-
ORIGINAL: Frumious
OK but they grabbed my rescue rope with me tied to them with a rock that they tied around their own ankles ready to drag us both down with the threat, “save me or I’ll drown you with me.” Under those circumstances I want to kick their a$$ when we get back to dry land not thank them for tying me to a rock. Without the rescue they would have drowned. Republicans are complaining that they were not allowed to drown but when their company is saved & they are kicked out Republicans also complain that government has no right to fire them. This is confusing & sounds like speaking out of both sides.Well, Gov does have to be the savior here….I would not even be opposed to saying that a condition for the change is that there has to be obvious restructuring and even discussions about short term plans….but specificaly outlining who will and will not be fired is too much intrusion into the day to day buisness and beyond the scope of the Federal Gov IMHO. If the industry is that lost, then let them die.
Bush & Paulson pressured the banks to accept and many who said they were healthy had their pens anxiously held out nevertheless.
[link=http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/blog/2008/oct/15/banking]http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/blog/2008/oct/15/banking[/link]I don’t know how “forced” they all were to accept or the reasons to force so-called healthy banks to accept the money. Why did Bush & Paulson force so-called healthy banks to accept funds supposedly not needed?
I never said this was just Obama’s fault. Bush has done plenty to push us away from the free country we think we live in…the wire taps, etc. I have no idea why these banks were pushed to take the funds. It is Obama’s people who refuse to let the banks pay it back though.
Not to be picky, but the quote was by Ben Franklin. I am not seeing Obama as the new Emperor or Hitler. If anything Bush’s supporters were saying he was the uni-Executive & not answerable to the Law or Congress or the Court. In fact I think it is Bruce Fein along with other Conservatives who warned about Bush’s practices & wanted him & Cheney impeached & warned what about these powers being used by succeeding Presidents? [link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_Agenda]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_Agenda[/link]
Suddenly now we are in danger of having Emperor Obama but not Emperor Bush, because Obama fired some CEOs?
Seriously, GPS on every car? I don’t think so.
It has been a while since history class so you could be right…still no less true. I agree with Bush overstepping his bounds and Cheney’s arguements over hime being accoutable to the law also horrible. That said, Obama is continuing to push us down the road. Lets continue your arguement from above….The Gov takes over healthcare…now I am invested in YOUR health. If I see you eating the wrong thing YOU are costing me money, “taking me down with you” in your previous example. The more we allow the Fed Gov to ‘protect us’ the more we become its slave because the more direct interest it has in how we impact the “collective” good (borg reference intentional).
For the GPS follow this link that I posted in a previous thread->:[link=http://www.detnews.com/article/20090429/POLITICS03/904290380/1148/rss25]http://www.detnews.com/article/20090429/POLITICS03/904290380/1148/rss25[/link]
“…..The [b]tax would entail [u]equipping vehicles with GPS technology[/u] to determine how many miles a car has been driven and whether on interstate highways or secondary roads. The devices would also calculate the amount of tax owed. [/b]
“At this point there are a lot of things that are under consideration and there is also a strong need to find revenue,” Oberstar spokesman Jim Berard said. “A vehicle miles-traveled tax is a logical complement, and perhaps a future replacement, for fuel taxes.”
Gas tax revenues — the primary source of federal funding for highway programs — have dropped dramatically in the last two years, first because gas prices were high and later because of the economic downturn. They are forecast to continue going down as drivers switch to fuel efficient and alternative fuel vehicles…..”Comparative religion & ethics/philosophy are not the issues. You were taught that science & religion are not mutually exclusive, but that is not something believed by some Fundamentalists & Creationists. Find for their children but not mine & not with my tax money, I don’t want to pay taxes to teach ignorance.
The irony in your statement is that if you follow that through, then they will never discuss religion and the philosophy associated with it and the specific roles different beliefs played on history (History of the reformation church till present and the Middle Ages to present european/US history are almost inseperable), you are, in fact, ignorant of those things….I would argue, my education was more complete as it did not confine itself to ONLY secular teaching. The funny thing I find about this line of thinking is that some are seem as scared for their children to be exposed to religious ideas who are atheist as people who are religious are afraid to allow their children to be exposed to ideas contrary to their beliefs. It is as though, if they hear that some believe in a God etc then their children will be converted. It is not like they will never be exposed to it.
The wisdom (although I did not see it at the time) in the way I was taught was that they presented all of it…it was up to the individual to make their own judgement. So many positives to this. You realize that not everyone thinks as you or your parents do, you are presented with ideas that challenge you belief system, you develop your own critical thought process to sort through how and what you think and believe, and, because you often disagreed with the teacher and other students in the class, taught you tolerence for people who disagree with you….
If the teaching does not include compartive religion, ethics and philosophy and only teaches a specific idealogy then I would be in more agreement with your point….I am more inclined to think that specifiying certain ideas that cannot be discussed is not what education should be…certainly is not the Socratic method that much of western education attempts to follow. IMHO, more is better as long as the opposing aspects are also offered. Regardless, this further demonstrates some aspects of my education in a private setting not offered in the current public ones.
