" Psychotic " Individual here.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
It certainly seems it'd be oppressive, and counter to the rights of the individual. Right or Left would be a moot point. Why do you ask ?

---

I ask because you explicitly said that all big-government concepts are left-wing.

To counter that, I presented this example, which I additionally consider to be very much NOT left-wing. In fact, it might be the original right-wing, going by the origins of the terms.

Would you thus concede that big government and authoritarian oppression can be found both in right and left wing extremes? Or at the very least not originate exclusively from left-wing thought?

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

The political game of - vote for me, and I'll give you( or your union, your state, home town, district, racial group, etc.. ) benefits and 'RIGHTS'- is a racket played by almost anyone, Left or Right. So yes, we can agree on that point.

But the larger issue, of what the State can and should do, for the good of the people, is what I'm talking about.

Our Constitution speaks of freedoms we have, FROM govt. Because, at the time, our founders were trying to escape the tyranny of an oppressive ,over bearing system. In contrast, our President speaks of things our govt MUST do for people, which is a complete 180 on the very ideals for which this country was founded.

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf. - Barack Obama.

I'm sorry Barry, but there's a REASON for that, and it's bizarre that a Constitutional 'lecturer ' like yourself doesn't get it.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

Resident USA Freedom Fundie

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME