you miss my point about wiretaps. The government has been listening to phone calls for years, and we have no reasonable expectation of privacy. In other words, we already know that they could be listening, so the first amendment does not apply.
Do you have anything to offer besides blindness and hatred?
Technically, neoLiberalism does. Classical Liberalism is the foundation of this country. Similarly, neo conservatism does the same and that is what is driving the current Republican party and has been for decades.
I assumed we would be using liberal and conservative in American sense of the terms, here. I honestly didn't believe clarification would actually be necessary. oddly enough, as the left moves further away from classical liberalism, the conservatives in this country are closer to its founding principles than the liberals are. You should read "the constitution of liberty" by Freidrich Hayek, it is an excellent piece in favor of classical liberalism by an Austrian economist.
As much as I hate to say it, you have provided nothing here at all besides assertions without any supporting evidence whatsoever. Perhaps you could share some actual data? After all, from what I have seen and participated in, the Republican party consistantly supports entreprenuers and small business. Really, the more liberal aspects of the Democratic party seem to completely fail to understand rights and liberties. They tend to see solutions rather than trade offs, and would rather take away our rights to decide and decide for us. Lets face it, the Republican party has been a lot more diverse in its ideas and theories than the dogmaticized left. Liberals force everyone in their party to conform; of course Bush has doctrinized the party more than I like, but he has lost support from republicans due to that. I tend to take a more pluralistic and systemic view, and liberalism in the U.S. today attempts to completely deny the impact that the very composition of our society has; ultimately, I fear that we will only loose rights to the liberals.
As far as wiretaps, that's not a conservative liberal issue. Lets not forget that before Al Gore was blue in the face castigating Bush for constitutional actions, he was supporting Carnivore and Echelon under Clinton. I honestly don't mind if the NSA listens for potential threats to our security, the people of Britian were in an outcry after the London bombings because their government didn't do just that.
I wonder how much would have been spent in future generations dealing with problems from the middle east that can be solved now?
do you know what is unconstitutional? FISA!!! It is unconstitutional for one branch to limit the power of another branch, but Fisa gives the President to use the unwarrented wiretaps for foreigners or U.S. citizens in contact with suspected foreigners, but then FISA says the president must get approval. That is unconstitutional.
This is not just bombast, I travel overseas about half the time
Wow, you must know more than everyone from another country that I have ever met. You must also know more about the opinions of people than they do themselves, as a large majority of Iraqis still support the original American liberation of their country.
As far as global warming, scientifically speaking humanity has thus far lived in the tail end of an ice age, which means the temperatures are bound to rise. Also, the vast majority of damage that we have done the atmosphere has been done by the large amounts of domesticated animals we have raised througout history as well as the millions of trees felled throughout history for farms and cities. We have done more damage with all of our accumulated campfires than we could ever hope to do with cars for many generations to come.
Oil companies are preparing to move into other niches or be destroyed, oil will not be around much longer. They need capital to invest. Besides, they have always operated on a thin margin, oil exploration, transportation, and collection is hugely expensive. PNC bank here where I live has consistantly reported profit margins much higher than all of the largest oil companies. Once more, you should read about two things: supply and demand, and China.
To stop terrorism, we need to get rid of repressive regimes who use a fanatical faith to control and exploit their populations. It may be an idea, but it is an idea propogated by men. legitimizing these men legitimizes the ideas they spread and violence they wreak. Give people self determination, and it is a chance for true peace.
Let's not forget that before the U.S. wars in the middle east, there was no peace. Just because we get involved doesn't suddenly make it war. The regions people have long been suffereing from each other and repressors, they had no real peace. Democracy is a chance for everyone to have real peace.
As opposed to invading a secular country, destabilizing the region and creating more terrorism and violence.
Stop murdering innocent people, and surprisingly enough, they're less likely to want to murder you. Simple concept there, Sparky.
Terrorism will never stop. Pretending it's something you can declare war on is the height of idiocy. Stopping support for brutal dictators and keeping our nose out of other people's lives will do far more to solve the issue than making up a bunch of ridiculous lies as an excuse to invade a country does nothing but promote terrorism as it *is* terrorism.
Stop murdering innocent people? I guess Iraq is exempt from this mandate. over four-hundred thousand dead in mass graves alone? genocide? It seems to me that empowering people to control their own lives will do far more to defeat Islamo-Fascism than pandering to criminals who repress and control their people. Most terrorists grow up in nations that preach and indoctrinate hatred as a means of control; give them democracy, and it is an opportunity to start anew.
Terrorism is an idea, an idea propogated by men in power as a means to control populations. Free the populace from these men, give them democracy, and the seeds af hate begin to vanish.
They do exalt the state above all at every opportunity in direct contradiction of the spirit and letter of the constitution
Funny, I always thought it was the liberals who want to give the government control. You know, nationalized healthcare, pro-labor, welfare state, anti-business. As a conservative, I try to keep the government out of the free market as much as is possible. Liberalism merely takes away peoples individual rights and responsibilities and makes them entirely dependant upon the government.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, I meant the fourth amendment.
you miss my point about wiretaps. The government has been listening to phone calls for years, and we have no reasonable expectation of privacy. In other words, we already know that they could be listening, so the first amendment does not apply.
Do you have anything to offer besides blindness and hatred?
I assumed we would be using liberal and conservative in American sense of the terms, here. I honestly didn't believe clarification would actually be necessary. oddly enough, as the left moves further away from classical liberalism, the conservatives in this country are closer to its founding principles than the liberals are. You should read "the constitution of liberty" by Freidrich Hayek, it is an excellent piece in favor of classical liberalism by an Austrian economist.
As much as I hate to say it, you have provided nothing here at all besides assertions without any supporting evidence whatsoever. Perhaps you could share some actual data? After all, from what I have seen and participated in, the Republican party consistantly supports entreprenuers and small business. Really, the more liberal aspects of the Democratic party seem to completely fail to understand rights and liberties. They tend to see solutions rather than trade offs, and would rather take away our rights to decide and decide for us. Lets face it, the Republican party has been a lot more diverse in its ideas and theories than the dogmaticized left. Liberals force everyone in their party to conform; of course Bush has doctrinized the party more than I like, but he has lost support from republicans due to that. I tend to take a more pluralistic and systemic view, and liberalism in the U.S. today attempts to completely deny the impact that the very composition of our society has; ultimately, I fear that we will only loose rights to the liberals.
As far as wiretaps, that's not a conservative liberal issue. Lets not forget that before Al Gore was blue in the face castigating Bush for constitutional actions, he was supporting Carnivore and Echelon under Clinton. I honestly don't mind if the NSA listens for potential threats to our security, the people of Britian were in an outcry after the London bombings because their government didn't do just that.
do you know what is unconstitutional? FISA!!! It is unconstitutional for one branch to limit the power of another branch, but Fisa gives the President to use the unwarrented wiretaps for foreigners or U.S. citizens in contact with suspected foreigners, but then FISA says the president must get approval. That is unconstitutional.
Wow, you must know more than everyone from another country that I have ever met. You must also know more about the opinions of people than they do themselves, as a large majority of Iraqis still support the original American liberation of their country.
As far as global warming, scientifically speaking humanity has thus far lived in the tail end of an ice age, which means the temperatures are bound to rise. Also, the vast majority of damage that we have done the atmosphere has been done by the large amounts of domesticated animals we have raised througout history as well as the millions of trees felled throughout history for farms and cities. We have done more damage with all of our accumulated campfires than we could ever hope to do with cars for many generations to come.
Oil companies are preparing to move into other niches or be destroyed, oil will not be around much longer. They need capital to invest. Besides, they have always operated on a thin margin, oil exploration, transportation, and collection is hugely expensive. PNC bank here where I live has consistantly reported profit margins much higher than all of the largest oil companies. Once more, you should read about two things: supply and demand, and China.
To stop terrorism, we need to get rid of repressive regimes who use a fanatical faith to control and exploit their populations. It may be an idea, but it is an idea propogated by men. legitimizing these men legitimizes the ideas they spread and violence they wreak. Give people self determination, and it is a chance for true peace.
Let's not forget that before the U.S. wars in the middle east, there was no peace. Just because we get involved doesn't suddenly make it war. The regions people have long been suffereing from each other and repressors, they had no real peace. Democracy is a chance for everyone to have real peace.
Stop murdering innocent people? I guess Iraq is exempt from this mandate. over four-hundred thousand dead in mass graves alone? genocide? It seems to me that empowering people to control their own lives will do far more to defeat Islamo-Fascism than pandering to criminals who repress and control their people. Most terrorists grow up in nations that preach and indoctrinate hatred as a means of control; give them democracy, and it is an opportunity to start anew.
Terrorism is an idea, an idea propogated by men in power as a means to control populations. Free the populace from these men, give them democracy, and the seeds af hate begin to vanish.
Funny, I always thought it was the liberals who want to give the government control. You know, nationalized healthcare, pro-labor, welfare state, anti-business. As a conservative, I try to keep the government out of the free market as much as is possible. Liberalism merely takes away peoples individual rights and responsibilities and makes them entirely dependant upon the government.