With President Obama in office, America is regaining world-wide trust while Republicans have the least trust of any political party. Why?

Comments

Comments

• You live in a very strange world, bro.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 20th, 2010

• Of course! That's why we have such a huge problem with illegal immigrants from Switzerland, Canada, Norway, France, Denmark, etc....;-D...

  • Report
  

  by Old School on April 20th, 2010

Comments

• Exactly!

  • Report
  

  by Tallyman on April 20th, 2010

Comments

Comments

Comments

• Hee Hee!

  • Report
  

  by Tallyman on April 20th, 2010

Comments

• "He's an American-hating socialist pig just like them!"
  
  Wow! Ignorance truly is bliss!

  • Report
  

  by Rinky Dinky Do on April 20th, 2010

• Oh yes, Rinky, Obama is such a lover of the American way... that's why the majority of his agenda propagates socialistic ideals. If you're looking for ignorance you need only look as far as the nearest Obama supporter... and notice how blissful they appear.

  • Report
  

  by BACzero on April 20th, 2010

• There is no real definition for an esoteric concept like "the American Way." I don't see how you can say that socialist ideals are against it, whatever it is.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 20th, 2010

• Actually there is a definitive and definable idea behind the founding of our country. Our founding fathers set forth to form a nation built on the idea of minimal government intrusion and maximum individual freedom and rights. Every time we socialize a program, the government takes a bit more control and we lose a bit more freedom. Socialism is not about equality, it's about government control, period. British historian, Lord Acton told us "power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Our government is already corrupt, so how much more power are we willing to give them? Apparently at least a bit more because we continue to hand it over happily. Lord Acton also states in his famous quote "Great men are almost always bad men." Obama is poised to go down in history as a great man (at least in the eyes of some), but I would never call him a good man. Spanish-American philosopher, George Santayana told us "those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Apparently we have learned nothing from the history of other nations, because we're heading down the same road many of them traveled. Giving up our freedoms, one at a time. Handing over our rights to the government, little by little. The Bush administration already took your right to privacy and free speech without most people even realizing it, with the signing of the Patriot Act. A bill that Congressman Jim McDermott himself claimed no Senator read before signing. But what do I know?

  • Report
  

  by BACzero on April 21st, 2010

• No, there definitely is not a definitive and definable idea behind the founding of our country. A statement like that makes me wonder if you're talking about the same country I am. The United States, right?
  The US government as we know it today was founded on a debate, the debate being over how much power the federal government should have. That debate was not settled when the Constitution was ratified. It came to a head at the Civil War, but it's still going on today. There is nothing definitive about that. Even the fact that the Constitution, the only concrete thing to come out of the debate, was ratified was only because some states thought that they could change it later. How in holy hell is that definitive?
  
  This is not to mention the fact that I'm not talking about the founding of the United States, I'm talking about some ambiguous "American Way" which, for some reason, we must always adhere to. Apparently, according to you, the "American Way" definitively says that the government should have no power at all. Or, very little power, at least. I think you should know that that was the first type of government we tried in this country, and to date it's the lowest we've ever sank.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 21st, 2010

• The United States, yes, that's very brilliant of you. The land of the "free", and the home of the brave... that's the one. Can't slip anything past you. I'm not sure where I said anything about the government having NO power, but ok. Whatever you feel like reading into what I say.
  
  Our founding fathers did indeed debate many things when writing the constitution. One of the biggies was how much power the government should have (or, conversely, how much liberty should be given to individuals). See there's a relation there. The more power the government has, the less liberty the individuals have. Do you see the connection... the relationship between government power and personal liberty? By your way of thinking we could slip strait into a communist state and that would be just fine because there's no solid definition of the term "the American way". Therefore, we're not violating anything by becoming communist.
  
  The term "the American way" as I used it (and I'm sure others use it), generalizes the ideals set forth in the Constitution. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, you know... those silly little things that people tend to forget. I'm sure you actually know that, but you seem to enjoy splitting hairs, so that's where we're at. I do not for a second believe our current government (or any government we've had for the past 20 years for that matter) is pro-personal liberty. Because as we've discussed, the more power the government has, the less liberty the individual has. And our government loves its power. Our government is verging on tyrannical. Our government has now given itself the power to force individuals to purchase insurance by way of yet another bill that no one in congress seems to have read before signing! They're gearing up to plan out your daily salt intake for you, soon they'll make sure we all have jobs, won't that be great? It worked so damn well in Russia. You go ahead and shake your head and roll your eyes, but don't think for a second that it can't happen, because it can... and it is.
  
  You just keep on thinking that everything is fine simply because you can't figure out what "American way" means, but realize you have lost the right to act surprised when your grandchildren are calling each other "comrade".

  • Report
  

  by BACzero on April 21st, 2010

• I can smell the rotten tea bags all the way from here!

  • Report
  

  by Rinky Dinky Do on April 21st, 2010

• The whole debate during the writing of the Constitution was how much power the federal government should have. That's all anyone talked about. The Constitution was written in response to the glaring need for a strong, central government. Now, I personally would rather have total liberty than total security, but there is a preferable mean between the two things which we should try to reach. James Madison talked about it in Federalist No. 10. Just because giving the government more power cuts into your personal freedom doesn't mean it's always a terrible thing.
  
  "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is in the Declaration of Independence actually, not the Constitution. The preamble to the Constitution talked about forming "a more perfect Union" (i.e. giving the government more power). It's kind of how our government has always worked, if you can believe it. The federal government has only been gaining more and more power since the Civil War, and every president from FDR on has tried to increase executive power.
  
  Now, I don't really see how we are doomed to communism. As far as I can tell, you don't really know shit about fuck. It seems to me that you think as long as you keep talking about socialism, communism, and tyranny, people will assume you are correct. You might want to try a different angle.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 21st, 2010

• LMAO! Agree or not, I like your style. I don't necessarily think we are "doomed" to communism, but I do believe the possibility for socialism exists currently, and historically, socialism inevitably leads to communism. In my lifetime? No... but in future generations? Possibly. I'm with you that although we don't want our government to control every aspect of our lives, we also can't have anarchy. But where is the line drawn? How much freedom is enough? How much is too little? Every time we turn around a little more freedom is taken away. Are you suggesting that we're heading in the right direction? They overtax tobacco and nobody says shit because only 10% of the population smokes. They overtax alcohol and nobody says shit because we can justify it as a "sin" tax. But we're allowing precedence to be set. Last year a group tried to push a bill through in California to overtax soda because someone somewhere in some government office deemed it was "bad for you". THAT is the kind of power we're giving our government. There has already been talk of a fast food tax, a fat tax, and a salt tax. All under the same premise that the tobacco tax was passed under. It's bad for you so the government must regulate it. The government knows what's good for us better than we do, so they can tell us what to eat. Yes, it's the "slippery slope" argument, but I think it's valid. A country doesn't go from capitalism to communism overnight... or even over a few years. It takes a long time and it happens very slowly, but rest assured, if the people don't recognize it, it will happen.
  
  "They first came for the communists... but I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist." Keep letting the government take rights from groups that don't involve YOU, and eventually there will be no one left to stand up for your rights.
  
  No, I'm not crazy, I'm not fanatical, I don't sit up late at night plotting against the government. I'm an average guy living an average life, but I do worry that the country is heading in a dangerous direction, and has been for a while now. I really do think Obama has a socialistic agenda.

  • Report
  

  by BACzero on April 21st, 2010

• As far as social issues are concerned, I think that we should be working toward equality of condition. That is, making sure everyone starts in the same place. As it is now, we have "equal opportunity," which is basically the government saying "at least I won't stop you." People at a natural disadvantage are fucked. Now, if it progressed to equality of outcome, which is making it so everyone has the same things, then I would begin protesting, myself. Equality of condition is the mean, and that is what I think we should be going for. That's where the line should be drawn.
  
  I'm not a big fan of people trying to legislate morality, by the way. I'm against all forms of sin taxes, as well as outlawing things like drugs. However, the government has been doing it for a very long time, and I think now is the time when that will begin to go away, not increase.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 21st, 2010

Comments

Comments

• While your answer finished strong, the beginning showed a lack of reality that the articles under the question would solve, the 2nd link in particular.

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on April 20th, 2010

• While I don't dispute the first article at all, I don't really take that second article as fact, simply because there are other numbers on trust and parties which I think show a better picture:
  http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1569/trust-in-government-distrust-discontent-anger-partisan-rancor
  
  The Pew survey shows that the trust in the government is very low across the board, and that people are actually becoming more angry at the government. I don't think it's because of Obama; really, anyone could be in office and I think we'd have the same results.
  However, I do think that the Republicans are losing trust. But, conservatives are simply going to form a new party. Perhaps the Teabaggers will become the new Republicans.

  • Report
  

  by Tamilze on April 20th, 2010

Comments

• A typical gross oversimplification lacking details I'd expect from somebody watching grossly oversimplified "news".

  • Report
  

  by Halliburton Shill on April 20th, 2010

Comments

Comments