This seems like a fairly common explination of our political system, espoused by Ralph Nader, Michael Moore, and John McCain, among others. However, I often hear the accusation but seldom hear the evidence.
I would be interested in any hard evidence of corporations controlling politicians.
Indeed, one might say that the NRA controls Congress by giving large sums of money to politicians to buy their votes when gun-control related bills come up for a vote. And this assertion would seem to be born out by looking at the votes of those who received large sums of money from the NRA -- they most often vote along the lines that the NRA would like.
But I wonder if there might be a different explination. Perhaps the NRA is giving money to people who it knows already share its views. Just as I sometimes give a small contribution to a political candidate that I want to win, the NRA gives vast somes of money to politicians that it wants to win. They're just bigger and more organized. But keep in mind -- the NRA, and organizations like it (hopefully to include GeekPAC) are supported by tens of thousands of dues-paying members.
So, corporations, organizations, and hopefully the "Geek lobby" are simply conduits to organize the political desires of individuals. I can't think of anything more democratic.
As a side note, George Will has written an interesting column about the current scheme to limit free expression in the name of "reform" of our allegedly corporate-owned political system.
And where in these articles can I find the justification for targeting civilians?
It is no surprise that the Palestinians and much of the Arab world hate us -- they are ruled by tyrants who keep them ignorant and incite them with state-run media preaching anti-Americanism. Just a couple days ago, Yasser Arafat was on his state-run media calling for holy war and jihad. His men order terrorist attacks inside Israel.
The Palestinians are not inherantly bad people, but they are caught in a corrupt orwellian system which prevents free expression and, more to the point, access to truth. Because of this, they make bad decisions based on erroneous information and attitudes.
As mentioned above, the President did not suggest compulsory military service. Rather, he asked us to volunteer 4000 hours or two years over our entire lifetime in volunteer work.
That's hardly an errosion of freedom. Its also doesn't diminish human rights.
Clearly, actually listening to, watching, or reading the speech is helpful in not making ludicrous claims regarding the "whole anti-terrorism" thing or the "exact losses of freedom" that you fail to specify.
Slashdot Mirror
No government service is free for anyone who pays taxes.
This seems like a fairly common explination of our political system, espoused by Ralph Nader, Michael Moore, and John McCain, among others. However, I often hear the accusation but seldom hear the evidence.
I would be interested in any hard evidence of corporations controlling politicians.
Indeed, one might say that the NRA controls Congress by giving large sums of money to politicians to buy their votes when gun-control related bills come up for a vote. And this assertion would seem to be born out by looking at the votes of those who received large sums of money from the NRA -- they most often vote along the lines that the NRA would like.
But I wonder if there might be a different explination. Perhaps the NRA is giving money to people who it knows already share its views. Just as I sometimes give a small contribution to a political candidate that I want to win, the NRA gives vast somes of money to politicians that it wants to win. They're just bigger and more organized. But keep in mind -- the NRA, and organizations like it (hopefully to include GeekPAC) are supported by tens of thousands of dues-paying members.
So, corporations, organizations, and hopefully the "Geek lobby" are simply conduits to organize the political desires of individuals. I can't think of anything more democratic.
As a side note, George Will has written an interesting column about the current scheme to limit free expression in the name of "reform" of our allegedly corporate-owned political system.
Sorry -- forgot to mention that you might want to check out this site: http://www.memri.org/ for English translations of Arabic and Farsi media.
And where in these articles can I find the justification for targeting civilians?
It is no surprise that the Palestinians and much of the Arab world hate us -- they are ruled by tyrants who keep them ignorant and incite them with state-run media preaching anti-Americanism. Just a couple days ago, Yasser Arafat was on his state-run media calling for holy war and jihad. His men order terrorist attacks inside Israel.
The Palestinians are not inherantly bad people, but they are caught in a corrupt orwellian system which prevents free expression and, more to the point, access to truth. Because of this, they make bad decisions based on erroneous information and attitudes.
As mentioned above, the President did not suggest compulsory military service. Rather, he asked us to volunteer 4000 hours or two years over our entire lifetime in volunteer work. That's hardly an errosion of freedom. Its also doesn't diminish human rights. Clearly, actually listening to, watching, or reading the speech is helpful in not making ludicrous claims regarding the "whole anti-terrorism" thing or the "exact losses of freedom" that you fail to specify.