Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Palatka51, Nov 3, 2008.
Smacks of a KGB doesn't it?
Been saying that since I first heard it, then include the 'truth squad', yep, you got communism forming right in front our eyes.
I don't think Obama was suggesting some kind of national police or security force although that could come later - I think he was suggesting a national community service force. Either one, however, would be very bad for our nation each in its on way. We don't need an "army" of any kind of federal government workers to solve our problems. What we really need is for vast parts of the federal government to shut down, shut up, and go home to doing something worthwhile such as producing some tangible and useful goods or services in private endeavors.
You'll know it's a real problem when "they" start asking your kids, at school, to inform on you....:tonofbricks:
What was it Khrushchev said? "Your children's children will become communist without a shot being fired." This is that generation he was talking about.
I have worked for various agencies of the federal government for over 35 years. Anytime you would like to keep up with me on a midnight shift and do my job, I will be glad to give you the address and will issue you a pass and see how much of what I do is worthless. It is where God put me to raise my family, and do not appreciate the implication. What is it you do for a living?
Another one is fleeced...
If America is such a great place to live according to Obama, what does he want to change?
What is it you do for the federal government?
I'll avoid the tendency to get too personal with my response and just repeat what I wrote: "What we really need is for vast parts of the federal government to shut down, shut up, and go home to doing something worthwhile such as producing some tangible and useful goods or services in private endeavors." and elaborate upon it because I meant it: Our federal government is too big, involved in too many things, and vasts part of it needs to be shut down. That does not discount the work ethics of the individuals who are employed by the government nor some of the good things they do. "Vast" means the majority but does not include all of it. There are just a hand full of valid purposes for the federal government - national defense being one of them - while many things are just an outgrowth of years of pet projects and attempts to solve problems or provide services that could be much better served by private endeavors or not at all. Congress needs a major house cleaning and reduction in staff size. Many departments need to be eliminated altogether even some that provide some good things. Government does not generate wealth - it consumes it. Government does not effectively produce goods and services - private individuals and business do. Government should provide a basic framework for justice and defend our liberty. It must consume some of the fruits of our labor to accomplish that. Most everything else just takes away great talent for the private sector and expands the political currency for trading favors.
I don't buy any of Obama's arguments for change! However, I do think we need to be fair and honest about what we say about him. The context in which he made the statements had nothing to do with establishing some kind of national police or security force as implied by the original post. I won't say Obama might not have such a plan in his hip pocket but that's not what he was talking about. Honesty is important even when it involves our opponents. It is clear he was suggesting yet another large government social program probably involving a lot of "make work" activities.
Read my posting again and understand that I'm not offering support to Obama's socialist ideas but, rather, just seeking that we be honest in our claims about what he has said.