Quote:
Originally Posted by bobabode
I thought we is the gubmint since they gave everyone the vote.  Messy and as complicated as it is, it's far better than a corptoccracy or a anarchist system where everybody is on their own and free to do as they please without any external moral compass. |
Do you think that government bureaucrats are more moral—or better, without bias—than the market? Furthermore, I thought the left didn't like a moral compass, particularly that of the church, but is there an effective replacement? Moral relativism will also lead to anarchy.
Quote:
That's my take on the "less governmint is better" crowd, they aren't anything more than anarchists hellbent on some darwinian quest to strip everyone of their hardwon protections and civil rights.  and in some cases all of their loot.
|
Considering those rights of which you speak emanated from less centralized government and not more centralized government, I would think that small government, which really means decentralized government, would be supported by the left if they'd vanquish their desire to create preferential systems that treat individuals differently based wholly on perceived differences.
Quote:
The feeding frenzy on the middle class has gone on far too long. How about those so called professionals in D.C. come up with better protection for the citizens instead of the classic Orwellian "Citizens United" ruling. It's even couched in doublespeak straight out of "1984."
|
What "feeding frenzy?" Just about everyone is materiallly better off than they once were in the United States. BTW, the SC Citizen United decision is also applicable to groups on the left. Why arbitrarily limit any group of individuals from expressing their political interests based only on the organization's structure?
Obama is putting a medal on Bob Dylan. That was nice. Of course, Bob doesn't speak.