Topic: [US] Read before you rally, read before you claim a clue

[-devil-]

/shrugs

all i will say, is i grew up in the southern part of the US, pretty much all of my ancestor's fought for the CSA during an invasion by the northern troops ... and now i am required to have 'citizenship' in the country that 'won' the invasion ... (even though i always say i am a citizen of louisiana, and accordign to most of my friends ... we are resident aliens of the USA, but that part i never quite caught onto, other then something about the only 'true' citizens are the ones located in washington DC, which is not part of any state)

meh, i prefer not discussing it online much as it always ends up with someone yelling and bla bla bla ...

[longshanks]

Archon I'd love to see you asking the English to recite the Magna Carta

Yes because we all speak Latin over here... 
The Magna Carta just isn't taught that much anymore, especially not the contents....Most of it just isn't relevent anymore....

Magna Carta (Latin for "Great Charter", literally "Great Paper"), also called Magna Carta Libertatum ("Great Charter of Freedoms"), is an English charter originally issued in 1215. Magna Carta was the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today. Magna Carta influenced many common law and other documents, such as the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, and is considered one of the most important legal documents in the history of democracy.

Magna Carta was originally written because of disagreements between Pope Innocent III, King John and his English barons about the rights of the King. Magna Carta required the king to renounce certain rights, respect certain legal procedures and accept that the will of the king could be bound by the law. It explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects - whether free or unfree - most notably the right of Habeas Corpus, meaning that they had rights against unlawful imprisonment. Many clauses were renewed throughout the Middle Ages, and further during the Tudor and Stuart periods, and the 17th and 18th centuries. By the early 19th century most clauses in their original form had been repealed from English law.

There are a number of popular misconceptions about Magna Carta, such as that it was the first document to limit the power of an English king by law (it was not the first, and was partly based on the Charter of Liberties); that it in practice limited the power of the king (it mostly did not in the Middle Ages); and that it is a single static document (it is a variety of documents referred to under a common name).

To see the Full Article....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

[ratfusion]

I haven't had time to read through all of this, but i will.    In the mean time,  for people who are interested in the constitution look up the Libertarian party, libertarianism, and  the candidate for president, Ron Paul.

[Rasmus]

I haven't had time to read through all of this, but i will.    In the mean time,  for people who are interested in the constitution look up the Libertarian party, libertarianism, and  the candidate for president, Ron Paul.

   Um.... Ron Paul is running for the Republicans, not Libertarians. He might be off on the left side of the Republicans, but he is still in the Republicans.

[ratfusion]

Yes, hes running as a republican.   But hes never denounced his affiliation with the Libertarian party, he was the libertarian candidate in 1988.

[Rasmus]

I think that, above anything else, is what will give the official Republican support to someone else, sadly. I would love to see a third/fourth-party candidate run (and win) the presidency in the US. I think it would be a great opportunity for the entire nation.

Can you imagine Nader as president? That would be awesome!

[ratfusion]

Some 3rd parties, yes, Nader, absolutely not.  Hes a socialist, a green fundamentalist, and an anti-capitalist.   We still have a year to get Ron Pauls name out before the primaries.  I support him because hes the only honest politician I know of, and I agree with more of his views than most.

One large part you seem to be missing about the libertarian message is that a nation is only as free as its markets.  The welfare state, and massive gov't regulation are incompatible with a nation that defends personal freedoms. 

Now hold on I'm still working a general reply to this thread.

[Rasmus]

I still love the idea of the American people voting against someone enough to put Nader in charge. It is not an impossibility, although not something we are ever likely to see. WE can, however, rest assured that Nader will be remembered longer than any of the current men in power. Indeed, if you read "Eon" by Greg Bear Nader forms the core of humanity's future.

[ratfusion]

OK, I've read through, a few observations.   First, the FOX news bit.  Its really no worse than any of the rest of the 24/7 news channels.   They're all biased.   The media in the US donated 9 times to 1 to the democrat party.  Information is a dangerous thing and theres still a lot to be had by controlling it,  the internet hasn't been able to stop that.  So please, endavor to find information from several widely varying sources.

Next, Bush isn't all bad.  I tend to disagree with him, and I didn't vote for him.  But I'm sick and tired of all these attacks on him for things that aren't his fault.  Hes not evil, hes not a moron, but what he thinks will fix things differ fundamentally from my ideas.  It really upsets me when our media more or less publicly insults the president.  Disagreeing with him is fine, but if you hurl insults at him constantly the rest of the world starts to belive it.  They're embarassing us in front of the world, for ratings.

An example; people blame him for the hurricanes.  Its completely retarded.  Its a state and local responsibilty, and it always has been. The FEMA exists to supplement state efforts,  after they request help.  Our retarded govenor (D)Blanco tried to play politics and not ask for help until it was too late.  I was hit by hurricane Rita, and I still believe this.

Next, why are americans, in general, so apathetic to their own system of goverment?   Because life is grand.  Our lives are so rich and enjoyable that most of us never take the time to follow any of the giant sea of bureocracy.  Clearly things are working out well enough that I can still enjoy my life.  There is truth to the statement:

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. - Thomas Jefferson

and because of this it is inevitable that we will slowly let various freedoms slip away slowly, until enough peoples lives suck.  When enough people are willing to be shot for an idea,  certainly we will have another revolution and restore most of our liberties.  And the cycle will repeat.  I think I read Jefferson believed the natural cycle of revolution was every 27 years.

Next subject, rights.   The most important of which is the right to bear arms, for with it you guarantee your right to defend your freedoms.   The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting,  its explicit purpose is to insure the people are armed so they may keep their gov't in check and revolt when necessary.  This is something the europeans never seemed to grasp, and is a large part in why their attempts at democracy are failing much more swiftly.

Theres no giant conspiracy to take away our rights, politicians do these things because they're misguided into thinking its the right thing to do,  pandering for votes, or have found a way to line their own pockets by doing so. 

I've talked to people overseas that criticise the US for having different laws from state to state.  This is one of the fundamental ideas that make our system great.  Decentralization.  The federal gov'ts role is limited by the constitution to a common currency, common defense, and regulation of interstate trade.  The congress has found massive ways to violate their powers under the regulation of interstate trade, however.  All other rights belong to the state, or the people.  Which, yes, is vague.

When you move the bulk of legislation to the state and local level,  you put it within peoples grasp.  Its much easier to feel your making a difference when you make a change that effects a local level.  Each state can make laws to suit its citizens best,  and each state can experiment with all kinds of laws, the best of which may be noticed by other states and duplicated. 

The basic idea behind the whole thing is that all humans are motivated by self-intrest.  By spreading out power as much as possible, and putting one power in check by another, we endeavor to use mans self-intrest to keep his peers in line by looking out for himself.  Its not perfect, but I believe its the best out of many flawed systems that we have yet seen.

To summarize, plenty of people still care, and it seems slightly more now thanks to the internet.  The bulk of the people don't really care and won't until things get worse.  Our government was cleverly enough designed to slow down things getting worse quite well.

To the americans, be wary of gov't fixes for any problem, free enterprise has always done so more efficiently.  If you're too lazy to pay much attention, either don't elect anyone that tries to increase the gov'ts hand in things, or at the very least don't re-elect anyone.

To all the non americans,  you don't really have a lot of room to criticise when you've let your gov't take away your right to defend yourself and your freedoms.



Edit: for clarity, proofread, wow this was long.  Also, if I didn't answer the original question, yes plenty of our rights have been eroded, through bad legislation, and worse supreme court decisions.  But some of us are still paying attention and care.

[The GrimSqueaker]

The media in the US donated 9 times to 1 to the democrat party. 

The statistic you quote was sourced from an MSNBC study which identified 125 (out of 143) journalists who contirbuted to Democrats and liberal causes (including moveon.org). Not merely to the Democratic party. Also to put the number in context:

The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms — at least among the donors, who are a tiny fraction of the roughly 100,000 staffers in newsrooms across the nation.

I suggest you read the article as it has some interesting findings in there that contradict your soundbite.

So please, endavor to find information from several widely varying sources.

That would indeed be nice.

This is something the europeans never seemed to grasp, and is a large part in why their attempts at democracy are failing much more swiftly.

I'm sure you'll be able to back that one up with some forms of measurement.

To all the non americans,  you don't really have a lot of room to criticise when you've let your gov't take away your right to defend yourself and your freedoms.

See the above. We've already been down the "guns guns guns!" line of thought plenty of times and it never leads anywhere pleasent.

Politcal talking points and soundbites are all very nice people but unless there's some backing for them they're all hot air and bluster. This thread especially needs actually background material and not mere statements.

[Mr.Peanut (Turtleproof)]

This is a good example of how people should educate themselves in- at least- rudimentary recent history.  I'm trying to say this without opening up the tired can o' worms, but think about past coverage of important events, especially military and diplomatic.  If you can even remember any event that happened before last week, how was the coverage biased and to benefit whom?  Whenever someone says "liberal media!" I think back to every major story and how it was covered in a way to defame or discredit so-called liberals, from the coverage of elections, to invasions, to irrelevant pop culture happenings.  The very idea that every citizen is either liberal or conservative- with no inbetween- is a ludicrous ploy to cloud perceptions and present a fictional version of reality as truth.

[ratfusion]

This is a good example of how people should educate themselves in- at least- rudimentary recent history.  I'm trying to say this without opening up the tired can o' worms, but think about past coverage of important events, especially military and diplomatic.  If you can even remember any event that happened before last week, how was the coverage biased and to benefit whom?  Whenever someone says "liberal media!" I think back to every major story and how it was covered in a way to defame or discredit so-called liberals, from the coverage of elections, to invasions, to irrelevant pop culture happenings.  The very idea that every citizen is either liberal or conservative- with no inbetween- is a ludicrous ploy to cloud perceptions and present a fictional version of reality as truth.

Theres now a new thread for media bias, but I'll agree that theres no simple left-right.   Personally I find the 2-axis political scale does a fairly good job:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

[The GrimSqueaker]

Advance warning - If any one posts something along the lines of "hey, I got X,Y on the test!" it will be killed on sight. We've had those threads before and this isn't one of them.

[Full Metal Geneticist]

OK, I've read through, a few observations.   First, the FOX news bit.  Its really no worse than any of the rest of the 24/7 news channels.   They're all biased.   The media in the US donated 9 times to 1 to the democrat party.  Information is a dangerous thing and theres still a lot to be had by controlling it,  the internet hasn't been able to stop that.  So please, endavor to find information from several widely varying sources.

I am sure reuters and the good ole auntie BBC would disagree with you on that. As would such institutions such as the independant who pride their name. Screw the US media, there are some sources that are valued more.

Next, Bush isn't all bad.  I tend to disagree with him, and I didn't vote for him.  But I'm sick and tired of all these attacks on him for things that aren't his fault.  Hes not evil, hes not a moron, but what he thinks will fix things differ fundamentally from my ideas.  It really upsets me when our media more or less publicly insults the president.  Disagreeing with him is fine, but if you hurl insults at him constantly the rest of the world starts to belive it.  They're embarassing us in front of the world, for ratings.

Clinton was impeached for lying about sleeping with someone else. Bush lied about a freaking war resulting in nearly half a million dead innocent people. Care to explain how a man can "kill" that many people and "not" be treated as bad?

An example; people blame him for the hurricanes.  Its completely retarded.  Its a state and local responsibilty, and it always has been. The FEMA exists to supplement state efforts,  after they request help.  Our retarded govenor (D)Blanco tried to play politics and not ask for help until it was too late.  I was hit by hurricane Rita, and I still believe this.

The tsunami which hundreds of thousands of people died in a wall of water around a 100 feet tall (i.e) 30 metres... hit third world countries... which are poor as dormice... and they reconstructed in less than 12 months... New Orleans was hit by something a lot more smaller that people knew was coming, yet managed to rack up such a bad death toll while turning the area into something out of Darfur and still has'nt had anything done about it. These were the poorest countries in the world. Yours is the richest. Do the math. Its shocking at best.

Next, why are americans, in general, so apathetic to their own system of goverment?   Because life is grand.  Our lives are so rich and enjoyable that most of us never take the time to follow any of the giant sea of bureocracy.  Clearly things are working out well enough that I can still enjoy my life.  There is truth to the statement:

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. - Thomas Jefferson

and because of this it is inevitable that we will slowly let various freedoms slip away slowly, until enough peoples lives suck.  When enough people are willing to be shot for an idea,  certainly we will have another revolution and restore most of our liberties.  And the cycle will repeat.  I think I read Jefferson believed the natural cycle of revolution was every 27 years.

Yet we never hear about the swiss doing the same? Or those extremely poor swedes. Or the brits, french, germans, japanese.... Or all those other countries where people live "teh awesomezorz" lives. And a lot of people in the US don't live such "luverly" lives. Infact quite a few live terrible ones. That murder rate is'nt a good stat.

Next subject, rights.   The most important of which is the right to bear arms, for with it you guarantee your right to defend your freedoms.   The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting,  its explicit purpose is to insure the people are armed so they may keep their gov't in check and revolt when necessary.  This is something the europeans never seemed to grasp, and is a large part in why their attempts at democracy are failing much more swiftly.

Defended those freedoms so nicely about that whole patriot act. Oh and remember all those guns you have in your arsenal are mere toys compared to any army. To keep your government in check you need a people that question that fight, that vote, that complain, that protest. You want to "keep them in check" you break rules enmasse to prove that you think that rule is silly and you start campaigning. Your guns are mere tools of violence, hell the police can match whatever the average gun owner has. The Army will simply murder any armed resistance. Unless you are prepared to take ludicrous casualties a la most resistance forces.

Theres no giant conspiracy to take away our rights, politicians do these things because they're misguided into thinking its the right thing to do,  pandering for votes, or have found a way to line their own pockets by doing so.  

Its happened before. Thats what happened in russia, china and 1936 germany. And the PATRIOT act is a massive loss of freedom which was celebrated not protested. Its like being happy about being burnt alive.

I've talked to people overseas that criticise the US for having different laws from state to state.  This is one of the fundamental ideas that make our system great.  Decentralization.  The federal gov'ts role is limited by the constitution to a common currency, common defense, and regulation of interstate trade.  The congress has found massive ways to violate their powers under the regulation of interstate trade, however.  All other rights belong to the state, or the people.  Which, yes, is vague.

Which only works when the people actually elect intelligent officials to represent them. Point in case is the state of kansas who ruined nearly 6 years worth of education with the removal of evolution from public school systems crippling their intellectual base for years upon years to come. It relies on everyone being extremely smart and doing the selfless thing and thinking about the people rather than the load of big business interests or religion. Which does'nt happen.

The basic idea behind the whole thing is that all humans are motivated by self-intrest.  By spreading out power as much as possible, and putting one power in check by another, we endeavor to use mans self-intrest to keep his peers in line by looking out for himself.  Its not perfect, but I believe its the best out of many flawed systems that we have yet seen.

There are other systems which work. There is always three options when you flip a coin.

To the americans, be wary of gov't fixes for any problem, free enterprise has always done so more efficiently.  If you're too lazy to pay much attention, either don't elect anyone that tries to increase the gov'ts hand in things, or at the very least don't re-elect anyone.

Such as privatisation of water in south america? HIV medicine in Africa? Infant formula in africa (Resulted in an unknown amount of children dying to diarrhoea believed to be rivalling malaria)? Enron? WorldCom? Your own health care system which refuses to provide cancer care to poor people cause their healthcare won't cover it? Yeah... Great things.

To all the non americans,  you don't really have a lot of room to criticise when you've let your gov't take away your right to defend yourself and your freedoms.

We learn to defend ourselves just fine. The government learns to fear the people. Learn from the French. They don't take things lying down. They make some sandwiches, grab a bottle of wine and go blockade streets to be-atch and moan at their government in their thousands to show their displeasure. They know the value of people power. So do countries like India whose people know the ways to cripple governments. They did it once with fantastic effect before. After all its very difficult if people who "mine coal" decide to stop working. Or if truck drivers do the same. Or if Doctors and nurses work to rule. We have a lot of weapons other than guns. And remember this, a gun makes you a killer. It makes you no different from any terrorist we hear about. Once you turn to the gun for freedom, you will use it to try and defend it and then you will use it yourself to remove it. Since all the guns that you can own in the US could'nt take down the police let alone the army. And who do you need to defend against? Are you saying that the worlds best country is so unsafe that you need guns. Its the US not Baghdad.

[ratfusion]

Clinton was impeached for lying about sleeping with someone else. Bush lied about a freaking war resulting in nearly half a million dead innocent people. Care to explain how a man can "kill" that many people and "not" be treated as bad?

I hate when people force me to defend his ass.  What exactly did he personally and maliciously lie about?  The stupid WMDs?  He acted on information provided by our intelligence, which other nations confirmed.  It wasn't just his idea or even the republicans.. you can find quotes of all the heads of the democrats saying we needed to go in there and get rid of them.  Now I don't agree with pre-emptive war, but congress apparently does.  How did Bush trick them all?  Hes a genius now?  I figure they did have weapons and moved em to Syria, anyhow.

An example; people blame him for the hurricanes.  Its completely retarded.  Its a state and local responsibilty, and it always has been. The FEMA exists to supplement state efforts,  after they request help.  Our retarded govenor (D)Blanco tried to play politics and not ask for help until it was too late.  I was hit by hurricane Rita, and I still believe this.

The tsunami which hundreds of thousands of people in a wall of water around a 100 feet tall (i.e) 30 metres... hit third world countries... which are poor as dormice... and they reconstructed in less than 12 months... New Orleans was hit by something a lot more smaller that people knew was coming, yet managed to rack up such a bad death toll while turning the area into something out of Darfur and still has'nt had anything done about it. These were the poorest countries in the world. Yours is the richest. Do the math. Its shocking at best.

What is shocking?  Most of New Orleans has long since been rebuilt.  Death toll?  There was a manditory evacuation, (which is manditory in name only, our gov't will let you make up your own mind) some people were stupid enough to stay, and paid the price.  I evacuated, I'm alive.  Personally, I like that people have the choice.

Yet we never hear about the swiss doing the same? Or those extremely poor swiss. Or the brits. Or all those other countries where people live "teh awesomezorz" lives. And a lot of people in the US don't live such "luverly" lives. Infact quite a few live terrible ones. That murder rate is'nt a good stat.

I'm not exactly sure what you meant.  We haven't had a revolution either, and europe is certainly not celebrating and massive amount of freedom.

Its happened before. Thats what happened in russia, china and 1936 germany. And the PATRIOT act is a massive loss of freedom which was celebrated not protested. Its like being happy about being burnt alive.

Ahh some of us did,  the patriot act is bullamphetamine parrot, and poorly named.

To the americans, be wary of gov't fixes for any problem, free enterprise has always done so more efficiently.  If you're too lazy to pay much attention, either don't elect anyone that tries to increase the gov'ts hand in things, or at the very least don't re-elect anyone.

Such as privatisation of water in south america? HIV medicine in Africa? Infant formula in africa (Resulted in an unknown amount of children dying to diarrhoea believed to be rivalling malaria)? Enron? WorldCom? Your own health care system which refuses to provide cancer care to poor people cause their healthcare won't cover it? Yeah... Great things.

Why does any of that require a US gov't fix, except arguably enron?

[The GrimSqueaker]

So many bullamphetamine parrot statements. So few actual sources or back ups. This thread has a limited life span.

I figure they did have weapons and moved em to Syria, anyhow.

Prove it or lose it. You're back to your soundbites and talking points.

[ratfusion]

Thats my opinion, I didn't allude otherwise.  Whos talking points am I using anyhow?  What makes it a talking point instead of just a point? 

Regardless, my point was what did Bush actually lie about?  How is he any more than just another politician that made a decision that we don't agree with?

[The GrimSqueaker]

Thats my opinion, I didn't allude otherwise.

If you can't back up that opinion with any evidence it has as much relevance as those who claim their arses were probed by aliens and that's why they smell of alcohol and woke up in the pig pen. 

Which brings us to talking points.  You did open the subject of media bias previously and you seem to be falling straight into the trap of it. If you believe such a statement, even as merely your own opinion, there had to be a basis for it. Otherwise you would have to accept FMG's statement that "Bush lied" and, being his own opinion, would require no further evidence or proof. I expect more than that from people and especially with a subject as sensitive as this.

Here's a link for you concerning "mistruths."

Edit: Now, for everyone, can we get back on topic at somepoint or should new topics be spawned? Think carefully before replying.

[jkmoore]

Being an american, I would like to say that I love what my country attempted to accomplish. I would also like to say that yes, I am disappointed that it failed to do so. Us americans are told in our childhood that this is a free country. It is not. I don't know just how ignorant americans are viewed to be, but want to make an effort to be more aware than the general public. I believe and hope that, more people in this country are beginning to realize just how naive they were.

[ratfusion]

A report prepared for a democrat and it concludes that they made misleading statements?  Thats an awfully weak conclusion for a report with a purpose.  If he was lying and we could prove it, well, we'd just get Cheney.  Of course perhaps we could get rid of them both, but then we'd get Pelosi, and shes been misleading since her first 2 weeks as speaker.  (I remember the deal with trying to raise the minimum wage, only one US location was excluded, US Samoa, I believe.  It turned out the big tuna fish company did a lot of processing there, and the company was headquartered in her district).

But it seems most likely hes deluded for whatever reason and thinks his agenda is best for the country.  I really don't enjoy defending him or the war in iraq.  The only good part of the war is that we got to undo a wrong from the first iraq war, when we encouraged the kurds to revolt (with suggestions of US backing) and then left and let saddam gas the snot out of them.  That and no one really is upset saddam is gone.  Its really upsetting to me now that its trendy to disagree with the war.  Everyone was all blinded by patriotism and gungho when it kicked off.   I was screaming at the TV in disbelief because we were attacking a country because they might attack us someday.

Regardless, we're straying away from the topic which was something along the lines of why don't americans care that the constitution isn't enforced, or are too stupid to know its not being enforced.  To which my answer still is, most of our lives are far too pleasant.  When government gets big and bad enough to make probably 30-40% of the populations life suck, we'll see another revolt.  Perhaps by votes, perhaps by force.