posted on July 2, 2001 12:42:51 AM new"Ok, for murder they should be tried, shouldn't anyone that commits murder deliberlatly be tried? yes."
Good! You've taken the first steps towards a healthier political attitude. If a person plots to blow up a federal building in Kansas and shows wilful, careless disregard for human life, he gets tried and punished. If a person who runs a corporation or other business pollutes the environment with willful, careless disregard for human life ... then what? Does working for or owning a corporation or business entitle anyone a status of Above the Law? According to your answer: no!
Now, follow along with me on this. Now, how far does that wilful, careless disregard go? Does the person who dumps paint thinner down a kitchen sink need to be tried for crimes against society? As a contrast, do people who run for public office and make decisions for everyone that affects everyone's life have a greater responsibility to adhere to the law, decency and common sense? Isn't that just what Republicans hounded Clinton for? Of course it was! So I assume that you agree up to this point also!
Here's the crux of the matter. If a politician knowingly blocks legislation in the public interest and for the public good, with a wilful, careless disregard for human life, especially where it affects the very health and lives of all Americans, all in favor of lining the pockets of a business or corporation, is any politician entitled to that? Can you read between the lines there? Are businesses and corporations entitled to make money with wilful, careless disregard for human life? Should they be allowed to make money any way that they can despite the cost in human life and NOBODY can make them stop? Individuals can't -- nd th federal governement can't? Do you think I can walk into a corporate board meeting at Ford Motor Company and tell them to stop making dangerous vehicles? Even if I got that far, would they listen to me? Should there then be a general revolt, thousands of victims marching on the company and the owners and hanging them from the nearest tree? At what point did you think that corporations can be made to stop polluting and killing us? Tell me how you think it ought to be done, instead of using the force of government -- the last group who can actually pull the cord on these types and bring them to jusitce. You tell me! Do you honestly believe that corporations have that as a right to be Above the Law?
Does that make them any different than Timothy McVeah? C'mon now -- of COURSE it doesn't! So, if there is a President who rolls back protections, important environmental protections that were made to respect human life, is that person in public office guiltier than a normal person who sits and plots to blow up a federal building? Tell me, NearTheSea, that just because a President shows careless disregard for human life in order to make more money for himself and/or corporations, does that mean that he is above the law?
Finally, here's where it gets uncomfortable for you. So, what can be said of a person who knowingly votes for a person to be president who has demonstrated in words and deeds that he is perfectly willing to destroy public health measures meant to keep people alive and healthy only for his own monetary gain and/or corporate gains? Doesn't that add up to being an accomplice? An accomplice of someone who shows willful, careless disregard for human life in favor of lining the pockets of others -- to MURDER?
So, NearTheSea, I can see why you would be uncomfortable with my pointing these things out. It must be HELL for you to think that you voted someone into office who is purposely removing protections for ourselves and our children just for mere money?? You have to be human and have to feel the pain of mothers and fathers whose kids will get sick and die horrible deaths and it could have been prevented, except YOU helped to put a monster in the White House! And beating up on me and calling me an anti-corporate activist doesn't make it so.
I hope that if your pockets get lined a bit more because of what your candidate for president did, I hope you'll remember it as you go to sleep at night -- if you can!
posted on July 2, 2001 12:17:24 PM new"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-- That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Sound familiar, anyone?
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"
We are a government Of the People, By the People, FOR the People. It does not belong to corporations, Big Business, the Rich & Powerful. It belongs to each and everyone of us.
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
Sounds like our current prediciment. It spells it out right there - we have a fundamental right to overthrow this government of ours that no longer represents the best interests of the people because they have abridged our right to Safety and Happiness.
Sure, some folks will hoot at me for saying that -- but go complain to the Founders of this nation - not to me!
posted on July 2, 2001 01:13:58 PM new
It's just old blather now, and means nothing in this global spectrum. Belongs right where it is--in history books. Those founding fathers would have been little more that street criers now--probably locked away eventually.
posted on July 2, 2001 02:33:36 PM new
Seems to be appropriate for this upcoming Independence Day I suppose.
The Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation
We hold these truths to be self evident.....
Yes that sounds familiar. It sounds like
the colonies declaring their independence from England, and the King.
So, you have every right to your endeavor.
Good luck in this. As there are approx. 273 Million people in these United States. And a very good majority would have to think the way you do, as to overthrow this government we have in place.
I would be willing to bet that a majority, be them Demorcrat, Republican or any other political party, not be willing to do this, peacefully, or in another Revolutionary War, which would actually be another Civil War.
posted on July 2, 2001 03:37:27 PM newa very good majority would have to think the way you do, as to overthrow this government we have in place
I guess that means the revolution is off for this weekend.
NearTheSea, Have you forgotten about how we were on the brink of a civil war back in December,according to some? The lines at the stores, the hoarding, the sandbags, the landmines in the backyards, the panic? How quick we forget.
posted on July 2, 2001 04:17:36 PM new
Ridicule all you want to -- that's just what Marie Antonnette did. Like her, you underestimate the will of the people. Just be sure which side of the chopping block you intend to be on this weekend.
posted on July 2, 2001 06:47:54 PM newBorillarIt happened the moment our corrupt Supreme Court denied the Floida Recount ... or hadn't you noticed?
Seems to me I've noticed one or two posts (maybe more) about that. I believe if you do a search for Nazi, Gestapo, or Fascist you can find those posts. They are a hoot.
posted on July 2, 2001 08:13:45 PM new
OK, I'm confused, but that is not uncommon for me where politics is involved. I am out of the loop...I got discouraged sometime in the 80's when I discovered NONE of my canidates had every been elected! Not even on the local level! Mainstream I'm not!
Let me see if I have this correct. From what I have read here at AW's Roundtable for quite awhile now, corporations are things NOT people. The Government is also a thing and not a living enity.
We the people means us. So we should be running the corporations and the government. Right????
I fear "we the people" have created "Franinstein's monsters". We have allowed them to grow and do pretty much what they wanted for far too long to stop them now! No, wait.....I gotta remember, a corporation isn't alive, it can't pick up the phone, send a fax or make policy or even engage in a dialog. A government can't set policy, or pass laws or regulate the corporations, it isn't "alive". Right??? Then, ....it's the "people" inside the monster that are really doing all that bad stuff!!!!
No, it's not people, it's those democrates, or republicans, or independents that run the government AND the corporations so they are to blame!
So, maybe if we could get rid of all those democrates, republicans and independents everything would start working for "the people" again??????
It really is all too confusing for me...where do democrates, republicans and independants come from anyway????????
posted on July 12, 2001 02:37:47 AM new
I had to resurrect this thread because of a news story that I thought would give some a chuckle.
Because they control the California state assembly, Democrats also are in charge of redrawing congressional districts to reflect the results of the 2000 census. Before the Levy affair, they had hoped to create a new, Democratic-leaning district encompassing the city of Stockton. But according to Cain, they may now have to scrap that plan in favor of adding Stockton to Condit's district, keeping it safe for Democrats but giving up a chance to gain an extra seat in the House.
Could the democrats be showing more backbone?
---------
Is 'backbone' the correct term for this?
