Have Gun, Will Travel. Sarah Palin a Good VP pick?

[Saxman]

lazs,

The simple truth is you can't have total equality and total liberty at the same time. It doesn't work.

Defending individual rights mean squat if I use my individual rights trample on yours. The government must take responsibility to ensure that everyone has the opportunity equal to EXERCISE their individual rights. Pure individualism DOES NOT ALLOW this because of simple human nature. Human beings NATURALLY are going to look out for one person or group: Themselves and their own families and to hell with anyone else's rights. We're a greedy and selfish species and you see this happening the world over from the beginning of recorded history right down to today. To use your own example of the West, that's EXACTLY what was happening out there. Miners, the railroads, free range ranchers, cattle barons, sheep herders, and small and large farmers were all at war with each other because each wanted the land for THEIR purpose and dammed if they were going to share it with anyone else.

It IS the protection of general welfare and the common good to ensure that ALL citizens are allowed the equal opportunity to exercise those rights. That's where socialism comes in, because left to itself society would naturally degenerate into the chaos of "survival of the fittest" and you'll see men like JP Morgan and the Rockefellers again who have a stranglehold on the national economy.

The problem is when the protection of the general welfare and common good goes TOO far and the need for the rights or contributions of the individual are ignored.

[RATTFINK]

I've met Sarah Palin in person, she's a nice lady 

[john9001]

JFK ...you are kidding right?

Does the Cuba missile crisis mean anything to you?

yes, it means that JFK failed to follow up on the bay of pigs and that brought the missiles to Cuba.

[Nwbie]

yes, it means that JFK failed to follow up on the bay of pigs and that brought the missiles to Cuba.

Understand the context of the quote before you jackboot your response
... And on that note - you think the Bay of Pigs was a good idea?

[DREDIOCK]

The right, when they see anyone saying anything that is to the left of what they believe, is pointed to and labeled a left winger or liberal.
The Left, when they see anyone saying anything to the right of them is pointed to and labeled a right winger.
The centrists and moderates are the ones that get pointed at by both sides.

Centrists and moderates see there is both good and bad from each side. And may seemingly lean left or right depending on the issue at hand.
THAT is me.

Laz, New Joisey is a Democratic state. Has been for a while.
New York is about as baseline liberal as you can get.

Lotta New Yawkas living in New Joisey these days.

San Franciscans arent left wing.
They are beyond it and should have a category all to themselves. Even the baseline Librals here think San Fransico is out there in the great beyond weird.
so that is a rather poor analogy

"I am being charitable when I say that you believe that you are centrist.. that you really don't know how far left you are... otherwise I would have to look at your pretend "fair and balanced" posts and conclude that you are no more honest than most lefties.
"   "
I too have watched your posts for years
The same could be said about you Laz. You may have been an individualist once. But I dont think you have yet realized how far right you have become

"
Your fair and balanced reasoning is like listening to NPR when they have a "discussion" ... "are the republicans truly evil or just really stupid bad people?"   "we will hear nancy pelosi on the truly evil and in defense of the republicans only being stupid and bad we will have jesse jackson.

The absurdidty of this statement only tells me that the only things that stick out in your mind are the posts of mine you do not agree with.
I've typed out alot of words in the last 8 years defending republican positions.
Certainly moreso then I have the left.
But as seems to be a typical movement on your part. I, as well as several others here Im sure have noticed
The moment someone speaks out against the right. or your positions in general. They are labeled by you a "liberal weenie". or an "Obamamama" supporter.
As though resorting to the tactics of a 10 year old might somehow change their minds.

If you were truely the "individualist" you claim to be. We should be seeing as many  rants about right "wing nutjobs" as we do "Left wing weenies"
But we dont.
Oh sure there may be one here and there. but not everyone agrees with their lover all the time.
By and large. the vast majority of your posts reaffirm your commitment to the right and condemn the left.
I encourage you to go through your posts and prove me wrong.
I encourage ANYONE to go through Laz's posts and prove to me how much of an "individualist" he is.


"Promoting the general Welfare" is in the Constitution as well as the second. but Im sure you know that already.

PURPOSE AND EFFECT OF THE PREAMBLE

Although the preamble is not a source of power for any department of the Federal Government, 1 the Supreme Court has often referred to it as evidence of the origin, scope, and purpose of the Constitution. 2 ''Its true office,'' wrote Joseph Story in his COMMENTARIES, ''is to expound the nature and extent and application of the powers actually conferred by the Constitution, and not substantively to create them. For example, the preamble declares one object to be, 'to provide for the common defense.' No one can doubt that this does not enlarge the powers of Congress to pass any measures which they deem useful for the common defence. But suppose the terms of a given power admit of two constructions, the one more restrictive, the other more liberal, and each of them is consistent with the words, but is, and ought to be, governed by the intent of the power; if one could promote and the other defeat the common defence, ought not the former, upon the soundest principles of interpretation, to be adopted?'' 3

1 Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 22 (1905).

2 E.g., the Court has read the preamble as bearing witness to the fact that the Constitution emanated from the people and was not the act of sovereign and independent States, McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 403 (1819) Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419, 471 (1793); Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304, 324 (1816), and that it was made for, and is binding only in, the United States of America. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 251 (1901); In re Ross, 140 U.S. 453, 464 (1891).

3 1 J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Boston: 1833), 462. For a lengthy exegesis of the preamble phrase by phrase, see M. Adler & W. Gorman, The American Testament (New York: 1975), 63-118.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/preamble/

[Yeager]

Understand the context of the quote before you jackboot your response
... And on that note - you think the Bay of Pigs was a good idea?

It was a good idea, right up to the point where JFK decided to WITHOLD the US air support he had already guaranteed he would send during the invasion.

Of course you are happy and pleased no doubt that Cuba has had such a wonderful era under the tutelage of the great one, the messiah, Fidel.

Im also betting you were a grand supporter of Janet Reno and her wonderful decision to return Elian Gonzalez to Cuba after his mother lost her life trying to
free him from a life of communism there. 

[Nwbie]

It was a good idea, right up to the point where JFK decided to WITHOLD the US air support he had already guaranteed he would send during the invasion.

Of course you are happy and pleased no doubt that Cuba has had such a wonderful era under the tutelage of the great one, the messiah, Fidel.

Im also betting you were a grand supporter of Janet Reno and her wonderful decision to return Elian Gonzalez to Cuba after his mother lost her life trying to
free him from a life of communism there. 

Wow - you sure make some major assumptions... 
Also....this still does not show how your response to the original post relates to anything...get off the coffee, you are a little high strung..
Why do you assume I think that Fidel was a messiah?...your words...  But, the bay of pigs was a cluster*** from the beginning..and the promise of military involvement ...where do you find that fact?..or is it a story you were told and you believe?...
As for Elian Gonzalez....  last thing I read about him was that he was quite content.....he is with his father..who had every right to demand that his child be returned to him...How it was handled unfortunately was very poorly done...but was the legal and right thing to do...maybe he didn't want to end up thinking that it was wrong to live in Cuba...just because you do...maybe he wanted to live with his father...not some loony aunt who used the media ...or do fathers rights not fit into your picture of the perfect world?

[DREDIOCK]

All due respect Dred, it sounds like you are confused - or talking apples and oranges.  If your decisions are based on principle, it doesn't matter what "side" others may assign to you.  You make decisions either towards socialism or away from it.  Towards liberty or away from it.  Towards the original consitution or away from it.  

Rather than Democrats and Republicans (composed of people), its better to think in terms of liberalism and conservatism (ideologies)   Then, it is easy to know where you will make your stand.

I am all for the original Constitution . But just because some of my views may seem to be left doesnt mean I am for socialism.
Example. I am for some social programs yes.

 I am for tossing someone a rope so they can help climb out of a hole.
but your going to have to do the climbing yourself.

I'm for giving someone a pick and shovel. but you have to find and dig the goldmine yourself.
Im for giving people training to do better rather then saying "heh, sucks to be you"

Im for helping people help themselves. Not giving them all they  want.
Long term it is in everyone's benefit.

By just giving out welfare, or ignoring the situation. You only feed the problem and make it worse.
I would hope we would have learned some lessons from things like the French revolution.


If you think we should cut out welfare. Fine Im all for it.
But if your going to cut out welfare. Cut out welfare for everyone. Rich and poor alike.

 I am against welfare for already ridiculously wealthy corporations as well.
I am also against giving out welfare to states. Which  these days amounts to little more then federal blackmail and  bribary of states.

If the Gov is going to be int he business of handing out money to companies. It should be to the small companies. not the already large and hugely successful ones. Which little by little are squeezing the smaller upcoming businesses out of existence.
.
Thats not socialism. Thats investment into capitolism

We are as a country only going to be as strong as our weakest link.
It is only common sense that we try to strengthen those weak links with things like training.

Im not talking handouts. Im talking something that has to be worked for.
Toss em a rope. but they have to do the climbing themselves.

I agree that if we were to follow the left we would head towards socialism
But if we only follow the right. We are headed towards feudalism.

Neither one is liberty

[Saxman]

In other words, as I said it:

The government's responsibility is NOT to MAKE everyone equal, but to ensure everyone has the equal OPPORTUNITY.

What you make FROM that opportunity is YOUR job, not the government's.

[Urchin]

Might as well educate yourselves about the Trooper Thing. Lots of speculation and misinformation out there.

Long-Standing Feud in Alaska Embroils Palin

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/30/AR2008083002366.html




IF that is true, the Trooper SHOULD have been fired immediately.


Now, if you at least read that whole article, you have something to discuss.

Toad -

That article definately gives me the impression she was trying to get the guy fired.  Whether he deserved it or not, I don't know.  But even looking at "her side of the story" it seems as though they were doing their best to get the guy fired from his job.

[lazs2]

saxman... please give me an example of where mean old human nature would prevent individualism with a good and fair court system from working. 

lazs

[Toad]

But, the bay of pigs was a cluster*** from the beginning..and the promise of military involvement ...where do you find that fact?..or is it a story you were told and you believe?...

John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum

JFK in History: The Bay of Pigs

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/JFK+in+History/JFK+and+the+Bay+of+Pigs.htm

What Went Wrong

The first major error occurred on April 15, 1961, when eight B-26 bombers left Nicaragua to bomb Cuban airfields. The operation failed to destroy the entire arsenal of planes, leaving most of Castro's air force intact. The CIA had used obsolete World War II B-26 bombers, and painted them to look like Cuban air force planes. As news broke of the attack and American complicity became apparent after photos of the repainted planes became public, President Kennedy cancelled the second air strike.

On April 17, the Cuban-exile invasion force, or Brigade 2506, landed at beaches along the Bay of Pigs and immediately came under heavy fire. The planes left unharmed in the earlier air attack strafed the invaders, sank two escort ships, and destroyed half of the exile's air support. Bad weather hampered the ground force, which had to work with soggy equipment and low stores of ammunition.

During the next 24 hours, Castro had 20,000 troops advancing on the beach and the Cuban Air Force continued to control the skies. As the situation grew increasingly grim, President Kennedy authorized an “air-umbrella” at dawn on April 19, which called for six unmarked American fighter planes to help defend the Brigade's B-26 aircraft flying from Nicaragua.  But the B-26s arrived an hour late (most likely due to time zone confusion) and were shot down by the Cubans. The invasion was crushed later that day. Some exiles escaped to the sea, while the rest were killed or rounded up and imprisoned by Castro’s forces. Almost 1200 Brigade members had surrendered and more than 100 had been killed.

There's where you find that fact. The second strike could easily have made ALL the difference. Without any aircraft, Castro would have been on the wrong side of the air superiority issue.

Not enough proof?

Time Magazine:  Bay of Pigs Revisited Friday, Feb. 01, 1963

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,829744-1,00.html

Targets of Opportunity. Whether or not the invaders were promised U.S. air cover, they were indeed promised air cover of a sort. It was to be provided by some 20 obsolescent B26. bombers, resurrected from U.S. Air Force storage by the CIA. The pilots were mostly Cuban exiles, but some were U.S. citizens (at least one U.S. pilot was killed during the invasion attempt). The bombers took off from a CIA-managed base at Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua.

The basic mission of this semi-clandestine bomber force was to destroy Castro's planes on the ground before the invasion was launched. That task, the invasion planners decided, would take three days of repeated strikes at "targets of opportunity." After that, the bombers were supposed to provide close support for the invaders as they moved over the beaches. But shortly before the invasion got under way, White House orders went out limiting the B-26 force to two pre-invasion strikes. The first ineffectual sortie, two days before Dday, set off rumblings at the United Nations, so Kennedy called off the second strike, scheduled for the morning of the invasion. After the invaders scrambled ashore, Kennedy ordered the second strike reinstated, but it was too little and way too late.

Apparently YOU are the one believing what "you were told to believe".

History; don't be afraid of it, it's your friend.

[Toad]

Urchin, I'm sure we have not heard the last of it. A little more digging and detail won't hurt.

If the guy made a death threat on your father and you later became gov, would you try to get him fired?

I admit I'm not a perfect person and I probably would try to get him fired.

[lazs2]

we can all agree in equality of opportunity.   That has nothing to do with extorting good from a person who has earned them and giving to someone who hasn't.

I give freely but I resent you telling me what is for "the common good".   

Providing for the common good to me means that the government provides the means of addressing grievences in a fair and just court system.  That is all the government you need.. that and a wing of the court to enforce it.

I am not an anarchist but close to it.. the minimum government is the best.

I hear saxman and dred tell me about the common good and how just and fair and inevitable and necessary it is yet.. when you read their posts you see nothing but a slippery slope and more government than any of the founders ever invisioned... in fact... more government than any early 1900's sci fi writer ever dreamed of.

Nope.. you simply can not allow... no matter what.. the majority.. a democracy.. to vote away individual rights under any guise.. especially that of "the common good"

There is no ill that a limited government with stong defense of individual rights and a just court system could not fix.

There is no ill that a strong government that is pure democracy can not make worse.

dred..  I would love to see examples of where I have gone straight republican when they were trampling individual rights... 

Perhaps it is my stance on legalizing all drugs?   Maybe defending unborn citizens?  perhaps it is my thinking on concealed carry and the right to defend yourself?   Maybe my views on all victimless crime?   The patriot act? 

Nope.. I can make the right wing conservatives as angry as I make you liberals.

If I were a liberal tho.. I would not pretend to be a centrist.   



lazs

[Hangtime]

Interesting discussion developing...

Laz..  You need 200 acres up the back of a valley. Call it 'Coventry'. Load up a wagon, head on in and live that 'individual' life; while you still have a chance. You won't have that opportunity for long... bear in mind, a bunch socialist weenies will be trying to snoop and trespass, so keep yer powder dry. When they drag you back out and stick you in the slammer for whatever BS transgression they can pin on yah, I suspect you'll need a liberal weenie lawyer.

Dred.. You and I will be raging against the machine till they stick us in the ground. It's nice to have principals, but like everything else, it's got a price. Unless we're standing guard mount at laz's wall, If we want to keep our jobs, plates on our cars, gas in the tank and food on the table, we're gonna have to accept the fascist coupon book and shop wallmart, fasten our seatbelts & stop for the red lights on the way home.

IMHO.. it's now down to being all about the cheese. How much 'they' got; who makes it, what kind, where I can get some, how much it's gonna cost me. For the last 40 years, the price has been going up... as with everything else cheese related. This once promising land of 'freedom and equality' has devolved into a facsist 'have and have not' society. Those that got the cheese, those that don't. That's the choice... accept the covenant, get your cheese... defy it, no cheese.

Not much wiggle room for 'principals'.... I agree, they are precious, but abstract ideals in a reality of cheese leave the rats with the supply lines pretty much in the drivers seat.