Third Party & Independents Archives

David:

Our tradition is that in times of war we give up some of our liberties until the emergency is over.

I think it was Lincoln that said the constitution was not a suicide pact.

Craig

Craig, this war according to everyone, Democrat and Republican, President and floor sweeper of Congress, agree, this war will last decades, perhaps generations. Are you seriously proposing we suspend liberties for that long? I assure you, America will not be recognizable as the land of the free in pretty short order. That image of the land of the free is already getting yellowed. And its only been 5 years.

But the Constitution became a Civil War which was a suicide pact, for 10’s of thousands.

Reality sucks, don’t it? The nation survived, but only with luck and horrendous casualties.

David,

I assure you, America will not be recognizable as the land of the free in pretty short order. That image of the land of the free is already getting yellowed. And its only been 5 years.

Actuallly, the US is unrecognizable already, and that was before 9/11. 40 years ago we would have never allowed what we started allowing with the RICO statues in the 70 and 80s that have been turned into the Patriot Act of today. It’s not that we are allowing it and will end up not being free, we have already changed (I fear permanently) in that we even considered, let alone went along with, what we are seeing today.

Fear of Communists, Fear of Terrorism, Fear of Failure, Fear of Big Business. All of these have been used by one party or another to slowly take away more and more rights for some sort of security.

Meanwhile the Fear of Government, the only organization we allow to have control over our lives, whittles away as we see it as a sort of Mother figure who will save us from our social, economic and safety ills.

I agree that we should start with taking our freedom back from this overreaching government, start with the bad parts of the Patriot act and continue to the TSA and our Airports where mass hysteria keeps us treated like unfeeling cattle. But let’s not stop there, let’s get our civil liberties back in all of the ways they are being violated today.

Forgive me if my memory fails, but I believe Ben Franklin said this:

“Those who give up necessary liberties in exchange for temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security.”

The Right harps on endlessly about how the Islamists hate us for our freedoms. An oversimplification, but let’s run with it. If we give up our freedoms in order to fight these enemies, doesn’t that mean that our enemies have won? The so-called War on Terror will never be won with force of arms, because such force will only create new opponents as fast as we destroy them. If force does nothing and impinging upon our freedoms in order to fight terrorists does their job for them, what is left? To treat the terrorsit threat as the criminal act it is, and not use it as an excuse for “regime change”, i.e. invasion and occupation of another country.

Rhinehold:

I agree that we should start with taking our freedom back from this overreaching government, start with the bad parts of the Patriot act and continue to the TSA and our Airports where mass hysteria keeps us treated like unfeeling cattle.

I’m confused by your comments particularly about the TSA. I recognize that no security plan will be foolproof, and that every security plan will have some degree of irritation to the consumer. I’m wondering what level of security you want at our airports and how you propose that it be provided. What is it particularly that you dislike about how the TSA is going about its job so far? I understand there are glitches in what they do, but their track record of no airline attacks is standing firm, which indicates they are doing something right. Thanks for your input.

leatherankh, I have to agree and Franklin was right. As it is right now the terrorist are winning, they do not want to physically conquer us, but to make us like the countries they are in where the population has no freedoms, and the government controls everything.
This war is not on of attrition but doing a mind set change and it will not happen in 2,3, 4 or even 5 yrs, because the current mindset of the terrorist has been set by centuries of the same thing. It will take generations to change people and it is not just the US that has to do it, but other countries and within the Muslim world those that are progressive to see what freedom can do to enhance life, liberty and pursuit of happiness for everyone.
One of the countries Bush calls a friend, who probably could do a lot more is Saudi, but look at them and they are as backwards as every. Women right are almost nil, religion controls almost everything.

President Bush says that the terrorists attacked us because they hate our freedom. (Freedom haters… evil doers.)

So, if we give up freedom, even to a small degree, are we not appeasing these terrorists? Wouldn’t that be the clearest sign of victory for terrorists?

What has emboldened and encouraged these terrorists more: the fact that the attacks on 9/11 were carried out? Or is it our reactions to 9/11 that has proven 9/11 attacks to be successful?

David,

Are your two choices mutually exclusive?

Are these really the only two choices?

I read this today on MSNBC.

Seems that this administration has a great deal of problem with truth. While I don’t think America is unrecognizable, I think it isn’t too alarmist to recognize the dimunition of liberty and the sell out of free speech that they are promoting.

Global warming will end up being a huge failure for this administration as well.

This article is truly alarming…

gergle, all part of a grand plan. Control! Control the media, control the issues, control the message, control the information: control the people’s actions, minds, and destinies.

If you want to take people’s freedom without rebellion, you carefully couch your actions in the name of freedom. This is the Bush strategy. Iraq has nothing to do with the war on terrorism, as the President said just today, the worst outcome would be if our enemies controlled the flow of oil out of the Middle East. The Iraq War was, and is about oil. But, the people would not support death and destruction for control of oil, so Iraq must be sold to the people in the name of freedom, democracy and center of the war on terrorism. The Iraq war was about control of oil’s free flow from the Middle East. Control. It always comes back to control when analyzing why leaders do what they do.

That slip by the President today, I am sure is going to cause some frayed nerves by his speech writers and handlers, if they think anyone was paying attention. I was. Question is, was the media paying attention? Doubtful! For the media control of oil as premise for the Iraq War is old news, and it didn’t sell well last time.

Are we going to let them down behind their backs, yielding up freedoms and individual liberties to those would take them?

I’m afraid that’s the choice a lot of us will make David.

Which is it going to be America?
1) “Take my freedoms, just give me security”.
2) “Give me liberty, or give me death.”
When our troops return, which choice will they find America made behind their backs in these trying times?

I’ll take 2 anytime. But I see more and more folks choosing 1. I’m wondering how much freedom my son, nephew, and niece, all three in war zones, will come home to this time around.
There has always been a cost for freedom and this country has always been willing to pay it. But I’m seeing a bunch of lilly livered cowards that are willing to give up their freedom for that false sense of security called safety. It seems they’re afraid of the cost of freedom and don’t want to pay it anymore. And our power hungry politicians are more than willing to take our freedom while blowing smoke up our tails about safety.
The only way to be safe in this world is to have a military that’s second to none, leaders willing to use it for our safety, and very well armed citizens willing to defend their country if it’s attacked. Even then there’s no such thing as 100% safe.
There’s a country song called ‘An American Soldier’. One of the lines in it says “I don’t want to die for you, but if dieing is asked of me, I’ll bare that cross with honor, because freedom isn’t free. I’m an American, an American Soldier.”
Our fighting men have been bearing that cross sense before this great nation was founded. I sure hope we won’t let the thousands that have died to gain and maintain our freedom down by choosing so called safety over freedom.

Yes, I agree with everyone who has stated that the true threat to our liberty is ourselves and what we are willing to sacrifice because of fear.

David,
You ask where have all the brave souls gone in these trying times. I believe they are still here, and have just been to busy keeping their collective heads above water to realize they have not been getting the full story from the corporate media and the white house.
Im not sure there are as many as there once was, but they are still here. Judging from the few people I know, I think the realization that we need to see take place before real change can occur is starting. I dont think we have hit critical mass yet but I am hopeful we are heading in that direction. Perhaps we will get a sign in November that the peaceful revolution is starting.
Either way keep up the good work, again a most interseting and timely post.

David:

Terrific article. One of your best.

I believe that reducing our liberties - for any reason - does NOT increase our security. Each American feels secure because he or she has inalienable rights guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Take away these rights and none of us will feel secure.

Support the troops! Fight for every single freedom!

How can we ask the troops to fight and die for our freedoms at the same time we so easily give them up for feigned security? How can we allow a President, who so easily asks for our freedoms, sit in power?

This isn’t a REP vs DEM issue… it’s Democratic/Republic vs Autocracy issue.

Paul, thank you for the praise.

Tony, you make an extremely worthy and valuable point. The Bush administration DOES NOT represent the will of the American people. The polls have demonstrated that amply. His administration is also failing to represent ever larger numbers of conservatives. These actions by the White House are about power and control, not the American people and what is in their best interests.

Growing numbers of Republicans, as many as 1/3 according to polls, now believe Bush has sold out the Republican platform and values. That 1/3 is probably closer to 2/3, except for party loyalty preventing that additional 1/3 from speaking out against the President during such trying times.

Nearly all of the Republicans I have dealt with and associated with, have the nation’s future and its people’s interests at the top of their priorities when it comes to governance. They are good people, some even great people of principle and high standards and values. Criticizing this Bush administration is not a condemnation of Republicans in general and should not be viewed that way. More and more of them are feeling the President deceived them as well, when they voted for him.

Thanks Trent for you comments.

j2t2, thank you for the positive comments. I certainly hope your assessment of about brave Americans is valid. As you say, we may see light at the end of the tunnel on Nov. 7, and droves of Americans return to the values they really believe in as opposed to those they were told were good for them.

I’ve had a pretty strong revalation lately… I really don’t hate or hold anything against true Republicans. They represent a legitimate beleif system in this country, and to fight against the existance of that is not only wrong, it’s unAmerican. I like a variety of opinions at work within our government… it keeps things on balance.

But what we have right now is a severe lack of balance. One particular group has taken the rest of America for a very bad ride. There is no longer possible collaboration or cross-isle agreements… it seems that any question or reluctance to do as they wish seems to qualify as treason. This has to end.

Tony, no amount of vote cheating, nor subterfuge on the part of the Bush administration and the Republican leadership which so desperately wants to hold on to power, will prevent the people from changing the government and those who sit at its helm, once the people realize it is not a government of, by, and for their best interests.

That is why I believe it would, in the long run, be better for America if Republicans hold onto power into the 2008 elections. Far, far more Libertarians, Republicans, and independents will have awakened to the fact that this neo-con ideology centered on control and power, is not healthy for America or her future. Then nothing will stop the people from expunging these authoritarian idealogues from power.

I say authoritarian, because this administration is authoring its own laws rather than conforming to them, and in total disregard in some instances for the Constitution and legal precedence. That is the very core definition of authoritarianism. It seeks to take us from a nation of law, to a nation of men, where persons in power author laws according to their own needs and wants, not Constitutional or legal precedence.

What is ironic time and again, is that mastery of the Bush adminstration to first attack others for what it intends to do itself. It attacked judges for legislating from the bench, all the while seeking to legislate using signing orders and interpretations of the Constitution by the Attorney General, thus usurpring the role of both the courts and the Congress.

Bush touts freedom and liberty as he implements policies to strip freedoms and liberties from us. He speaks of cutting the deficit in half year after year after year, all the while building national debt to unprecedented levels. He talks of smaller government as he grows the size of government to ever greater proportions. He talks about good policy for the economy through tax cuts as he borrows trillions from the next generation’s payroll deductions.

Many an authoritarian leader has used the very same tactics to steal power from the people. They have all fallen on the sword of their own hypocrisy and duplicity.

Tony
How can we ask the troops to fight and die for our freedoms at the same time we so easily give them up for feigned security?

Good question. I reckon the lives and blood of our troops ain’t as important as they used to be.

How can we allow a President, who so easily asks for our freedoms, sit in power?

How can we get rid of him now? It ain’t easy to impeach and the only two attemps failed.
We had our chance in 04 and the voters seemed to want him for another 4 years.

I find this entire conversation heartening. Five years after 9-11 it is much easier to put everything that has happened since in perspective, and the issues that, at the time, seemed pertinent, have often turned out to be much adeu about nothing.

John Mueller, an international relations theorist, wrote this article on whether or not there is really a legitimate terrorist threat out there, or if it is really fear itself we are fleeing from. His point, though it may not be entirely true, is worth considering.

“We had our chance in 04 and the voters seemed to want him for another 4 years.”

Ain’t Democracy a bitch!? This is at the core of my doubts for a DEM wave in Nov. We had the same arguments against Bush then that have now… and I know that is only seeing the issues with one candidate rather than showcasing positives for the other candidate (I need to be more positive) but DAMMIT, the majority of people hate Bush now for the exact reasons they voted for him in 04.

One question: Is there an actual rational thought that goes on in the voting booth?

tony
One question: Is there an actual rational thought that goes on in the voting booth?

Doubt it. Otherwise we would never of had the likes of LBJ, Nixon, Carter, or Clinton either.

I would also toss in Reagan and Bush (both.) I take exception with Carter - I think he’s an extremely intelligent man.

Why is it that we have such an exception wealth of talent in our country - but we elected such mediocrity. Also, the political parties have us in such a tizzy, we’ll even accept blatant criminal behavior - if it’s for the right party.

Says a lot for the average voter.

(I think the helmet law should be enforced 24/7 on most pedestrians.)

The land of the free has been long gone. What is considered to be the land of the free is now bombarded with high levels of government interference. This country will never be free as long as it continues to feel that it has no responsibility to the black community for all that it has done to it. We are never free. Freedom is of the mind and no government can control that.

Cheri, freedom of the mind is certainly one kind of freedom. But, there are many others. Freedom of travel, freedom from intrusion by government into our personal lives, freedom from confiscation by the government or corporations lobbying it via the illustrious mechanism called taxes. Freedom from wrongful and erroneous arrest, conviction, and imprisonment for crimes we didn’t commit. Freedom of access to our government officials.

There are many kinds of freedom. Freedom of the mind is an important one, but, so are all these others in a democracy.

tony:

Why is it that we have such an exception wealth of talent in our country - but we elected such mediocrity.

It’s called money, as in campaign contributions. The candidate who gets the most money for his/her campaign almost always wins. Campaign contributors often do not want anyone but the mediocre, because the mediocre better represent those to whom they are beholden, rather than representing the best interests of the nation.

tony:

I take exception with Carter - I think he’s an extremely intelligent man.

Carter was merely an aberration in the trend toward more pliable, bought-and-paid-for presidents. He could never have become elected had not the Nixon administration been so thoroughly corrupt. Dubya is merely the latest in an unabated progression downhill since Carter.

Yes, Carter’s term in office was a disaster. But most of the problems he confronted and failed to resolve were the results of bad decisions by his predecessors, much as will be the case for whoever succeeds Dubya.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the first thing that needs to happen to whomever runs for president in 2008 (Dem or Repub or otherwise) is for them to have a complete psychiatric examination to determine what form of insanity drives them to want to clean up Dubya’s messes.