Comparing America to Ancient Civilizations

And all the people said. . . . "Huh?"

 

The Bush culture of deception and not being an
honest broker has hurt this nation...period.

Elderly,children,middle class, are falling down
and because of the Bush Culture he lied and lied
big when he said his administration would be
compassionate...it all went to wars and lying about the wars plus money for cronies who just so happen to get large amounts of tax dollars.


Where is the church???????????

Shame and consequence on the bush culture and those who enable it.

<edited to fix link for browser - LE>

[ February 12, 2006, 11:10 PM: Message edited by: LadyEagle ]

 

Similarities with Rome"

1. Many foreign wars.

2. Population pacified with sports.

3. Welfare programs

4. Farm lobby?

5. Rich getting richer and poor getting poorer.

6. Labor provided by (wage)slaves.

7. Democratic system pre-empted by the rich people, poor people powerless.

8. Surrounded by enemies.

 

Add:

1) Failure to protect borders.

2) Adulterated currency.

3) Political instability (instead of physical assasinations, we use assassination of character).

4) Unrestrained government spending.

5) High taxation (our Founding Fathers would be stunned to see us tolerate it).

6) A fundamental strategic shift from maneuver warfare to one of static defense on the borders.

7) An explosion of superstition imported from the Near East (New Age thought today) vs. "traditional religion"

8) A general decline in character and values.

 

False... even if you realize that caring for the elderly is a community, family, and church responsibility in a free society.

False. The recession Clinton left Bush might have had a minimal effect. However, we do not have hordes of starving/malnourished children in spite of the dire predictions of Dems every time a conservative proposes a "cut" to the projected "increase" of any welfare program.

Further, teachers are now being held accountable for their job performance... a completely postive thing that Dems never would have done since they are beholden to the teacher's unions.

Nope. In spite of the Clinton hangover recession, unemployment is very low, new business start ups make even that great sub 6% number... pessimistic.

Dems have tried to sell the "middle class squeeze"... but no one has bought their lie.

He hasn't done it the way I would but to say that he hasn't been "compassionate" is a matter of whose ox is being gored.

Are we still giving out quite as much to people without demanding some responsibility? Probably not. Are people who really need assistance going without? No.

"Compassion" is a fairly hollow term spoken by liberals anyway... it is hardly "compassionate" to confiscate the wealth of the those who earn it and give it to malcontents whose only real qualification is that they have made poor personal decisions and now want make others bear the responsibility.

It is a LIE to say that Bush lied about the justification for war. It is simply something that has never been proven and has been disproven on numerous occasions. Being wrong doesn't mean someone has lied or else you could be accused of lying for most of the political/philosophical statements you make here.

Shame on those who hate Bush so badly that they distort the truth.

Shame on those who support a party that stands for keeping the slaughter of innocent unborn babies legal.

Shame on those who support a party that seizes rights and liberties then sells them back as privileges for votes and tax dollars.

Shame on those who think that charity and compassion are involved in forcing others to relieve the poor rather than doing it themselves and soliciting others to volunteer as well.

 

More likely from Ahab to Manassas.

There are two parallel economies, one for the rich and one for the working class.

 

False... even if you realize that caring for the elderly is a community, family, and church responsibility in a free society.

False. The recession Clinton left Bush might have had a minimal effect. However, we do not have hordes of starving/malnourished children in spite of the dire predictions of Dems every time a conservative proposes a "cut" to the projected "increase" of any welfare program.

Further, teachers are now being held accountable for their job performance... a completely postive thing that Dems never would have done since they are beholden to the teacher's unions.

Nope. In spite of the Clinton hangover recession, unemployment is very low, new business start ups make even that great sub 6% number... pessimistic.

Dems have tried to sell the "middle class squeeze"... but no one has bought their lie.

He hasn't done it the way I would but to say that he hasn't been "compassionate" is a matter of whose ox is being gored.

Are we still giving out quite as much to people without demanding some responsibility? Probably not. Are people who really need assistance going without? No.

"Compassion" is a fairly hollow term spoken by liberals anyway... it is hardly "compassionate" to confiscate the wealth of the those who earn it and give it to malcontents whose only real qualification is that they have made poor personal decisions and now want make others bear the responsibility.

It is a LIE to say that Bush lied about the justification for war. It is simply something that has never been proven and has been disproven on numerous occasions. Being wrong doesn't mean someone has lied or else you could be accused of lying for most of the political/philosophical statements you make here.

Shame on those who hate Bush so badly that they distort the truth.

Shame on those who support a party that stands for keeping the slaughter of innocent unborn babies legal.

Shame on those who support a party that seizes rights and liberties then sells them back as privileges for votes and tax dollars.

Shame on those who think that charity and compassion are involved in forcing others to relieve the poor rather than doing it themselves and soliciting others to volunteer as well. </font>[/QUOTE]That was an excellent response Scott J!

Shame on them who want our government - especially the federal government - to take care of everything for everyone all of the time. Little do they understand where that road leads one little brick at a time.

 

Since you are loyal supporter of Dubya, you are one of them. Under Bush, the nanny state has progressed rapidly.

1. Biggest federal grab of power from the states since Roosevelt (No Child Left Behind)

2. Biggest new entitlement program since LBJ (Prescription Drug Program)

3. Greatest increase in Presidential power against American citizens ("Patriot" act)

4. Biggest peacetime deficit in history. This is a massive tax increase, plus interest, unless you suppose someone besides the taxpayer will be paying for it.

One brick at a time. And you're carrying the bricks for him.

Nice going.

 

Uncharted Spirit, I feel your pain. But this is the politics forum so it was inevitable.

 

UnchartedSpirit, the American people do not swing all that far to the right or all that far to the left in any one presidential election. That's why both of the major party candidates try to move to the center during the general election campaign after appealing to the activists in their parties during the primaries.

That's why the chances of Hillary Clinton on the left or Sam Brownback on the right winning the White House in 2008 are very, very slim.

 

This country is not Old Testament Israel and our kingdom is not of this world. The whole world lieth in wickedness.

 

Since you are loyal supporter of Dubya, you are one of them. Under Bush, the nanny state has progressed rapidly.

1. Biggest federal grab of power from the states since Roosevelt (No Child Left Behind)

2. Biggest new entitlement program since LBJ (Prescription Drug Program)

3. Greatest increase in Presidential power against American citizens ("Patriot" act)

4. Biggest peacetime deficit in history. This is a massive tax increase, plus interest, unless you suppose someone besides the taxpayer will be paying for it.

One brick at a time. And you're carrying the bricks for him.

Nice going. </font>[/QUOTE]Galatian, that's some odd conclusions you've made about my positions!

I support President Bush on many things - especially on the war we're fighting against terrorism. I'm pleased with his courage and determination to stand fast despite all the pressure against him. I believe he's doing the right things. I support the cause and the troops and their leaders - military and civilian.

Given the alternatives the Democrat party has offered in recent years, I'm very pleased to be a Republican and generally support them. I'm certainly very happy that neither Al Gore nor John Kerry were elected President!

I do not agree with the expanding role of our federal government by any party. I do agree that Republicans have had a hand in that as well. However, I place the primary responsibility for that upon citizens "who want our government - especially the federal government - to take care of everything for everyone all of the time." Those elected as their representatives are all to happy to oblige them with an ever increasing number and scope of programs at an ever increasing cost. The Democrats excel at this but the Republicans aren't far behind these days.

I don't have any problem with the Patriot Act although I do not want to make sure Congress continues to provide oversight to its application because, down deep inside, I'd don't trust government. Power can corrupt! Never the less, the act is designed to empower our government to more effectively pursue the fight against terrorism. I'm for that! I don't see that the act treads upon the freedoms of law abiding citizens. I don't care if it steps on enemies of the nation either within or outside our borders. I don't have any problem with the President doing his job. I'd even like to see him do much more than he has. I'd like the borders to be far more effectively secured. I'd like the terrorists to be held by, tried by, and, if found guilty, executed by the military if not killed out right in actual fighting.

I am concerned, and always have been concerned, about the national deficit. The only way we're going to reduce it is to cut spending or increase taxes. I vote to cut spending. The only way to cut spending is to stop trying to solve everything for everyone all of the time. People have to take responsibility for their own lives. Long term, I'd like to see the government out of many areas of our lives including education.

 

Cutting taxes does not necessarily increase revenue and conversely increasing tax rates will generally not have a long term positive effect on revenues.

JFK was the first to recognize that a "rising tide lifts all boats". That was his way of saying "trickle down".

The Bush tax cuts have not harmed but rather increased revenue by increasing taxable business activity. High tax rates and regulations have a stiffling effect on economic activity.

IT IS A LIBERAL LIE THAT REDUCING TAXES HAS HURT THE POOR OR INCREASED THE DEFICIT.

Rich people and in particular capitalists provide the funding for job creation... and they are much better at producing worthwhile jobs than government ever can be.

 

"Rich people and in particular capitalists provide the funding for job creation..."


The Bible tells us in James ch. 5 how good rich people are to the poor and how rich in faith they are.

 

Brother James, is it a sin to be rich ?