought in the oversized gavel right through the middle of a tea party protest (this is the same woman who tried to cry while lamenting the same “rhetoric” in the ‘70s and was supposedly “afraid” and yet threw this in their faces) one older guy in a ball cap was angrily shouting the same thing over and over. This is the “angry, violent mob” the left has tried to turn the tea parties into! This is where the “spitting” and use of the N-word allegedly came from although not one incident was caught on tape in spite of a $100,000 reward being offered for proof of even ONE such incident. Other than that, it's been calm to the point of boring.

    Violence? Watch any G-8/G-20 protest. Canada’s ponying up nearly a billion dollars for extra security and I can guarantee you there won’t be a conservative in the angry mob turning over cars, breaking plate glass windows, and setting things on fire. Environmental extremists also torch SUVs and homes. What organized rightwing violence is anyone referring to? But then again, we _could_ turn violent at any moment. We’re ex-military types who listen to Limbaugh. Maybe they’re correct. We ARE violent. We just haven’t manifested it openly yet. Once Limbaugh sends out the code word through our tinfoil hats, DC better watch out. Yep, Napolitano's on to something all right…

  89. geoff Avatar

    Cal: forgot the KKK? Dragging gays along behind pick-up trucks?

    Every racist, homophobic, misogynistic attack is right-wing.

    How about Timothy McVeigh? The various Ulster Unionists in Northern Ireland?

    Don't be such a lazy swine all the time. Try this thing called Google:

    "However, the public was mentally unprepared for a new form of right-wing terrorism that virtually exploded with the car bombing of the Federal office building in Oklahoma City in April 1995, killing 169 persons and wounding more than 400. In peaceful Sweden, neo-Nazis in 1999 murdered two police officers, assassinated a labour union activist, bombed a journalist and his son in their car and, in 1998, Nazis also sent a letter-bomb to the Swedish Minister of Justice."

    Or this:

    "The face of domestic terrorism in the United States continued to change in 1995. The FBI identified a further decline in traditional left wing domestic extremism, and an increase in activities among extremists associated with right wing groups and special interest organizations."
    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/current.h
    But then look at the URL: "mil." What would they know? Probably a pile of communists, since they work for the gov't.

  90. geoff Avatar

    Sorry Cal, I forgot KKK was supported by Democrats. I totally forgot about Byrd.

    I also apologize about Timothy McVeigh. I forgot that in a recorded interview with Time magazine[79] McVeigh professed his belief in "a god", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs." Throughout his childhood, he and his father were Roman Catholic and regularly attended daily Mass at Good Shepherd Church in Pendleton, New York. The Guardian reported that McVeigh wrote a letter to them claiming to be an agnostic and that he did not believe in a hell.[80][81] McVeigh once said that he believed the universe was guided by natural law, energized by some universal higher power that showed each person right from wrong if they paid attention to what was going on inside them. He had also said, "Science is my religion."[82]

    This is actually what Democrats or left wing terrorists believe in and how left wing democrats function.

    I also apologize for calling you a lazy swine, I am trying to be polite, but I fail occasionally.

    I did not realize that the link I posted earlier is 15 years old and has no relevance to today's scenario.

  91. geoff Avatar

    geoff: really?

  92. geoff Avatar

    geoff: were we talking about McVeigh's political or religious beliefs? I'm not sure where "Catholic" or even "agnostic" lies on the political spectrum. The Pope is pretty conservative, but the CIA and a lot of South American dictators used to get angry at those priests preaching "liberation theology."

    "Right-wing extremist ideology has its roots in nationalism and racism. It is governed by the idea that ethnic affiliation to a nation or race is of the utmost importance for an individual. All other interests and values, including civil and human rights, are subordinate to it.

    "Right-wing extremists propagate a political system in which the state and the people amalgamate – as an alleged natural order – to form a unity ("ideology of the ethnic community"). Actually, this results in an anti-pluralistic system, leaving no room for democratic decision-making procedures. Right-wing extremism in Germany is not homogeneous in terms of ideology, but all right-wing extremists have in common that ethnic affiliation and xenophobia directed against the principle of equality are overestimated.

    "As concerns its image, right-wing extremism is no homogeneous, self-contained phenomenon, either. It occurs in various forms, in particular in a juvenile sub-culture of violence-prone, right-wing extremist skinheads, neo-Nazi groupings propagating a totalitarian state, parties striving to gain political influence by running in elections, literature of right-wing extremist authors and publishing houses, agitating intellectually or propagandistically."
    http://www.verfassungsschutz.de/en/en_fields_of_w
    And here's some stuff from your Fox folk:
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/14/homela

  93. geoff Avatar

    Prove it wrong.

  94. geoff Avatar

    geoff: prove what wrong?

  95. geoff Avatar

    Wonderful link.

    This article would cease to become a propaganda and a fact if it read as below. Now every line of that article is a reality.

    A truth in its entirety.

    "Islamic extremist ideology has its roots in religion and racism. It is governed by the idea that ethnic affiliation to ones religion or race is of the utmost importance for an individual. All other interests and values, including civil and human rights, are subordinate to it.

    Islamic extremists propagate a political system in which the state and the people amalgamate – as an alleged natural order – to form a unity ("ideology of the ethnic community"). Actually, this results in an anti-pluralistic system, leaving no room for democratic decision-making procedures. Islamic extremism in the world is not homogeneous in terms of ideology, but all Islamic extremists have in common that ethnic affiliation and xenophobia directed against the principle of equality are overestimated.

    As concerns its image, Islamic extremism is no homogeneous, self-contained phenomenon, either. It occurs in various forms, in particular in a juvenile sub-culture of violence-prone, Islamic extremist religious heads, muslim terrorist groupings propagating a totalitarian state, parties striving to gain political influence by running in elections, literature of Islamic extremist authors and publishing houses, agitating intellectually or propagandistically.

    The ideology which is hostile to the constitution and mostly contemptuous of human life vents itself in Islamic extremist and in particular xenophobic acts of violence directed against other religions only because of their religious belief.

    In order to contain Islamic extremist acts of violence and to prevent Islamic extremist propaganda activities which are liable to prosecution, a large number of state measures have been taken against Islamic extremism (especially bans on associations and prohibitions of assemblies). Since late 2001, 24 Islamic extremist organisations have been banned by the Federal Minister of the Interior resp. the ministries/senates for interior affairs of the Federal States."

  96. geoff Avatar

    Also from the same link.

    Left-wing extremists are avowed opponents of the state and social order of the Federal Republic of Germany, which they defame as an order of capitalism marked by racism and fascism. Depending on their ideological-political orientation – revolutionary-Marxist or anarchist – they are aiming at establishing a socialist/Communist system or a "society free from rulers” (anarchy).

    The left-wing extremists´ forms of action are manifold: They comprise public manifestations, overt agitation with flyers, calls for action via posters, periodic publications, electronic communications media and running in elections and attempts to covertly influencing social groups. Violations of the law including overt or covert offences like causing damage to property, mass militancy and also inflicting bodily harm are partly regardsd as a means to pursue their political objectives.

    For years now, the internal security of the Federal Republic of Germany has been threatened in particular by militant left-wing extremists, mainly from the anarchist-autonomous scene.

    In German left-wing extremism the following ideolgical currents can be distinguished:

    * a revolutionary-marxist wing, comprising i.a. the "Deutsche Kommunistische Partei” (DKP / German Communist Party), the "Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Deutschlands” (MLPD / Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany) and individual overtly extremist structures within the "Partei des Demokratischen Sozialismus” (PDS / Party of Democratic Socialism) and the "Left-wing Party PDS" like the "Kommunistische Plattform" (KPF / Communist Platform).

    * among the Trotzkyist groups which have been particularly active in the past years are "Linksruck” (Swing to the Left) and "Sozialistische Alternative” (SAV / Socialist Alternative).

    * the major part of the violence-prone left-wing extremists is made up of anarchist groups, among them those calling themselves "Autonomists".

  97. geoff Avatar

    And this

    Extremism of foreigners

    Currently, there are nearly seven million foreign nationals from almost any part of the world living in Germany. By far the biggest part of them is law-abiding, but in late 2006, extremist resp. terrorist groups of foreigners in the Federal Republic of Germany –excluding Islamist groupings – had a membership of some 25,250 individuals.

    Most of these organisations do not want to violate German security interests in the first place but consider Germany to be a safe haven which they can pursue their objectives in their home countries from and also materially support like-minded individuals there.

    These are e.g. left-wing extremist groups of foreigners pursuing the objective of abolishing the existing state and social order in their countries of origin and of replacing it by a communist social order. These groupings also carry out anti-imperialist agitation in particular against the United States of America.

    As regards some groups, their former left-wing extremist orientation has lost significance and instead, ethnically motivated efforts aimed at gaining independence have been given priority. For example, the "Peoples Congress of Kurdistan" (KONGRA GEL) which was founded after the "Freedom and Democracy Congress of Kurdistan" (KADEK) had been dissolved, according to its own statement is currently aiming at achieving greater cultural autonomy for the Kurdish people within the existing limits of a democratic Middle East. However, on 1 June 2004, the organisation terminated the so-called "unilateral" cease-fire in Turkey. Consequently, the situation in the Kurdish areas has been marked again by increased fighting between the Turkish armed forces and KONGRA GEL's "People's Defence Forces" (HPG) with numerous casualties on both sides. Since August 2004, activities of a till then unknown grouping in Turkey called the "Freedom Hawks of Kurdistan" (TAK) have been registered. This group has claimed responsibility for a number of attacks on civil, in particular tourism-related targets in Turkey.

    Furthermore, adherents of extremist Iranian opposition groups in Germany have been agitating against the system of rule in the Islamic Republic of Iran and with manifold activities are trying to be removed from the EU and US lists of terrorist organisations.

    Asian separatist organisations like e.g. the "Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eeelam" (LTTE) and Sikh organisations in Germany also concentrate on propaganda activities and the collection of funds.

  98. geoff Avatar

    Also this

    Espionage, security and countersabotage

    Being informed on time and correctly is often decisive for success or failure in all areas of life. Getting correct information on time is important for states in their geo-strategic competition but also for competitors in global economy. This has remained unchanged even after the Cold War. Intelligence services provide such a lead in information.

    Due to its geo-political location, its important role in EU and NATO and not least as a site for numerous high technology companies, the Federal Republic of Germany continues to be an important target for intelligence collection activities of some intelligence services of foreign states. Like in the past years, they include the intelligence and security services of the Russian Federation, the People's Republic of China, Iran, North Korea and some states of the Near and Middle East and Africa. The strength of these states' secret services in the respective diplomatic, consular or semi-official representations in Germany where they maintain their bases, the so-called legal residencies, varies a lot.

    Not all members of these secret services cooperate with the German security agencies e.g. in the field of international counterterrorism. A considerable number of intelligence officers are involved in intelligence collection activities directed against German interests or abuse the German territory as an operational area for espionage activities against third countries. Such illegal activities of foreign secret services constitute an attack against the security interests of the Federal Republic of Germany. Counterintelligence is tasked with uncovering the modus operandi of foreign services and countering their espionage activities. This also includes the uncovering of illegal transactions or the release of expertise to be used for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

    It is no secret that some states that want to get hold of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons and the required technology have been trying to procure the required goods also in Germany.

    Protective security has to ensure that information and procedures whose compromise might jeopardise the existence or vital interests, the security or interests of the Federation or one of its Federal States are kept secret and protected from unauthorised knowledge. In the framework of counter-sabotage, security-vetting of individuals – a reliable instrument of personnel security – in future is to prevent unreliable individuals from being employed in important positions of sensitive areas (facilities of vital or defence-related importance).

  99. geoff Avatar

    And this

    Scientology

    The "Scientology Organisation" (SO) is still being monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution. Concrete evidence of activities directed against the free democratic basic order continues to be available. This is why the legal requirement for the organisation to be monitored by the offices for the protection of the constitution is met. Therefore, the relevant decision made in 1997 by the Permanent Conference of the State Ministers of the Interior and the State Senates remains valid.

    Islamism

    Islamism – in particular its terrorist form – has developed into a major threat posed to the internal security of the Federal Republic of Germany, too. Islamism is a political, mostly socio-revolutionary movement – heterogeneous in itself – which is supported by a minority of the Muslims. With reference to the original Islam of the 7th century, its adherents – the Islamists – are calling for the "reinstitution" of an "Islamic order", in their understanding the only legitimate state and social order which is to replace all other orders. Under this "Islamic order" all areas of life are to be shaped in a way bindingly laid down by God in the Koran and by the example of the Prophet and the early community (Sunna).

    Militant Islamists feel legitimised to impose the "Islamic order" with violent means. In this context, they are referring to the call for the "Jihad" laid down in the Koran (originally: effort, internal struggle, also: "Holy War") which they – unlike other Muslims – interpret as a holy obligation to unceasingly fight against all the "enemies" of Islam both in Muslim and in non-Muslim countries.

    In spite of existing ideological agreements, the Islamist organisations clearly differ as regards their attitude towards the use of violence. Extreme attitudes have been taken by Osama Bin Ladin's organisation "Al Qaeda" which has been overtly advocating the killing of Western citizens, and the German-based Turkish IGMG which wants to expand its influence primarily on a spiritual-cultural level.

    Consequently, the various Islamist organisations can be distinguished by the methods and means used to achieve their objectives. Primarily, these are the groupings and "Mujahedin" networks which have been carrying out terrorist actions worldwide and are committed to the violent "Jihad" (Holy War); part of them is associated with Osama Bin Ladin's terrorist organisation "Al Qaeda". Also Islamist organisation striving to change the social system and the conditions of domination in their countries of origin with violent means (terrorist actions or guerrilla warfare) are in the focus of monitoring. In many cases, the members of these organisation have come to Germany as political refugees and are trying to support the struggle in the crisis region with logistic and propagandistic means from Germany. Thus, they are a potential threat for institutions and interests of their countries of origin also in Germany. A third category comprises organisations which, exploiting the instruments of the state of law (= legalist) are trying to impose Islamist positions in social life in Germany, as well, or at least to achieve freedom for organised Islamist activities in Germany and which are consequently contributing to disintegratingly establish an Islamist sub-society. Against this background it has become obvious that Islamism has to be dealt with in many different ways.

    It has to be clearly emphasised that not Islam as a religion is being monitored by the Offices for the Protection of the Constitution, neither is the Muslims' personal faith nor their religious practise which is protected by the basic right to religious freedom as part of the free democratic basic order which is laid down in Art. 4 of the German Grundgesetz (the German constitution). Safeguarding this religious freedom of all the citizens –Muslims, too – is among the tasks of the Offices for the Protection of the Constitution.

  100. geoff Avatar

    Why be biased and focus on only Right wing extremism?

    Every thing, Every community, every religion is a threat to the German society.

    But I love to be biased and will focus only on right wing extremism.

    It makes it easy to substantiate distorted and broken facts.

    It is easy.

    1) Pick a fact.

    2) Distort it to make it hazy or blurred or ambiguous

    3) Twist it with great grammar and excellent vocabulary to make it look like right wing extremism.

    Remember great grammar and excellent vocabulary go a long way to prove your mastery over details.

    Makes it easier to push the opponent in a corner and subject him to be defensive when you run out of arguments or when he starts pointing out the facts.

    4) Finally, when nothing works the ultimate method, brand the opponent as a Nazi. He will go down defending and trying to prove he is not a Nazi.

    This ultimate method gives you complete control over the conversation and enough time to cover up any facts the opponent has provided and twist them again to completely turn the conversation in your favor.

    The opponent will either fight till the end and loose trying to prove he and his arguments are not Nazi or he will give up and go away.

    Either way, you end up proving you are superior and the only knowledgeable individual.

  101. hemstead Avatar
    hemstead

    geoffs:

    I do believe you've lost it!

    You've never called me illiterate before, and now you are arguing with yourself?

    Someone needs to quit impersonating you and get a real username. This is identity theft!

    It's an outrage! I need to know that the guy responding to my posts is the real geoff and not some imposter.

    I've figured it out, your name on previous posts was always a link, so none of these geoffs are you!

  102. geoff Avatar

    hemstead: "Someone needs to quit impersonating you and get a real username. This is identity theft!"

    Well, they do say immitation is the sincerest form of flattery. It's just another in the long line of Sunita, Fakegeoff, Phil, and various others who have tried to tell me things like historians are gossip columnists, that people in the 1930s thought differently and I have to consider things from their context, etc. (i.e. standard introdoctory historiographic concepts from History 101).

  103. Cal Avatar
    Cal

    Lord have mercy! Ten posts? I saw “KKK” next to my name in the first one so I’m guessing it’s some sort of new twist on “Caliban.” Nice.

    The discussion had been on left versus right violence and only a kook would try and tie the Klan to the modern-day Right while the Left IS still strongly connected to the G-20/environmental extremists. But this is gooff who thinks the Taliban and Al Qaeda are morally equivalent with US soldiers so I guess that could be a possibility.

    hemstead, you’re a very patient man whether or not all those are from our very own geoffrey.

    signed,

    Caliban. Imperial Wizard of the modern Ku Klux Klan aka the Tea Party movement.

    Okay, where IS that damned sheet and my pointed hat? “Honey? Are you washing my sheets or did Bob Byrd stop by to borrow them again?”

  104. geoff Avatar

    Comment from Cal

    Time June 1, 2010 at 7:35 pm

    "I’ve seen leftwing violence all my life, but I’ve never seen rightwing violence."

    Ah, spinning already. You just have to scroll up to see what you wrote only yesterday.

    Question: if we don't "tie the Klan to the modern-day Right," who do we tie them to? The Catholic Church? the Moonies? Starbucks? They're just self-generating, out there in a vacuum, wholly unconnected to any other life form?

    C'mon, Cal: we're asking you direct questions, here. You can't just post your BS and not expect to be called on it.

  105. geoff Avatar

    Oops. I forgot. We tie them to modern day left. They are the only ones, who just self-generate, out there in a vacuum, wholly unconnected to any other life form.

  106. geoff Avatar

    Uhm, geoff: who is "them" or "they"? The Commis in the KKK?

  107. Bryan Avatar
    Bryan

    "Separation of Church and state" is actually liberation of the Church from the state. God's Kingdom is beyond earthly realms.

  108. tixximmi Avatar
    tixximmi

    Keep in mind that the KKK was originally southern Democrats. Robert Byrd, US Senate was a clansman and a Democrat. The Jim Crow laws were set up under a Democrat President. (Wilson) Unions who are usually pro Democrat, started by attacking Blacks. And as far back as the mid 1800's they discriminated against Chinese. Today they call white people racist because of the immigration law in Arizona. The 1964 Civil Rights Act had more democrats vote against it than Republicans. Al Gore's father voted against it too. Wilson ( a Democrat) imprisoned over 20,000 people for disagreeing with his administration. Roosevelt, another Democrat interned tens of thousands of Japanese.

    As for right wing or left wing violence, all you need to do is to look at Toronto today at the G20 conference. All left wingers out there. The guy who flew is plane into the IRS here in Austin, was mad at Bush but voted for Obama. It was the press who tried to tie that guy with the right. Most violence comes from the left. Look at Greece. Riots are spearheaded by the Unions. The same unions that supported Obama in the election. The ship from Turkey that was boarded by Israel. This flotilla was organized by the wife of William Ayers. (Terrorist that bombed the Pentagon and supported Obama).

    The question should be, do you want a larger government or a smaller government? Do you want more freedom or less freedom?

  109. geoff Avatar

    tixximmi: "Keep in mind that the KKK was originally southern Democrats." Uhm… I thought the KKK was originally made up of former Confederate soldiers.

    "Most violence comes from the left." Then I wonder how fascism got its nasty reputation.

    I think maybe one problem is your determination to paint Democrats as "left" (to the rest of the world, they're somewhere just to the right of centre). And maybe your view of violence: it seems that Walmart can devastate inner cities, BP can destroy ecosystems, Enron can rob its employees of their pensions, AIG and Lehman Brothers can rob millions of their savings… and get away with it. How does that compare to a few noisy demonstrators trying to get some attention on TV?

    "The question should be, do you want a larger government or a smaller government? Do you want more freedom or less freedom?" Why should that be "the question"? Shouldn't it be more important whether he gov't is big/small enough to do its job properly? Like build roads, inspect oil wells and food production and workers' papers? More freedom equals less equality: big corporations and the rich become more free to do what they want and everyone else ends up paying for it. And if the only way individuals can fight back against BP, Enron, Walmart, the IMF, etc., is to use their freedom to protest, make noise, and show their anger… why would you want to limit that freedom?

    Do you want more freedom or less freedom?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *