Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| America at a Crossroads; discussion provoking piece | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 17 2009, 11:20 AM (104 Views) | |
| Mr Gray | Jun 17 2009, 11:20 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Coach
|
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=5550 I don't agree with everything in this piece, but it has so many points with historic references and analogies, that I just had to share it. Should lead to great discussions on here. Here are a few quotes that I liked. Today's liberalism is a perversion of Classical Liberalism, which stressed the essential goodness and rationality of man and his ability to recognize and solve problems, all of which led to systematic improvement in man's life, exemplified by the Enlightenment. The corruption spread in the 1930s when Roosevelt signed into law the minimum wage, progressive taxation, Social Security and established Fannie Mae to provide low-interest mortgages. Classical Liberalism was dead. Liberalism and the welfare state became one: socialism. By such actions as these and many, many more, conservatism and liberalism merged to become nationalist-socialism, hardly distinguishable from each other in their violations of individual rights. Liberals claim they are not socialist. They merely want to force rich people to feed poor people. But individual rights determined by other people's wishes are not rights. Liberals claim they do not seek to violate individual rights---except when the violation is for a cause they deem "good," such as forcing men to practice socialized medicine. But rights restricted by some people's needs are not rights. Conservatives claim they do not seek to violate individual rights---except when the violation is for a cause they consider morally sound, such as forcing women to have children they do not want. But rights predicated on the assumption of women's inferior status to force them into unchosen actions are not rights. I actually agree with this principle, but I believe the facts of the scenario are misleading. This assumes #1 that the unborn child doesn't have individual rights, and #2 that woman are "forced" to become pregnant. "A right is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man's freedom of action in a social context." [Ayn Rand, "Man's Rights"] To claim that a moral principle is at the mercy of another's wish is blasphemous. Rights do not include the "right" to violate another's rights---no matter what the need, wish, demand, or assumption. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Jun 17 2009, 01:54 PM Post #2 |
|
Coach
|
good post |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | Jun 17 2009, 01:58 PM Post #3 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
Speaking of "classic liberalism", where's OldSchool been lately? |
| |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jun 17 2009, 02:24 PM Post #4 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
aaron - kudos to your posting as of late. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jun 17 2009, 02:31 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Coach
|
thanks Brum. I have tried to focus my "anger" for government into reasonable disucssion. To be honest with you, when I saw you starting to come around to many of the Paul economic principles, it kind of gave me hope. I can deal with your social views, because as I have said before, I may not like abortion or gay marriage (etc...), but as long as you don't force me to participate or pay for it, I stomach it for the purpose of fixing the economic issues which affect us all! |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Jun 17 2009, 02:33 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Coach
|
He's in Europe. He is my friend on facebook, and he occasionally posts about getting high, new drugs...etc etc. He's having a good time. That guy cracks me up. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| HoosierLars | Jun 17 2009, 03:24 PM Post #7 |
![]()
3 in a row
|
Thanks for the update. |
| |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Jun 18 2009, 08:26 AM Post #8 |
|
Coach
|
getting high kicks ass...... |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| BoilerUpAT | Jun 18 2009, 08:29 AM Post #9 |
![]()
The Inspector
|
"drugs are bad, ummmkay?" |
|
Close by the Wabash, In famed Hoosier land, Stands old Purdue, Serene and Grand, Cherished in Memory, By all her sons and daughters true, Fair Alma Mater, All Hail Purdue | |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Jun 18 2009, 09:05 AM Post #10 |
|
Coach
|
kkkkkk |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jun 18 2009, 09:09 AM Post #11 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Getting high and reading politico, not so much. |
| |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Jun 18 2009, 09:18 AM Post #12 |
|
Coach
|
You should definitely stop doing it then. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Jun 18 2009, 12:39 PM Post #13 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I thought it was the only way you could read Politico. They have a sign that says 'you must be this high to enjoy the ride.' Seriously, I think politico is as poor a website as there is in terms of political discussion. As I've said before, they are the TMZ of politics...and they aren't simply a site that is damning to one political party, they are damning to political discussion in general. Op ed pieces are fine, if they are presented as such as opposed to being a news story. A site like Rasmussen Reports (rasmussenreports.com) does an excellent job of providing op ed pieces and presenting them as such. Take a look at their recent political opinion pieces: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary. Pretty good cross section of pieces and presented as political opinion as opposed to what politico does, trying to sell opinions as facts. And Rasmussen is run by a ultra-conservative CEO who doesn't let his politics get in the way of solid journalism. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:45 PM Jul 10
|













7:45 PM Jul 10