If you think the Republicans are in favor of small government please show me, aside from their rhetoric, where they have practiced what they preach? I am perfectly willing to concede that it may be necessary for the Federal government to abridge some of our privacy in a time of war. However, I think that it ought to be done consitutionally that is with judicial oversight. The FISA courts have never turned down any governmental request to wire tap and they can seek a warant ex post facto. So why not do this according to the law. Speed is supposedly the reason but they can, as I noted above seek a warrant after the fact. Can it be that they are spying on those who have little to do with terrorism? How can we tell if this is paranoia or the truth? I'd feel better if our government followed the law. Wouldn't you?

If you presuppose that I feel that religion is a personal matter then you are correct. If you surmise that I think sexual matters are private you surmise correctly. If you assume that I think health matters are private then you'd be correct.

Would I be in favor of lower taxes? Sure. What would you give up? I do believe that each generation ought to pay its own way. The idea of placing the cost of today on to my children and grandchildren as these Republicans have chosen to do, I find anethema.

If you assume that I can accept the use of government power to rectify private corporate misdeeds then you are correct. Would I wish it otherwise? Certainly. You argue that Republicans are in favor of small goverment? They speak the language but have yet to walk the walk. I look for evidence not mere words. They speak the language of lower taxes but ( and here Democrates are as guilty ) construct a tax system that is not progressive and which foists upon salaried workers a larger share of the tax burden. I would think that those who work ought to retain a larger share of the efforts. If I had to choose I would tax investments over labor. I'd rather reward effort over the luck of birth. I think the statistics do not lie. The super rich and corporations do not pay their share of the freight. Individual workers do.

These arguements take us all over the map. A coal miner understands he is practicing a dangerous job. But a mine owner can always find someone willing to take the place of an existing worker and if profits are more desirable than worker safety then what will that businessman do? You think it good, as does Tom Delay, to do away with the EPA in part because it would not allow him to use certain poisons when he was in the extermination business? There is no simple answer. Reglation is only as good as the regulator and the political will to carry through with that regulation. If the regulator does not do his job or is bribed then it does not work.

However, I think I am on the side of reason. It is not merely that I think you are wrong but you are overlooking deeds in favor of words. My rant began because someone made a joke about "Democrates" objecting to our government spying on its citizens. How can this be amusing, why would we all not object and why would a conservative not also be up in arms? One's beliefs ought to be tested by reality. If not it's religion. If you are truely a small government conservative how can you countance this crew of Republicans?

Alan

I dropped off a package today and they merely asked to see it. Never took it from me or scanned it.

The ups reds must have been reading this thread! good job guys!

Well, if I recall correctly, we have our Supreme Court to thank for that one. And lest anyone thinks Tom is exagerrating, it really does apply to things like shopping centers. If a city decides that a shopping center would work really well where your house is, well, "goodbye house". Used to be used for only extremely important publics works projects such as expanding a major highway, but now it could be a shipping center or anything a city thinks would be "good for the city".

Phil,

I had promised some examples of how the government is holding people incognito without charging them. There are lots of cases and I don't claim this is a perfect one but here was a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Link: washingtonpost.com]

Here are a few relevant quotes:


So for 7 months we hold an innocent man incognito. His family thinks he is dead. Doesn't sound like how I want my government to operate. I don't have a problem with our goverment holding someone for a visa issue but NOT this way.


I've read of worst cases than this but this one has been well reported by reputable news sources. Like I said, who knows how many cases there are because when a government can imprison people in secrecy for indefinite periods of time WITHOUT charging the, it makes it a little hard to rerpot on it!

I also dropped a package* at my local UPS Store, to Miami, and they didn't ask to see anything at all.

*A box of 1- and 2-gang TwistLock power inlet assemblies, and matching female cord ends.

Thanks Q, I'll let you know what I think.

Ummm...

Ummm....

Ummm...

Did you skip this?

Or did you not notice this?

I'm not willing to say the side in power now has all the answers or is doing the right thing all the time or even some of the time. That's a discussion that leads nowhere.

I'm equally unwilling to allow that the other side, if it were in power, would be less corrupt and more able to do the right thing. That's equally intellectually dishonest.

Did you read this?


I added this for you Alan. Have one of your kids NEVER come to you and said "She is being bad!!" and then the one accused says, "Yeah, but you should hear what he did to me!!" Not who is innocent, but who is less guilty.

That can be the tone of the interchange here. Shall we keep the above style of jousting out of our discussion?

That is also why I mentioned in an earlier post that this discussion, with no absolute basis of right and wrong, leads nowhere. You said yourself:


I'm willing to let you believe what you want and not call you lame, idiotic, sitting on your brain, brain dead, and all the other things you revert to on a regular basis. I just see it as your world view and leave it at that. You on the other hand, in the name of superior study, knowledge, wisdom, and so on, are happy to take your friends here and not just dialogue with them but berate them in any manner you choose. Is there a difference in our approach? Do you care to pass judgment on that too?

I need clarification: My understanding from this is that you don't like religions or belief systems because they contain too many things that are unprovable. Did I get that right?

Don't you celebrate the Passover every year?

Am I missing something here?

And if I am not missing something...


Hmmm, I must be missing something.

US Postal Service is no longer part of the US corporate government, which when it was, was under the control of the military, it was sold years ago to the private sector. For those who dont know, the Federal reserve system also has no legitimate tie with the federal government, never has, it also has no cash nor Gold on hand, all it has is a bunch of big ass computers that move imaginary money around the world whilst keeping track of whos doing what withthe digital money, like when you use your lic. to ship your package. So were you trying to use non plastic cash to ship that package? If you did, then they would want some way to keep track of you now wouldnt they

Where did you get the idea I am not religious? Perhaps because I do not attend church? Hopefully, that might be made understandable as I am not a Christian. However, I am not someone who believes that religion ends with the 613 commandments in the Torah. I do not take the myth of the story of Honukkah seriously. The miracle of one day's oil lasting eight. I do take the story of the Maccabees seriously and it is that story and its lessons that I teach my children. While we have our share of myths Judiasm is predicated on law and not faith. Talmudic study is not based upon ego. If I ask you a question to which I know the answer and you do not I am obliged to supply it. The goal is knowledge and, by closer observance of the Lord's laws, an attempt to come closer to God. It is rationality predicated upon the irrational fact that the Torah came from God. Think you can prove it did or did not?

Like Gary, you assume facts that cannot be proven. You have no proof that Democrates would be as corrupt as these Republicans because there are no Democrates in power at the moment. You have examples on the local level and from the past. But you have no proof that the corruption amoung Republican Congressional leaders would be the case if it were Democrates in power. What ever happened to individual responsibilty for his own acts and behaviors? If your next door neighbor committed adultry might it be acceptable for me to argue that you would have done the same if given the opportunity? Are people not held accountable by their actions anymore? You excuse corruption and malfeasence with the dismissive retort that all politicians are guilty. To a degree that may be turue but it overlooks the facts. Not all policticans are as cravenly greedy as this crew. You may have to raise money but you don't have to sell your office to do it; nor should you need to launder money.

You are willing to forgive and overlook these Republican misdeeds because they play on your team. You are willing to accept the words without the deeds. Tom, you are the one who wrote that Republicans are for small government. I sure do not see where this can be proven. I see where they mouth the words but I look at the legislation they pass as a more accurate indicator of what they are really believe. I cannot prove that the Eternal light did not indeed burn for eight days with one's day's ration of oil. As it was a miricale I can believe it was true as an article of faith.

The fact is that this crew of dishonest Republican politicans do not support the values or ideas you claim to hold. But you spoke about them as if they do. The hated Clinton balanced the budget, recorded record supluses and his issues-- which all of us knew about when and if we voted for him--were personal failings not all that unusual in powerful and successful men. I am not justifying infidelity but if I have to choose among flaws I'll take sexual infidelity over this dishonest administration in power. They slander all oponents, and it's made worse in that they dishonor men like McCain and Kerry who did serve and who served with disticntion when they found ways to avoid that service. They pay lip service to small government but I have not seen any attempt to make it smaller. Indeed they have dispensed government largess at record levels not even big spending Democrates ever attempted. Give me Mr. Livingstone and his private indescretions over DeLay and his public malfeaseance.

Clinton had Eschilon. Only Eschilon had FISA approval and did not spy on American citizens, no matter what the ding bat ditta head tells you. I do listen to Hannratty and dingbaugh on occasion. Howard Stern dispenses more intelligent political commentary than either of these two. We have the evidence of Katrina. Of leaving Afganistan before we finished our work there for a war of choice predicated upon misinformation. A war in which the end game was never "gamed" out. Secret agents are "outed" as political retribution. And while it may be unprovable as a criminal act it is incontrovertable, even at this point, that Rove and Libby were speaking to reporters about Valary Plame. A good idea? I'd like to keep our secret agents secret. I'd like to keep the type of agents we have secret.

A better analogy is not what do I do when my girls come and complain about each other, claiming the other one started the fight. It would be my refusal to ackowledge that my 9 year old is no longer 3 years of age and so treat her. It would be to live in the past and pay no attention to the changed conditiions of her life and behavior. Hold these Republicans to the standard and beliefs you support. If they do not then vote for someone else. Support whomever you wish but acknowledge that these folks do not support your values. You may argue that you hold you nose while voting for them but at least acknowledge that they are not honest, honorable nor for small government while so doing.

If Democrates were in power I might be able to petition my Congressman to sue for impreachment. We might have the subpeana power and compell the executive branch to testify and supply documents. With Congress in the hands of Republicans who are more committed to party loyalty then to this nation's history and values is this possible. Senator Arlan Spector, when asked last Sunday what remedies might exist were it to be true that Bush violated the law on this domestic spying suggested first and foremost impeachment. Fat chance this Congress will support freedom and law over politics. Here I'll agree that Democrates would do the same. Which is why I suggested to Gary that it would be best if one of the 3 eleected branches of govenemnt were in the hands of the oposition.

Alan

I stopped bye UPS yesterday. They had a few signs out saying that you would need a Government Issued ID, but the person at the counter never asked for one. I do normally ship there once or twice a week.

CJ

I'm pretty sure that you are wrong on both accounts:
[Link: firstgov.gov]
[Link: firstgov.gov]
http://www.federalreserve.gov/

CJ

PS- all .gov domains are reserved for governmental entities

[Link: timesonline.co.uk]

Now the administration wants Google to hand over a list of all their searches for any one week period. Maybe next week they decide they'd like to have a copy of every citizens phone records. Well, as long as they are doing it to "fight terrorism", only some liberal tree lover would complain, right (sarcasm)? And if "fighting terrorism" isn't a good enough tag, then let's say it's to "protect children". After all, the government should be able to do ANYTHING as long as it's to "protect children" and if you are against it, it must mean you don't care about children.

EVERYONE that believes in a free society, liberal or conservative should be against this type of insanity.

Once again, let me clarify what I originally wrote.

UPS, not USPS demanded a driver's license.

What I meant meant was that I found it strange that UPS (Private Sector), is requiring a driver's license to ship a package whereas USPS (Government Agency) is not.

Then again, maybe they (USPS) just haven't figured out a way of implementing a method for attaching an ID to every letter mailed yet.

Ladies and gentlemen, the potential for abuse in this type of system is not only probable, but inevitable.