posted on October 2, 2001 10:47:54 AM
Trust in any foundation is difficult for me. My trust in the foundation of this government was shaken when George Bush was fraudently elected president.
As Darrow said, "When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President. Now I'm beginning to believe it."
In spite of this, I'll say yes, I have some trust in the foundation of this government.
posted on October 2, 2001 12:47:35 PM
If you mean the principles our government is founded on, then yes, I do trust those.
However, our history shows us that we should have less trust and more vigilance in making sure that the government continues to carry on with those principles.
posted on October 2, 2001 01:12:54 PM
Is Ashcroft the Head "Rumor Mill" for the Government??!!?? How is he NOT fired after the Boston incident (Boston should expect an attack this weekend). At least an apology is due.
posted on October 2, 2001 02:13:03 PM
I honestly do not understand the question.
Trust them to do what?
Meet my needs?
Keep me safe?
Be the best possible form of government?
Not intrude on my life needlessly?
The Scriptures have some good advise-
"Put not your trust in princes-"
Saying to ignore what IS and speak only of what should be from it's foundation is fantasy. I don't see it as having any use except as amusing fiction if you's like to write a story of what government should have become.
posted on October 2, 2001 03:12:55 PM
There is a Washington Post Poll that touches on 'trust' (item 16). I don't know how much trust to put in the poll, it is in sharp contrast to a high percentage on this message board and I know some don't trust domestic news services and the Washington Post is very domestic.
posted on October 2, 2001 03:30:26 PM
If by foundation, you mean the constitution, it's a darn fine document and Thomas Jefferson almost pulled off what he wanted to pull off.
Do I trust the politicians in our government to abide by the spirit of the constitution? Only if we watch them very closely.
What form of government would I prefer? One that "defends the coast and carries the mail, and leaves the citizens alone". I could care less if we had a king, as long as those 3 things where done. (A king would never be so benevilent, but....)
posted on October 3, 2001 01:10:59 AM
I too am confused about the question's aim.
Under the current president, pretty much "Yes". It doesn't extend much beyond the
president himself however.
Under the previous administration, "hell no".
All my Y2K preparations were not fear of Y2K but fear of marshall law being enacted
unjustly solely to preserve the administration and total chaos resulting. (If you are a liar, thief, and cheat, there are no limits to what you will attempt to steal.)
Under the current administration, my only fear of a necessary marshall law should it ever be required would be financial consequences, not mis-use of presidential power for personal gain.
The democratic system under the Constitution? Well, yes mostly. I think many people twist
the constitution to their liking and it is unfortunately reflected in federal court decisions. The constitution's original aims are solid.
I don't trust 50+% of the population AT ALL, and I don't have even slight confidence in
more than 3 politicians...and they are:
George Bush
Trent Lott
Bobby Howell (MS, state level)
what form of goverment would you prefer to live under.
A kingdom, and my grandpa, were he still living, would be king.
