gdp's Comments

912 Communique' - Better Communication for 912ers : Vent 2.5 - 912 Communique\'

Sun, 7 Feb 2010 18:19:01 +0000

again I said nothing of moral relativity, you don't have to be a christian to understand right & wrong. your looking for an argument where none exists and showing ignorance in the process. the argument is that things such as charity are not the proper or legitimate role of government, government by it's nature will politicize such things and use them for political expediency and the people who really need help will suffer as a result. These things should be left to the people for whatever reason they choose to pursue such things. In fact I would argue that the reason why someone who prescribes to an organized religion, fufill there so-called charitable obligations out of a belief to make themselves look good in the eyes of God, Therefore it is self interest that motivates this behavior. Your right it would nullify many laws, that is the problem Government has grown beyond it's legitimate function

912 Communique' - Better Communication for 912ers : Vent 2.5 - 912 Communique\'

Sun, 7 Feb 2010 17:16:28 +0000

I think the problem is they have forced themselves into areas that are not within their legitimate duties

912 Communique' - Better Communication for 912ers : Vent 2.5 - 912 Communique\'

Sun, 7 Feb 2010 15:14:32 +0000

their is nothing progressive about anything I said, progressivism implies government dictating morality and cofiscating wealth for purpose of achieving the vision of a few. secondly no one is attacking christian values, but the fact is not everyone is an orthodox christian, if you have a spiritual belief in such things that is all well and good, but not everyone does, the only moral obligation we have is to yourself and family everything else is extra curricular, and like I said it is something to be applauded. And you are wrong about your interpretation of legitimate law, while it is true that government has an almost monopoly on the use of force how it uses that force is what gives it legitimacy. The proper role of law is protect one individuals natural rights from infringement by another, coercion only comes into play when someone violates that. For example the government, except in special situations doen't stop someone from breaking into a home, and even if they happen to catch the person before he gets in the house he has already planned the crime.

912 Communique' - Better Communication for 912ers : Vent 2.5 - 912 Communique\'

Sun, 7 Feb 2010 04:07:43 +0000

While speaking at the 2010 national prayer breakfast, President Obama invoking health care proclaimed; that “we may disagree about the best way to reform our health care system, but surely we can agree that no one ought to go broke when they get sick in the richest nation on earth.” This statement was meant to be another of the Presidents’ toothpaste ad platitudes. (Nine out of ten dentists agree) But it actually exposed his extreme adherence to the Marxist ideology which has created such a chasm between the American people and himself. It is certainly true that the majority of Americans have no interest in seeing innocent individuals struggle, financially or otherwise. Our nature however dictates that those struggles are a part of the human experience, and it is that very nature that limits our ability to address these struggles. I don’t know anyone who wants to see people go broke for any reason, but the question is, at what and who’s expense? It is for this reason that Obama tries to wrap his agenda in a cloak of moral superiority. But there is nothing moral about forcibly limiting the individual’s ability to provide for himself and his family for the sake of political expediency. Obama suggests that we have this “moral” obligation as a result of being “the richest nation on the face of the earth.” This is an extremely ideological statement from a man who just days earlier declared that he is not an ideologue. While it is true that The United States is the home of a fourth of the world’s wealth, President Obama implies that this wealth belongs to the state. Our current deficits show that nothing is farther from the truth. The nation’s wealth in fact resides with its private citizens. It is extremely laudable for an individual to freely commit a portion of his wealth to the service of others, but there is however no moral obligation to do so. Finally, politicians seeking to use the iron fist of government to coerce the individual into the service of others or some dictated high virtue is not morality, it is tyranny. Anthony D Dolpies

Big Government : SOLD: Sen. Nelson's Bribe

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:04:49 +0000

the whole article you mentioned makes all the sense in the world, in order to prevent things like this from happening. meaning bribing a senator with special legislation, also the reason why senators where not originally elected by popular vote.

Big Government : SOLD: Sen. Nelson's Bribe

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:19:52 +0000

absolutely all of these other side deals are just as bad.

Big Government : SOLD: Sen. Nelson's Bribe

Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:59:51 +0000

it is actually very clear it says no preference in regulation OR in the revenue of ports, it is not strictly talking about ports but regulation in by the federal government that would give one state an outright advantage over the other, it is the same reason why they did not put the capitol in a state. or giving preferential taxation at the federal level, meaning the taxes levied by the feds must be equal in every state. I honestly don't know how this could hold up constitutionally.

912 Communique' - Better Communication for 912ers : Vent 2.0 - 912 Communique\'

Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:52:57 +0000

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/conservativerepublic... Check out my Show you will not be disappointed Date / Time: 12/10/2009 3:00 PM Category: Politics Conservative Call-in Number: (347) 637-2550 The Conservative Republic Live, Where Liberty Lives We Can No Longer afford to hope join me today back at regular time 3pm est as we dissect Copenhagen, another entry from our perspective of a Russian immigrant, And the our dictatorial regime known as the EPA

Big Government : Fistgate III: Obama's Safe Schools Czar's 'Black Book' For Kids Included Tips on Fisting and Pi$$ing

Wed, 9 Dec 2009 20:11:29 +0000

what happened to the audio clip

Big Government : Obama: King of All Statists

Tue, 1 Dec 2009 19:20:59 +0000

right so lets all depend on social security where your payout is always less then what you put in, and better yet lets fund it with iou's & money that doesn't exist, this way we inflate the currency & destroy the prosperity of subsequent generations, condemning them to $40 loaves of bread, all because you lost some money in stock market downturn. How progressive.

Big Government : Justice Department: ACORN Can Be Paid For Existing Federal Contracts

Sat, 28 Nov 2009 17:02:36 +0000

Eric Holder needs to be removed plain & simple

912 Communique : Vent

Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:15:56 +0000

The Mind-set of Malcontents Every Obama speech seems to be constructed with one objective in mind, to reinforce the mind-set of the malcontent. Whether the venue is foreign or domestic he portrays an image of a world filled with injustice, populated with hapless inhabitants biding their time until some evil force devours them, with their only salvation being some international bureaucrat or government program that will fulfill their basic needs and change the course of an unjust human history selflessly guiding it toward some far off unreachable utopia. Obama subscribes to the zero sum philosophy, or at least that’s what he preaches, this is the theory that an individual or a nation can only advance their own interest or add to their wealth by denying those things to another. On the domestic level this philosophy suggests that if a corporation or employer is allowed to keep more of its earnings through low taxation somehow the employee’s wages suffer. Or that one individual’s economic hardship is the direct result of another individual’s success, in other words he presents an image of an ever shrinking communal pie. Promising the malcontent a bigger piece in return for a vote or support of some liberty stealing legislation that will level the playing field and foster a better “equality” among citizens. Globally the same concept applies. One nation’s prosperity impedes the ability of another to achieve the same. Obama advanced this theory in his speech to the U.N. then repeated it during his recent Shanghai town hall, he proclaimed “power in the 21st century is no longer a zero-sum game; one country's success need not come at the expense of another.” Obama’s idea to correct this perceived injustice is the same as his answer to domestic issues, global wealth redistribution and intergovernmental regulations tasked with insuring economic balance. Power or economic success has never been a zero sum game. The idea is absurd, power goes hand in hand with a strong economy, economic success depends on many factors, navigable waterways and geography, political stability, government policies, cultural factors, human beings in general have the same basic potentials but a nation’s success can never be guaranteed. It is also important to realize that countries like China and India have grown economically after pulling back their governments involvement in the marketplace, Obama suggests just the opposite, while global wealth redistribution has proven as much of a failure as its domestic cousin. Look at Africa, GDP has decreased as economic aid to the continent has reached unprecedented levels. Finally the industrial revolution did not just benefit the U.S. it advanced nearly all of civilization, the nations that lag behind did so as a result of cultural barriers and political instability, the industrial revolution was not the cause of those instabilities. In reality Obama seeks the same globally as he does domestically a population of victimized serfs in permanent economic stagnation dependent on an elite political class that holds out the carrot of unattainable utopia in exchange for individual liberty. Anthony D Dolpies

Big Government : Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:50:35 +0000

uncompensated care amount to about 2% of the over cost, far less then the additional costs added to make up for low medicare & medicaid reimbursement rates, not to mention the other cost of compliance that is levied by the government, & what about the welfare payments that will be provided by this legislation so that families who make up to 70000 a year can by health insurance, aren't you now subsidizing those people on an even larger scale.

Big Government : Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:44:33 +0000

the federal government does not impound your car the local government does, there are no felony parking offenses

Big Government : Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:39:53 +0000

the 16th ammendment allows for taxes on income, this is a penalty for not participating in a specific type of commerce, which is ridiculous, so where does that end? What can't government fine us for and even more what can't they command us to do under threat of imprisonment?

Big Government : Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:51:36 +0000

yeah but the tax is a fine for not buying insurance, which means the resulting penalties are a result of not having health insurance. Therefore you are being thrown in prison for not having insurance. All I have to say is get my cell ready.

Big Government : Sunday Open Thread: New Beginning Edition

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 05:07:58 +0000

nice catch I meant wary.

Big Government : Sunday Open Thread: New Beginning Edition

Sun, 15 Nov 2009 22:14:14 +0000

you would figure from the way the American people reacted when he bowed to the Saudi King, This Jackass would be more weary of doing such things, it is obvious he just does this to tweak the American people.

Big Government : Committee Confirms: Comply With Pelosi-Care Or Go To Jail

Fri, 6 Nov 2009 21:51:22 +0000

They better get my cell ready, The moral obligation of a free people is to stand up in opposition to such tyranny

912 Communique : Vent

Wed, 4 Nov 2009 04:21:25 +0000

You don't have to tell me about the federal reserve I know all about them and I agree it is an unconstitutional entity, You also should never assume that you know more than the person you are addressing, my pocket constitution is worn from constant referencing, and I have read both the federalist & anti-federalist papers, I am quite aware of the breaches in the constitutional firewalls, however thats not what this article is about, all of the things you mention are creations of the progressive movement. Nowhere have I said anything about this country being a democracy, so what are you talking about, I would suggest that you google my name a read some of my other essays and articles before you start making assumptions. The problem with all of you bildiberger freaks is that you are just as bad as the libs, you assume you have some type of monopoly on truth, meanwhile you are looking for black helicopters while the 747 is landing in front of you