And McCain's VP pick is...

 

I would be happy to respond King John.

 

Both the Democrat and Republican parties seem to be onboard with the patriot act, atleast that is how it appears to me? So i don't think it is a party-specific issue? If any rights have indeed been eroded, judging from my American history, it is quickly righted with repeals against it. Seeing that it is not the first time to have taken place (Probably a dozen times or so... with this one being the more questionable of recent?), especially in a confusing time of war or conflict; Therefor... it's not like it is without precedent and doesn't cause me any concern as of yet. That is why i don't think the character that makes up this country has changed that much.. if at all? I think only the world's understanding or actual experience of what it has always been like (My assumption of course) for this country during times of great international stress. I suppose we can thank television and the web for the speed of dissemination & informational transfer in the modern world? However, as much as i am not afraid as of current, is in part due to our multitude of critics, in which... i am thankfully greatful  that there are people out there who are keeping an eye on it for any signs of abuse, no matter if it is suspicous on how they play the political angle on it! I still appreciate all the paranoia to a degree!

 

   About bigger government, i have to be honest. At that time, in 2000, i liked Bush's message of less military involvement and nation building in the world & perhaps less government spending? In 2004, i held my nose and voted for him too follow through on what he started in the foreign sphere. Domestically, i think i realized roughly around that time of the 2004 elections(?), that between the two parties, one was just a tad less bigger on more government than the other. Now i tend too think even the Republicans are abandoning that position, leaving it entirely to the Libertarian party to be the only ones who still hold onto the prinicples of smaller government. The evolution of my political support goes something like this... I started out liking Fred Thompson, then switched my support, albeit... lukewarmly, to Mr. McCain. Then i found myself even underwhelmed by his performance so far, that is before Gov. Palin. Now i am not sure which party i might vote for this Novermber, The Libertarians or the Republicans? Whatever the reasoning for throwing Gov. Palin on the ticket, it seems to be working in reenergizing the GOP base!

 

Why is it that anytime somebody disagrees with another person's political views, the disagreer immediately resorts to calling the other person's argument propaganda? Simply put a disagreement is not propaganda, especially if the disagreeing point has facts behind it.

 

Well.. if i came across or even stated an accussation of someone's thought as being propaganda (I'm sure i have somewhere on the Web?), then i offer my apologies for any extreme rudeness on my part, but no apology for my belief.

 

Why do we use the word "propaganda" if we disagree with one another? I'm afraid to joke around with this subject, because people might actually take me seriously? Persoanlly, i'm not always do dure... but when i use it, it's not out of avoidance of an issue, or perhaps it is too a degree, but i would guess it is probably the lack of any originality for an arguement when i possibly find myself using the word when it sounds like an echo of any particular party line, verbatim that is...; Much like i suppose when it is used against me or the beliefs i happen to agree with. I can't doubt that i can be a biased person, and don't think i am that much of a fool who denies it! Other then what i had mentioned, i can't think of anything else too add?

 

Maybe more intelligent posters here could give you a much better perspective then i can? Anyways... i hoped this helped a little?

 

 

 

Ok... our liberal friends and allies want an explanation for this supposive monstrosity they are currently faced with, then i suggest people are to go and look it up in your governments archives or ask your grandparents? Who better to explain why the US is still involved in the world? It's like people expected it too remain small & militarily weak while facing a powerful military advesary, such as the USSR?

 

Ummm yeah, well if it ever came down to a shooting war, we could always have shot back with daisies  go figure...

It's not totally party-specific. There are libertarians on the right who are against many provisions of the Act, and there are Democrat conservatives who are for it. On the whole though, opposition to the act was mainly from Democrats and the support for it mainly Republican.

 

Things are rarely party-specific in the US because the parties aren't cohesive enough.

If any rights have indeed been eroded, judging from my American history, it is quickly righted with repeals against it.

Not if the populace puts up with it. Whether recent legislation erodes old rights is not susceptible to majority vote. I don't think many gun control extremists would accept their rights were not being eroded if gun ownership were forbidden, even if a large majority of the people were in favour of forbidding it.

 

A large number of the people who complain about eroding second amendment rights are keen enough to erode ninth amendment ones.

Why is it that anytime somebody disagrees with another person's political views, the disagreer immediately resorts to calling the other person's argument propaganda? Simply put a disagreement is not propaganda, especially if the disagreeing point has facts behind it.   Well.. if i came across or even stated an accussation of someone's thought as being propaganda (I'm sure i have somewhere on the Web?), then i offer my apologies for any extreme rudeness on my part, but no apology for my belief.

I don't think you did. I don't think King John had you in mind.

 

I wonder what kind of reactions the world, after being downtrodden for so long under American imperialist domination, would react to a non-capitalist, non-western, country taking its place as the imperialist aggressor?

Oppose it. If you don't believe in militarism, it doesn't mean you have to be a pacifist. It means you have to concentrate on defence not aggression.

 

But what has that got to do with the current situation? You seem to operate on the basis that US domination (not that it does de facto dominate) would automatically be good, whereas you only have to look at the US and compare it with other societies to realise that the US system is inferior, certainly on many counts, in providing a secure, peaceful, prosperous and liberated lifestyle.