New states' rights fight emerges
For a bunch of guys obsessed with 19th century history, our esteemed state lawmakers sure haven't learned much from it.
Because the last time they got all uppity and started mouthing off about states' rights, we got our butts kicked.
Right now, the General Assembly is considering a resolution to warn the federal government not to overstep its bounds by imposing too many laws on the state.
Legislators assert that all federal agencies and employees in South Carolina are subject to the state laws, but the state isn't particularly beholden to the feds. They quote the U.S. Constitution and their new favorite amendment, the 10th, to remind President Barack Obama that "powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Here we go again. Next thing you know, they'll be shooting at the Park Service guys out at Fort Sumter.
These lawmakers say they're doing this because they don't like the stimulus bill, and are sick of unfunded mandates.
Huh.
Well, maybe they can save some postage for our cash-strapped state by mailing the resolution to the White House in the same envelope as that thank-you card for the $8 billion in bailout money. Of course, they could just pass on the cost of the stamp to the counties along with the rest of their own unfunded mandates.
A bit of unpleasantness
Scott Poole, a history professor at the College of Charleston and co-author of "The Palmetto State: The Making of Modern South Carolina," knows quite a bit about our not-so-recent unpleasantness, and is bewildered by this move.
Proposed resolution
"It's an unfortunate rhetorical decision," Poole says. "That language has a tragic history in the life of our state. It harks back pretty clearly to the nullification movement."
That fight came up in the 1830s, when our legislature didn't like some tariffs, declared them null and void in these parts. President Andrew Jackson got so mad he stopped looking for a way to cheat American Indians out of their land long enough to make some pretty serious threats. And he meant business — just ask said Indians. If you can find any.
That dragged on for a couple of years, egged on by John C. Calhoun, until the state finally backed down. But South Carolina's resident busybodies didn't shut up, and kept fanning the flames until finally they just decided to secede. And we all know how that turned out.
Don't stir this up now
The most troubling thing about this resolution, Poole notes, is, "There has never been a time when South Carolina used that language that it wasn't intertwined with race."
He's got a point. Notice that the Legislature didn't get all indignant when the last administration was stripping away all our constitutional rights with the Patriot Act. And then there's the race issue from the last states' rights thingy — but let's not get into that.
Truth is, some people who remember history seem doomed to repeat it.
This path leads to a bad place, which folks around here should know better than anyone. Maybe we should use the Confederate Memorial Day to teach some hard lessons instead of taking the day off to shop.
So if the General Assembly passes this resolution, you'd better cook up some hard tack, break out the wool uniforms and hope the scientists get the Hunley working again. Lawmakers say it'll never come to that; they say they're just making a statement.
Yep, this resolution says something very loudly: kick our butts.
Reach Brian Hicks at 937-5561 or bhicks@postandcourier.com. To read previous columns, go to postandcourier.com/hicks/.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
buff_o_rilla (anonymous) says...
Its high time that states start standing up for themselves and put this oppressive Federal Government in its place. South Carolina isnt the only State reasserting its Constitutional Rights. As for me i am tired of being controlled by people hundreds of miles away from me physically and even further away from me when it comes to what i believe and how i live. Stand up South Carolina you have stood up for less in the past. No need to cower down to the Feds, you are not alone in this struggle!!!
March 20, 2009 at 1:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Creeker01 (anonymous) says...
Tea Party downtown on 4-15.
Be there.
March 20, 2009 at 2:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
watchdog (anonymous) says...
Creeker01 and buff o rilla, you two are idiots. Pick up a book and learn your history, MORONS!
March 20, 2009 at 3:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jacman (anonymous) says...
Can't we all just get along ? , " chuckles "
March 20, 2009 at 4:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
skeeter (anonymous) says...
John C Calhoun where are you?
March 20, 2009 at 6:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
joldham (anonymous) says...
THIS WHOLE SITUATION IS GETTING WAY OUT OF HAND. WE ALL NEED TO BACK UP AND TAKE A BREATH...
I'M SURE WITH ALL THE SCHOLARS WE HAVE IN SOUTH CAROLINA WE CAN COME UP WITH AN INTELLIGENT ANSWER AND RESPONSE TO THIS SITUATION. WE HAVE SEEN SOME ALREADY IN THE COMMENTS APPLIED TODAY. WE JUST NEED TO KEEP THE SCHOLARS OF OUR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES OUT OF THE FINAL PRODUCT.
March 20, 2009 at 6:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mb300sl (anonymous) says...
The stimulus is BS but we should take the money...we're going to have to pay the taxes to pay for it!
March 20, 2009 at 7:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eatmorecollards (anonymous) says...
This story should be in the editorial section. Brian Hicks liberal use of "we" doesn't speak for me.
The War of Northern Aggression isn't over yet.
March 20, 2009 at 7:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
I'll try one more time to tell you state politicians how to handle this. The feds get around the language (not the spirit) of the Constitution by buying you off. They own you. They set conditions on getting the money by telling you what hoops that you must jump through to get that money. That way you become legally obligated to do what they say, when they say, and how they say. They own you now and will own you as long as you take their money. Stop taking their money, and you'll find that a lot of state operations, government and education for example, will become cheaper and more effective, because you will not have to jump through those loops unless you want to. You can then exercise your rights under the Constitution. Stop selling your rights away.
March 20, 2009 at 7:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Aristotle_384 (anonymous) says...
Is this an opinion piece or a news story?
March 20, 2009 at 7:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
It's a rare news story these days that is not slanted one way or another. This one just happens to have a little more opinion than most.
March 20, 2009 at 7:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Aristotle_384 (anonymous) says...
theronce, good point. Every single dollar sent to DC, for the Dept of transportation, education, you name it, that dollar is than used as a means to dictate to the states the laws that the states must enact, or they will not get their tax dollars back. It is called control, and the federal government is very good at it.
March 20, 2009 at 7:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
majorjohnson (anonymous) says...
We tossed states rights out the window when it was convenient for us, like when we get more back from the feds than we give, but then cry out about being so steadfast in our commitment to states rights. I think it's wrong that we take from other states to re-build our beaches and build our sidewalks. We're a teenage welfare state, we waste what we have and beg big daddy government for more, then cry and whine because we have to follow daddies rules while we're living under daddies roof. If so many states weren't so willing to give up their rights for a chance to suck the federal teat we might not be in this mess right now.
March 20, 2009 at 7:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
watchdog (anonymous) says...
Majorjohnson, and blueeyes are correct. SC is a welfare state because of our DREAM TEAM(Sandford, Graham, Demint, Henry Brown)Leadership.
March 20, 2009 at 8:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
The events of the Civil War outline fairly clearly that being overzealous about states' rights and seeking to cripple federal power leads to a weak nation. During the Civil War, the Confederate states were so obsessed with states' rights that they frequently refused to send troops or money to aid each other. The mentality that each state is a separate sovereignty in a loose confederation with each other disrupts the ability of the union to work cohesively.
An absolutely powerful federal government would be a bad thing, sure, but the stimulus bill does not present a significant threat to states' rights. This states' rights squabble seems to be a bit of grandstanding by our state government, and the article has it spot-on that this is a partisan move. If states' rights didn't come up when the Patriot Act was passed, but is coming up now for the Stimulus Bill, then the difference between the two - the fact that the Patriot Act originated with a Republican administration and the Stimulus is being carried out by a Democratic administration - must be the reason that the states' rights cry is being put out now.
Our state government is, once again, putting partisan politics above our best interests.
March 20, 2009 at 8:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Draconian (anonymous) says...
Ownership of the states and the federal government is now China's. Greed, Corruption and Politics is business as usual. Then, we all talk about ethics and blame our students for a culture they have no control. The problems and solutions are suppose to be held by local control, which the states have sold citizens' democratic rights for socialism. The nature of police states in nanny government to distribute welfare only creates a class system. Religion, race, money will all be sorted by the powers vested in our monarchy. Let them eat cake! He who has the gold rules-
March 20, 2009 at 8:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
What high school does Brian Hicks go to? This article reads like some teenager blindly following a liberal teacher. It is a really sad day in America when politicians are ridiculed for wanting to return to the Constitution.
I wish liberals would at least have the integrity to state what they really want....to tear up the Constitution and have a new constitutional convention where they rewrite how America should be governed.
March 20, 2009 at 8:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jimjones (anonymous) says...
Every wonder why we get back more than we give in? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the majority of this state is "lower class". I don't like the crapulus and I think Sanford is doing what he thinks is best. When his time is up vote for a guy who will take the money. I hope the whole thing fails so we can start over and do it right . Burn baby burn!
March 20, 2009 at 8:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cappy (anonymous) says...
WHAT HAPPENED? When did we become liberals or conservatives, republicans or democrats. When did we lose THESE united states for THE united states. Whe did it become necessary to have a hyphon in your nationality? What ever happened to AMERICANS?
March 20, 2009 at 8:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Draconian, the goal of Socialism is complete equality before the law between all citizens and the removal of the social inequalities created by socioeconomic classes. That directly contradicts distributing welfare and creating a class system. There are far too many people like yourself who are crying about Socialism and don't have any idea what it really is or how it really works.
Greyrider, when conservatives come up with legislation like the Patriot Act, you really can't pretend that only liberal politicians are tearing up the Constitution. The Patriot Act does far more to trample the Constitution and rape our rights as citizens and human beings than the Stimulus ever possibly could, but conservatives accept the Patriot Act because it gives them more power over us and it coincides with their political agenda. They oppose the Stimulus and call it unconstitutional not because it really violates anything in the Constitution but because it doesn't conform to the conservative agenda of crippling the government to leg big business run roughshod over workers and consumers, all to maximize their own profits.
March 20, 2009 at 8:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
IHATEINBEV (anonymous) says...
Sanford's right, and the P&C is completely out of place. Why do they continue to let this guy write columns and put them on the front page of the "LOCAL" section? He should be writing his editorials for the New York Times. I'm pretty sure he would fit in better up there.
It's about time South Carolina stood up for us. How could anybody out there actually think 500+ bureaucrats in Washington DC knows what is best for South Carolina. I'll take a governor that was born and raised here any day. He has an a personal stake in the future of our State.
I am tired of taxation without representation.
March 20, 2009 at 8:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
South Carolina takes money from the fed and then has the audacity to say "you aren't the boss of me", just like some sassy teenager. You can't have it both ways.
Eatmore: sorry to inform you, but the war is over and the south lost. I know it is hard to accept, but it is true. Just pick up a history book......oops, that wouldn't fit into your neat little box that you have hunkered down into. Tin foil hats, guns, K rations:.the yanks are coming, the yanks are coming! Good grief dude::get with the times.
FYI:
http://www.momsrising.org/film
I watched portions of this film last night. We (United States) are the only industrial nation that does not mandate family leave, sick time or child health care. Once you watch this film you will see that doing the right thing (flexible schedules, maternity leave longer than 6 weeks, a decent living wage) can be profitable for the business world. Wonder if we did the right thing and prospered if the conservatives would get on board?
Couldn't South Carolina get above the curve if we embraced our "so called" family values and showed the country how to be "right" and still make money?
.
March 20, 2009 at 8:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
Holy cow - you can't come up with a country a little closer to 2009 that hasn't been in a prolonged war?
hhhhmmmm are we cherry picking this morning?
March 20, 2009 at 9:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
CHRISJIII (anonymous) says...
ITgrunt: You hit the nail on the head.You have all of these GOP'ers screaming about socialism and they don't have a clue as to what it means. I would have thought that the word "appeasement" would have made them go to their history or civics books to find out what these words really mean, but then being in S.C. they probably couldn't find a school book that covered those things.
March 20, 2009 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
itgrunt, the best way I can answer you is this. Bush is no longer President. Obama is now President. I don't trust Obama as far as I can throw him. I have no problem with the Patriot Act in place with Obama as President. The only people who have anything to fear from the Patriot Act are terrorists and criminals. I don't feel threatened by the Patriot Act under Obama in any way, shape, or form.
March 20, 2009 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
What grey? You don't trust Obama, but you have no problem with the Patriot Act under Obama?
Did you ever have a problem with the Patriot Act?
March 20, 2009 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
Did I ever have a problem with the Patriot Act?
NO, I never did.
The left wing media created the Patriot Act hysteria. Explain HOW the Patriot Act tramples REAL Constitutional rights. In other words, QUOTE the Constitution and QUOTE the Patriot Act.
March 20, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Posted by Aristotle_384 on March 20, 2009 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Is this an opinion piece or a news story?
================================================
It passes as "hard facts" for some around here.
March 20, 2009 at 9:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
Again, in ref to the Patriot Act, 1 thing that should be obvious
Persons not US citizens have NO Constitutional rights
March 20, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
It is humorous that this article covers portions of the Constitution, you know that old piece of paper that endows all of us as citizens with certain rights, and the righties that scream about it all the time have no problem with the Patriot Act.
It tramples all over our Constitution, but that is OK as long as it fits into your nice little dream world.
I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning!
March 20, 2009 at 9:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
longagoandfaraway (anonymous) says...
What would you prefer, Mr. Hicks, a "yassuh, masta" resolution?
The Constitution of the United States is still, hopefully, worth defending, regardless of the perceived ramifications.
March 20, 2009 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
BTW, obama voted to support the Patriot ACT.
89 U.S. senators voted in favor of the March 2, 2006 Renewal of the Patriot Act
Obama (D-IL)yea
Biden (D-DE)yea
Clinton (D-NY) yea
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/patrio...
CHRISJIII - socialism is simple;
State ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals. Capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital, creates an unequal society. <---this is being spewed from the class warfare experts in the democrat party and their leader obama puppet of George Soros.
That is the short version, but the bottom line is that the State, eventually will be in control of banking, industry, farming, ect... all in the name of equaility.
Unfortunately, as the democrats are demonstrating, as the great Eric Arthur Blair (George Orwell) wrote: 'All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
March 20, 2009 at 9:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCHoser (anonymous) says...
Why should anyone trust Obama??? Just what has he done that is deserving of our trust so far? He has done the opposite-broken countless promises made during the campaign, can't select a cabinet member worth his/her weight in salt! Pushes through several spending/bailout bills which we are finding out just plain suck! I mean, why in the world should we trust this guy? His administration so far is a joke from his cabinet picks to his looney tunes ideas to his appearances on various shows. This experiment will be over in 4 years, and maybe then the adults can come out and get things done!
March 20, 2009 at 10:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BlackReign (anonymous) says...
The tea party website asks, Are you fed up with a Congress and a president who:
vote for a $500 billion tax bill without even reading it are spending trillions of borrowed dollars, leaving a debt our great-grandchildren will be paying?
consistently give special interest groups billions of dollars in earmarks to help get themselves re-elected?
want to take your wealth and redistribute it to others?
punish those who practice responsible financial behavior and reward those who do not?
admit to using the financial hurt of millions as an opportunity to push their political agenda?
run up trillions of dollars of debt and then sell that debt to countries such as China?
want government-controlled health care?
want to take away the right to vote with a secret ballot in union elections?
refuse to stop the flow of millions of illegal immigrants into our country?
appoint a defender of child pornography to the No. 2 position in the Justice Department?
want to force doctors and other medical workers to perform abortions against their will?
want to impose a carbon tax on your
electricity, gas and home-heating fuels?
want to reduce your tax deductibility for charitable gifts?
take money from your family budget to pay their federal budget?
http://teapartyday.com/
March 20, 2009 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hobcaw (anonymous) says...
Mark Sanford is the man - I support his actions 100% ...
March 20, 2009 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I_Love_d_Peninsula (anonymous) says...
When South Carolina committed the act of treason, they should instantly put to death. Then, we wouldn't have these problems with them now.
Let's face it, South Carolina hasn't effected not one single component that is productive and or positive for the betterment of humanity. It's entire existence has been littered with rebellion, defiance, lack of vision and passive aggressive behavior.
I hope the idiot, Mr. Sanford refuses the money, then finally SC can rot.
March 20, 2009 at 10:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jimjones (anonymous) says...
Luna, you said it right US CITIZENS! Not a citizen no rights for you!
March 20, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
WhatMeWorry (anonymous) says...
BlackReign, the country you describe sounds really scary! If I were you and I lived in that country, I'd get out quickly!
Luckily, half of what you wrote is untrue (or at least a gross exagerration). The other half is unfortunate, but does not represent any change over the policies of the last century.
It's so interesting how quickly a group of people who claim to despise the "victim's attitude" can adopt that same attitude.
March 20, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Larz13 (anonymous) says...
FYI--the Patriot Act has NO financial strings attached to it regarding the state (unlike the stimulus).
Obama will be gone a la Jimmy Carter in 1980 after all of the stimulus money is spent and nothing comes of it except debt, more unemployment, high inflation and interest rates.
Also...these scholars are no more than book smart people who are not street smart. More than likely not able to get a real job in business today or any day. They don't get their summers off and 3 weeks of vacation between semesters. The C of C is a haven for them around here.
March 20, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
You guys are nuts!
Obama this.....we are in ruins.....the sky is falling....COMMUNISM.....Socialists......propaganda.
I am guilty of coming on here and attempting to put some level headedness on the daily spin, but ya'll are just too hard core and unwilling to EVER look at another point of view.
But I did note very few of you righties have commented on the revelation that most of the illegally held GITMO prisoners are innocent. I guess you don't want to look in that mirror too long?
March 20, 2009 at 10:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
majorjohnson (anonymous) says...
For luna to be crying about the constitution being trampled is downright hilarious. This is a woman who thinks rights are taken from one person to give to another. Food is a right, so I have to work a portion of my work week to fork over money to pay for someone else's food. Health care is a right so I have to work to pay for someone else's health care. She thinks a right is something that someone else is forced to provide.
Here's some news for you luna. I have a right to be a millionaire. It's up to me to actually obtain that status though, it's not up to government to take from someone else to make me a millionaire, and under the constitution they have no more power to do that than they do to make me pay for someone else's food, housing or health care. You wouldn't know a right if it poked you in the eye.
March 20, 2009 at 10:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
hairy1663 (anonymous) says...
I love the way some folks think this is just an issue with South Carolina, including Brian Hicks! Currently more than 20 states have lawmakers pushing measures calling for state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. This is not the same as secession even though Mr. Hicks would like you to believe that. Mr. Hicks conveniently left that out in his attempt to belittle our state.
March 20, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SCHoser (anonymous) says...
Luna-replace the word "most" with the word "many", and you may have more credibility. And why would anyone comment on that story here? Apples and oranges.
March 20, 2009 at 11:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jimjones (anonymous) says...
Will Rachel Maddow...er.... Keith Olberman...er...luna please move to one of those peace loving Middle East countries. I am sure they share your opinion of the U.S. Most of the detainees!!!!! You are as senile as the Fossil in Charleston!
March 20, 2009 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eatmorecollards (anonymous) says...
Sanford should take that money and divide it up between all South Carolinian's who had a ancestor that fought for the south in the Civil War.
Problem settled!
March 20, 2009 at 11:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
Please major - you have no idea who I am or what my bank account looks like....so to assume....I'm sure you know the adage, you seem to ignore it enough.
What do you think social security is for:..and if you are a millionaire are you going to accept the checks when they come? I have been paying in to the system for 25 years and I gladly give those funds to other CITIZENS in need.
How we take care of our most needy and vulnerable defines us as a society:..I like my picture better than I like yours, but we have to agree to disagree.
harold - just because someone has a beef with the way things are going in this state or this country does not mean they are from African. Come on darling, that is just too easy of a cope out. I know you can do much better than that.....You wound me in these posts enough;-)
March 20, 2009 at 11:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
Luna, the world did not come into existence a few years ago. We have thousands of years of human existence and thousands of years of governmental styles to study and learn from. Obama and the Washington lefties are trying failed ideas. Find someone from Poland, or China, or the former Soviet Union, and talk to them about life under an all-powerful federal government. This has been tried before and it has never worked. This is nothing new.
March 20, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Draconian (anonymous) says...
Itgrunt The definition of democracy under the constitution is equality of rights but not ability. When those of ability are required to fund welfare or other such gov. sanctioned programs to leave no one left behind, we have thus eliminated social inequalities by redistribution of the socioeconomic class to allow for one size fits all. The class system will never be eliminated by the nature of the human beast to label rich/poor, black/white, homo/hetero, male/female,skinny/fat, smart/dumb... regardless of socialism, democracy or any other name. But thanks for the lesson and rude opinionated comment.
March 20, 2009 at 12:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
Grey - so is it socialism or communism?
I'm pretty sure Canada, UK, France, Switzerland.....are not on the slippery slope to communism.
And did any of you check out the mothers rising link? Is that communism as well?
Love it when someone disagrees with a view and then tells another AMERICAN CITIZEN to leave the country. Wow, I guess the first amendment only applies to you and your ilk? I pay my taxes, raise my children to be productive members of society, obey the laws (well most) and contribute in a positive to my community, but I still do not get to have the same rights as you......
March 20, 2009 at 12:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Larz13 (anonymous) says...
Socialism = rewarding lazyness
March 20, 2009 at 12:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Greyrider, all-powerful governments worked fairly well up until a few hundred years ago. The absolute monarchies of the pre-Enlightenment era maintained the power of Western Civilization, and in that era a government with powers limited by its wealthy landowners was typically crippled and unable to properly defend itself, as was the case when Poland was torn apart by Prussia, Austria and Russia.
Dictatorships rarely work, though, as we have seen in the Soviet Union, WW2-era Italy and Nazi Germany. Dictatorships typically evolve from revolutions which promise the people equality and prosperity, but are hijacked by leaders who seek to increase their own power rather than to benefit the people in any way.
Typically, though, it is the leftists and liberals in those societies which eventually cause the totalitarian regimes to falter and crumble. No government really works with only left or only right doing everything. And no, before anybody hops onto the delusional, tinfoil hat bandwagon, the US government right now is not completely left or completely right.
The current administration isn't trying to take absolute power or create a Socialist economy, just as the Bush administration wasn't out to create a fascist regime. Unfortunately, people who lean one particular way see any influence whatsoever by the other side as if it were the direct and immediate threat of the most extreme position the other side could possibly take. So what we have now is that many conservatives with an alarmist mentality are blowing the situation far, FAR out of proportion, and claiming that a liberal attempt to stabilize the economy is a conspiracy to establish a Socialist dictatorship.
This is precisely why the founding fathers warned against partisan politics. Everybody needs to take the blinders off, chill out, and realize that in the long term, these things ebb and flow within reasonable boundaries. If the government gets a little too liberal now it's because it has been a little too conservative, and it will lead into another episode of conservative governing in the future. It's a constant evolution and adaptation, and we should all be happier knowing that we have a government that responds constantly to the pull of the people rather than a regime that stagnates in the status quo of entrenched wealth and nobility.
March 20, 2009 at 12:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Draconian, the very fact that we cannot eliminate human imperfection is what makes any pure form of government impossible. Pure, unregulated Capitalism is as impossible and utopian as pure, completely equal Socialism.
If we were all perfect, either one of those systems would work perfectly. We aren't, so they don't.
Balance is what we need. Regulated Capitalism, Moderated Socialism, whatever hybrid -ism you want to call it, a balanced middle-ground that prevents those in power from abusing everyone who doesn't have it while also preventing those with no power from overthrowing and overrunning everything is what we need. But again, there is no perfect government, so we can only keep adapting what we have into whatever works best for the times.
Also, democracy is not defined in the US Constitution. The work doesn't actually even appear in the Constitution, nor does it appear in the Declaration of Independence. Which is good, really, because we don't even have a democracy, we have a republic.
Larz, I could just as easily say that Capitalism equates to rewarding heartless greed. All you're doing is demonizing the concept by taking it to an extreme.
March 20, 2009 at 12:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BlackReign (anonymous) says...
WhatMeWorry, you are obviously just another useful idiot for the George Soros puppet obama.
It takes courage to face the truth, why dont you try?
http://teapartyday.com/
March 20, 2009 at 12:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BlackReign (anonymous) says...
Posted by Luna on March 20, 2009 at 12:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Grey - so is it socialism or communism?
I'm pretty sure Canada, UK, France, Switzerland.....are not on the slippery slope to communism."
Other than the UK, has any of those nations been able to defend them selves for the last 60 years? France couldnt from Germany, and all of NATO, has to have the USA's help. Europe is a paper tiger waiting for their final collapse into chaos and anarchy.
Remember the 2005 "urban riots" Riots in France? That was just the beggining.
France braced for a huge protest march in Paris and a day of nationwide strikes Thursday aimed at pressing the government to support workers better during the economic crisis.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/0...
This entitlement mentality that the socialists in Europe have set up is a powder keg waiting to blow.
Now you have Obama making nice with the terrorist regime in Iran, thank you Jimmy Carter.
You leftists are deluded and living in a fantasy world.
March 20, 2009 at 12:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
ltgrunt, actually the founding fathers did not foresee the formation of political parties. Once one started, they all jumped on board very early on. George Washington, though, somewhere along the line did warn us about them. I'm not actually sure whether he really joined the whigs or has simply been labeled as such. He really is in a category by himself. I also don't think that I have lived in a politically conservative period of time. You'd probably have to go back to before Wilson to find a time like that.
March 20, 2009 at 12:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Luna (anonymous) says...
Black - fear mongering again today, are we?
Please stop being such a tool!
I don't buy it and only kool aide drinkers do....so go with jimjones and take a big sip.....maybe something in the sweetener will mellow you out a little.
So, we have never had a riot or pissed off citizens? But we are still not marching in high step or praying to Stalin, so chill out.
We will never go the way of China or the USSR, and you're crazy theories are just, that crazy!
Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try:::..come on everybody, sing along.
Or:.All you need is love!
Trust me it is easier to love some of you more than others, but I keep trying;-)
March 20, 2009 at 12:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
BlackReign, if you had any concept of history you would know that the citizens of France have used riots and rebellions as a means to force the government to bend to their will for the past four hundred years. It isn't unusual for them to take to the streets to get things done. That's just how things work in France.
Before WWII, France was one of the mightiest and strongest powers not only in Europe but throughout the whole world. The only reason that France was defeated so quickly in WWII was the fact that the Germans employed the Blitzkrieg, a completely new and unforeseen military tactic which changed the face of warfare completely.
Europe isn't beset with an entitlement mentality, the people there just realize that the government has a responsibility to prevent disaster. Here, apparently, there are a lot of people like yourself who would rather the government allow a disaster than have to pay even a portion for the solution if it goes to help others in addition to just yourself.
Personally, I see it as a good thing that President Obama is willing to negotiate with foreign powers which are opposed to us rather than harassing them and intentionally causing more wars. We've had enough meaningless war already, we don't need any more.
"You leftists are deluded and living in a fantasy world."
The same could be said of you, BlackReign.
Theronce - conservative and liberal are relative terms anyway. What we now consider conservative was highly liberal in years past, while what we now consider liberal was a highly conservative governing style. Looking at it in the long term, it's kind of funny.
March 20, 2009 at 12:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
Luna, there really isn't that much of a difference.
itgrunt - Our FEDERAL government is SUPPOSED to be VERY right wing. That's the way the founders intended it. After that, states are allowed to be as left wing or right wing as they want. There are supposed to be very few federal laws or federal policies. That's the whole point of States' rights. If Californians want a very liberal state, South Carolinians really have no right to stop them. If South Carolinains want a very conservative state, Californians don't have a say. But neither should impose their views and the feds should DEFINITELY stay out of it.
March 20, 2009 at 12:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
50ofus (anonymous) says...
What is the point of the grandstanding? SC is not any better than any other state, not NJ, NC, WY etc. Obama is trying to fix a mess not seen since the depression which by the way happened on the watch of our former "esteemed" president. All 50 states are struggling.
Think you can do better? SC has some of the highest unemployment in the country, yet Sanford is saying screw those who need to be tied over with extra UI coverage while looking for jobs, who cares if you starve or you lose your home. The education system is in need of an overhaul its one of the worst in the country, check out Allendale County, hope does not spring eternal there. With help we are not up to par, hate to see if we were a separate entity.
SC is not special you get all the rights and privileges of any other state. This is not 1861, its 2009. Stop living in the past, move on, because SC has a lot to offer and is in need of a lot of improvements.
The Stimulus Bill is not trying to re-write society it's a measure to deal with a situation not seen in many decades. Frankly, it's not an everyday occurance with easy solutions. Instead of complaining write DC with suggestions and ideas to make it better. The Head Honcho in Columbia is worried about old school logic not the citizenry.
March 20, 2009 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
greyrider (anonymous) says...
Posted by 50ofus on March 20, 2009 at 1:13 p.m.
The Stimulus Bill is not trying to re-write society
Oh really, tell Barney Frank, now that he thinks he is CEO of AIG.
March 20, 2009 at 1:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Spunky_Monkey (anonymous) says...
well said 50ofus!!
And how very true.
Sanford is just another one of those southern good ol' boys.
Am so glad he can't get re-elected again.
March 20, 2009 at 1:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
buff_o_rilla (anonymous) says...
The Fed buying over 1 Trillion Dollars in debt yesterday. Obama's budget not reflecting real conditions and numbers, Now shows atleast a 1.8 Trillion Dollar shorfall. This Government and the illegal Federal Reserve with its Fiat currency loaned out under fractional banking standards is going to collapse. States better start crawling out from under the shadow of The Federal Government and re-establish their sovereign rights and powers. Last i heard there were atleast 22 other states with legislation either passed or in commitee's to do just that. South Carolina is not alone, Others have already started regaining their 10th Amendment rights. Wake up or your going to be the odd man out. Its time to get rid of a corrupt Democracy and revert back to a Republic in which the USA was founded on. Get back to strick Constitutional/Bill of Rights Government. When 50.1% of people can Control 49.9% its mob rules!!!
March 20, 2009 at 1:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
50ofus (anonymous) says...
Well, The American Taxpayer is running AIG, at least our dollars are. love AIG's way of running things, take OUR money and pay bonuses. Bonuses are supposed to be paid on performance. Wish I can get a bonus to run a company into the ground and ignite a global crisis.
March 20, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
buff_o_rilla (anonymous) says...
The AIG bonus distraction was just a smokescreen so people would ignore the Billions of taxpayer dollars being paid out to foreign banks and national banks that had already received bailout money. AIG is just a money laundering operation the governement setup to redirect the billions to their masters and cronies.
March 20, 2009 at 2:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
50ofus (anonymous) says...
One last thing, as mentioned earlier SC gets more than it pays to DC. Which allows SC to enjoy a low tax rate. Now lets take NJ a state I have lived in for many years. NJ sends more than it gets back, the result: taxes that would make your head explode. The Feds money comes from all 50 states taxpayers, so before SC rallies for secession remember you may be helped out from someone from another state.
If SC was to "go it alone" so to speak, where would the revenue come from if the Feds were not helping out? You. The property, sales and income taxes would go up to support programs. You may be embargoed from trade, again. The citizens may have to get passports to go to GA or NC and beyond.
March 20, 2009 at 2:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
WhatMeWorry (anonymous) says...
First of all, I want to commend Itgrunt on the well-written and coherent posts today. You are one of the few posters on either side of this discussion who can put together a cogent argument.
On the other side, we've got this blackreign character who's conspiracy theories make Oliver Stone look rational.
Nonetheless, it was blackreign who inspired me to learn more about this George Soros character. Afterall, blackreign accused me of being a follower, so I figured I'd better educate myself regarding the person I blindly follow.
Does anyone else think this Soros character is a major force politically? Sure he throws a lot of money behind poltical actisvism he believes in, but so do a lot of other people and corporations. From what I've read, he's an eccentric billionaire economist who hated Bush and makes a lot of philanthropic donations. Sounds like he's done a few good things in his life, a few bad things, and a lot of quite interesting things.
Does anyone else think he the leftwing's Karl Rove, or is this more of blackreign's lunatic-I'm-a-victim ranting?
March 20, 2009 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
ltgrunt, Europe has a class system. Even today, Europeans for the most part die in the same class that they are born into. That was and is the call of this country. We have the "new money" that all the old world looks down their noses on us for. Regardless of what class you were born into here, you had the chance to move up in the world through your own efforts. That ability is being eroded today with the nanny state doing the income leveling. Those of us here today who are bought and paid for by the government will probably remain so until we die. How many millionaires has the War on Poverty created. A slave knows where his bread is buttered and will return to that table.
March 20, 2009 at 2:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Theronce, the Industrial Revolution did more to create and enforce a class system here in the US than the government has. We have a loose, permeable class system - nothing so formalized as Europe, as we have no legal and very few social barriers to class mobility. Usually.
Class mobility becomes eroded not only by excessive government control but also by a lack of government presence.
If there is too much government, i.e., if there really were a nanny state, then classes would become cemented as income, employment and living arrangement would be dictated for all by the government. Thankfully, that doesn't happen here, as even with government assistance, people are encouraged to improve their lot in life and whenever possible to move themselves to positions whereupon they can be removed from government assistance.
If there were not enough government, i.e., if centralized powers were reduced to impotency, then the already wealthy and landed would dictate social, economic and career mobility and everything would be dictated by family name. Thankfully, that doesn't happen here, as without established nobility and thanks to government regulations on industry, our wealthy and powerful can't overpower the landless, working classes. We are able to have social mobility because laws prevent outright discrimination for jobs and living conditions based on superfluous determinants.
As I've said many, many times, the government that we have right now is in reality much more balanced than the doomsayers would have us believe. Yes, we have too many laws in the sense that our legal system has become inefficient and tends to get in its own way, but we do not have too many laws in that our government controls everything from where we live to what we eat. Yes, our upper classes have too much power in that they can exert a lot of influence on our politicians, but they do not have too much power to the extent that they can force the lower classes into abjectly unfair and unsafe living and working conditions.
Our government and society aren't perfect, but they're not as bad as either side's extreme stances claim.
March 20, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I_Love_d_Peninsula (anonymous) says...
haroldreems : I don't respond to inbreeds. sorry.
March 20, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by ltgrunt on March 20, 2009 at 12:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"BlackReign, if you had any concept of history you would know that the citizens of France have used riots and rebellions as a means to force the government to bend to their will for the past four hundred years"
BlackReign, grunt is one of those "know it alls" and there is no way you can ever be right with him!
And how is that working out for France? Nice history lesson, here is another, 2 World Wars, France had to be saved from with American blood. Even the the Vichy French that fought against us in WW2 ... the armistice included the surrender of all Jews living in France to the Germans.
then there is their commie Ho Chi Minh embraced communism while living in France & helped to form the French Communist party. And of course they left us Vietnam to deal with after they tucked tail and ran.
Yes the french have been a great socialsit state.
Oh and many dropped french rifles, like new, never used.
They havent had a military worth spit, and we the US have covered their worthless arses for decades, even after they bailed from NATO in 1966.
They are socialists, that tried to give their people everything, and now, the spoiled french, are ticked off because their utopian dream is a failure. And I guess the Muslim riots were just muslims practicing their new found french heritage, after coming from Algiers.
But thanks grunt for reminding us of your brilliance and your indeed a blessing for all of us poor souls.
March 20, 2009 at 4:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
theronce, if you go read several days of grunts posts, you will find that he embraces Marxism and communism, and believes that is is the tyrannts and dictators that mess up the proletariat's paradise.
He/or she is an apologist for the great principles of Marx and Engels, it would seem.
March 20, 2009 at 4:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
PalmettoDP (anonymous) says...
This time around the federal government is broke. We're selling our debt to ourselves. If the federal government had to live within its means, it couldn't bail out a lemonade stand.
It's ironic that the south is the only part of the country with any semblance of an industrial base (small, but at least we have one) - a base that didn't exist in the 1860s.
March 20, 2009 at 4:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
singleroni (anonymous) says...
put several tolls on 95 to raise money for sc. free pass for residents and $10 per car for others
March 20, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
"2 World Wars, France had to be saved from with American blood."
We were barely involved in World War I, Get_seriousHELP. By the time we had landed a significant presence, the war was wrapping up. Additionally, the French bore the brunt of the fighting on the Western Front in World War I, and they fought tooth and nail to protect their homeland. Popular misconception cheats France out of a great deal of recognition and respect for the role that the nation played in both World War I and World War II. Also remember that if it weren't for the help that France gave us during the Revolutionary War, there probably wouldn't even be a United States of America.
The Muslim riots in France were actually directly caused by inequalities and discrimination against the Muslim citizens of that nation. If France were really as Socialist as you claim, such inequality wouldn't exist and there wouldn't have been any riots. In reality, though, France is a republic with a regulated capitalist economy with socialist facets, which reinforces the fact that governments - like people - aren't perfect. While you're making the extreme argument that France's riots have been caused by any tiny amount of Socialist influence, the opposite extreme argument could be made that the riots happened because France wasn't Socialist enough.
But by all means, GSH, do continue your baseless and untrue ad hominem attacks against me. Maybe if you insult me enough it will make you right. Probably not.
March 20, 2009 at 4:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by ltgrunt
"Before WWII, France was one of the mightiest and strongest powers not only in Europe but throughout the whole world. The only reason that France was defeated so quickly in WWII was the fact that the Germans employed the Blitzkrieg,..." <---True BUT the French abandon Paris, declaring it an open city. Allowing the Germans to enter the French capital on June 14 without resistance.
The Armistice is signed on June 22. Under its terms, two thirds of France is to be occupied by the Germans. The French army is to be disbanded. In addition, France must bear the cost of the German invasion.
And they were not defeated they surrendered! Gave up, the French government called on the Germans for an armistice to end the fighting.
Hitler dictates that the French surrender take place at Compiegne, a forest north of Paris. The same spot where twenty-two years earlier the Germans had signed the Armistice ending World War I. Of course, it took American and British blood to help them then too.
The only thing the French ever did for us was during the revolutionary war.
March 20, 2009 at 4:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
buff_o_rilla (anonymous) says...
Wow some people in here seem to be educated/indoctrinated to a level so high they appear to be stupid!!!
March 20, 2009 at 4:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by ltgrunt "We were barely involved in World War I,"
Geez, that is good news, let me call my mom and tell her dad bled to death in a muddy trench in France for nothing.
54 French divisions saw mutinies within their ranks as 20,000 French troops deserted... By the end of the war in November 1918, the American buildup sent over two million FRESH troops to the Western Front.
http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/CMHWWI.html
March 20, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rgsurf (anonymous) says...
Whether or not you agree with Brian, it's his OPINION - NOT a news story! Columns are people's opinions, which many don't seem to understand. Now, please continue bashing each other...
March 20, 2009 at 5:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
You're completely ignoring the tremendous risks taken by the French Resistance during World War II, as well as the contributions that movement made toward the Allied cause. The sabotage, assassinations and discord caused by the Resistance was a key factor not only in weakening the German position in occupied France but also in the success of the Allied campaign on D-Day. Had the French rolled over to the degree that you claim, Get_seriousHELP, the Allied campaign invasion of occupied France and then Germany would have taken months if not years longer.
The French were caught completely unprepared by the Blitzkrieg. Because of the established mentality of fixed positions and fortifications, the French military was mainly positioned on the Maginot Line, which the German attack completely bypassed. There was barely anything in Paris for the French to defend the city with, so rather than see the city destroyed by completely one-sided fighting, the French surrendered. The French Resistance was just as unorthodox and unpredictable as the Blitzkrieg, and brought another entirely new methodology to modern warfare.
"The only thing the French ever did for us was during the revolutionary war."
The French were also of great aid to the US during the War of 1812.
World War I lasted from 1914 to 1918, and the US didn't even participate until 1917. Additionally, we weren't even sending significant numbers of troops until the summer of 1918, when the war was almost over. By the time we were fielding a significant presence, Germany's fighting capacity was almost exhausted. The French and British did most of the fighting on the Western Front, we really only got to mop up.
March 20, 2009 at 5:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by ltgrunt
"The Muslim riots in France were actually directly caused by inequalities and discrimination against the Muslim citizens of that nation."
Agreed, my point is though, that France is a perfect example of a socialist state that can not deliver all it has promised.
ltgrunt "Also remember that if it weren't for the help that France gave us during the Revolutionary War, there probably wouldn't even be a United States of America."
I did in my 4:42 p.m. "The only thing the French ever did for us was during the revolutionary war."
You know your right ltgrunt, I apologize for my ad hominem attacks.
March 20, 2009 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
counterpoint (anonymous) says...
Personally I'd like to be the only one in this state... would everyone else mind leaving? Thanks!
March 20, 2009 at 5:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
As I've said before, GSH, pure Capitalism can't deliver on everything that it promises, either. There's a balance between too much and too little centralized power that can likely provide the best benefit to the most citizens, and we're probably as close to that as we can get in the real world. Too far on either extreme and, in the real world, it all goes bad.
Also, France isn't socialist. The French government does not own all means of production, and it hasn't nationalized all industry.
March 20, 2009 at 5:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by ltgrunt
"Also, France isn't socialist. The French government does not own all means of production, and it hasn't nationalized all industry."
No, I guess not, but lets agree they are part socialist. Maybe they realize that pure socialism is pure misery, and they need at least 60% of the population to support the socialist programs they do have.
I still say they would not be able to afford their semi-socialist state, if they had to maintain a military that could do what the US and NATO has done for the defence of Europe since the end of WW2. The French did spend a lot of $$$ testing nukes in the Pacific though, give em that!
I would pull all of our troops out of Europe and close down our bases. Of course, Poland, Hungary the Ukraine and the rest of the ex-Warsaw Pact nations, still appreciate us and need us.
March 20, 2009 at 6:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nurenberger (anonymous) says...
buff_o_rilla! You sure got that right,just some wanna-be POLITICIANS who will claim that they have been there and done that.LMAA!Peace Ya'll!
March 20, 2009 at 7:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
As I wade through these posts I see that once again professor Ltgrunt is admonishing those who he alludes have nowhere near the knowledge about the subject at hand as he does.
Assigning a moral equivalency to socialism/communism as it relates to capitalism is absurd, which he appears to do.
Capitalism may have some faults but it is the only system that can provide the initiative for individuals to seek improvement through industriousness and desire.
Those traits are completely destroyed in a socialist society save for the industry exerted to trying escape from such a oppressive existence.
Every socialist/communist nation on this planet is a failure socially, economically and environmentally.
China is a only prospering because in spite of their authoritarian rule they are permitting enough limited freedom for those with the incentive to delve into entrepreneurship to do so.
As Obama and his henchman systematically destroy our monetary system they are positioning us to become part of a United Nations controlled one world government with a universal coinage. Many of the worlds nations are experiencing hyperinflation and as the dollar is eroded further it will soon become no more valuable then the Mexican peso or the Turkish Lira.
Then it will only make sense to do away with the dollar and adopt a monetary unit that will not only be acceptable world wide but will be adopted by all nations.
Billionaire George Soros is an advocate of a one world under the UN type of government. He is a rabid anti gun zealot and also a major mover behind the massive dog and pony show that spirited Obama into the white house.
The UN is so opposed to individual gun ownership that they have a sculpture of a handgun with the barrel tied in a knot on their grounds.
We may not be perfect but the very notion of accepting socialism in even the smallest doses is akin to being bitten on the foot by a rattlesnake as opposed to the neck.
Both can kill you, one just takes longer.
March 20, 2009 at 8:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vuduchld (anonymous) says...
I find it intriguing that the same pilgrims who rebel yell for states rights and keeping the feds at bay are the same crowd who are more than willing to accept federal troops on their hallowed soil. You are also the ones at the head of the government trough grunting for taxpayer dollars like a bunch of stuck, bleeding pigs. You dimwits are beyond funny, you're just plain stupid.
Last time I looked, you "states rights" monkeys lost the war and were eating tubers instead of steak. If you want to go back to those days do us all a favor, beam yourselves back 200 years and wallow in your stupid "states rights" mantra all you want. Me, I'm staying in the 21st century because our nation needs people who can use their skills and talents to solve pressing issues instead of whining about silly ones.
South Carolina's love affair with "states rights" is a pure case of what happens when inbred retard citizens comprise the majority population of a failed, pseudo nation state.
March 20, 2009 at 8:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Yird, Canada seems to be doing fairly well, and they have a socialized medicine system. According to your analogy, a country having any socialist systems at all makes that country not only totally socialist but also completely doomed.
At any rate, you're still making the error of confusing an economic system for a political system. You're assuming that because you have only seen socialism as a facet of dictatorships that it must be a tool of dictators and therefore be inherently oppressive. In reality, socialism in a democratic or republican environment could be quite beneficial to the people. It's just a matter of having an open government beholden to the people, which none of the communist nations in the world right now have.
Capitalism only allows people to seek improvement either in a perfect world or in one where it is regulated by government. Pure, unregulated capitalism in the real world abuses workers and consumers and vastly increases the economic and social disparity between rich and poor. The early stages of the Industrial Revolution, when laissez-faire was the order of the day, men, women and children were being worked to death, companies were making tainted products and factory owners and bankers were reaping all the benefits is a prime example of what happens when you have pure, unregulated Capitalism.
Again, in the real world where no one is perfect, pure Capitalism is just as destructive and just as impossibly utopian as pure Socialism. In the real world, Capitalism needs to be tempered by regulations, Socialism needs to be tempered by self-determination, and a hybrid of the two systems can work very well.
Now clearly, Yird, you're buying into the biased media and anti-administration propaganda that you've been inundated with on Fox News and various other outlets. Your paranoid delusions about Soros, Socialism, one world governments and whatnot smacks of crackpot conspiracy theories and imaginative smear campaigning. Instead of believing the very first thing you hear and sticking to it as if it were the gospel, why not take the time to question the rhetoric you're being fed and come to more reasonable, less biased conclusions?
Seriously, Yird, 1984 was over twenty years ago. No one is telling you that 2 + 2 doesn't equal 4. Stop cowering in fear of a phantom Big Brother and try to understand how the modern world works and what the real threats and crises are.
March 20, 2009 at 9:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MsSun (anonymous) says...
vuduchild too bad we all aren't as smart as you. By the way the word 'retard' is not a word we use now days. Just because someone has another opinion that isn't aligned with yours doesn't make them stupid. Your name calling is childish and really doesn't make you look very intelligent. Grow up.
March 20, 2009 at 9:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
Seriously my friend, I am not buying into anything. The damage done by socialism given in doses as prescribed by the late Nikta Kruschev is slow metastasizing but it eventually ends in overburdening the citizens as it has in Sweden. They have an artificially "high" standard of living which has become unsustainable.
Canada has numerous problems albeit they don't get a lot of exposure. Everyone is too interested in the folly going on in our own country.
I am not cowering in fear nor do I live in the past even though I am painfully aware of past events, that are being repeated today in this country, that led to disaster.
You make think it's stupid conspiracy theories that govern my thoughts and you may be right.
I believe that very little in politics or macro economics just happens.
Even the depression of the thirties which no doubt was exacerbated by the dust bowl and even the bole weevil in the south (as far as the US was concerned) ended up crushing numerous small businesses that emerged from the boom of the twenties while the giants were able to survive.
Right here in Charleston a particular attorney gobbled up huge tracts of land north of Charleston as he "took them off peoples hands", helping them keep their credit in tact.
If you think expressing concern over the machinations of George Soros is paranoia then maybe you should do some research into this mans connections and activities.
Contrary to what you and others believe, I rarely listen to Rush and one of the reasons I do not listen to him is because he doesn't subscribe to any conspiracy theories, or at least he didn't years ago. I don't know about now.
I do. I believe very little happens by accident. I guess I'm being redundant but I feel very strongly about this subject. Since my late teens or very early twenties (not sure at this point in time) I became very interested in what was happening and the reasons why.
I remember the Berlin wall going up, the invasion by the Soviets into Hungary and Czechoslovakia, the Soviet sponsored terror in Angola along with the horrific crimes visited on the people of several African nations buy United Nations troops.
March 20, 2009 at 11:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
The same United Nations that was formed mostly by communist with communist goals in mind. The way the security council was initially set up was to favor the communists. Our own delegation to the United Nations were all communist or communist sympathizers. One, Alger Hiss was later convicted as a spy for the Soviet Union. Another, Averell Harri man, was ambassador to Moscow and was the attorney the Soviet Union used to represent them in litigation against them in this country so it doesn't take a great deal of brains to figure where his sympathy lie.
Then there is another innocuous sounding organization, The Council on Foreign Relations, which was virtually unheard of until just a few years ago yet it has been in existence for decades. Check out the membership.
Democrat, Republican, Libertarian,and probably a few vegetarians but all in the same club.
George Soros is a member as well as Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton.
If you think I'm paranoid so be it. I won't accuse you of being naive but I do think you need to develop a bit more cynicism.
March 20, 2009 at 11:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
"Posted by ltgrunt on March 20, 2009 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Draconian, the goal of Socialism is complete equality before the law between all citizens and the removal of the social inequalities created by socioeconomic classes. That directly contradicts distributing welfare and creating a class system. There are far too many people like yourself who are crying about Socialism and don't have any idea what it really is or how it really works."
Well, Grunt, That's a pretty impressive description. Since you're educating us on how socialism works, why don't you provide some examples of where it is working as you describe it?
Because it isn't?... Anywhere?
March 20, 2009 at 11:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
"Posted by Luna on March 20, 2009 at 8:52 a.m."
"I watched portions of this film last night. We (United States) are the only industrial nation that does not mandate family leave, sick time or child health care."
So you're a commie, so what else is new? Save yourself some finger exercise and just post "commie".
March 21, 2009 at 12:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
"Posted by ltgrunt on March 20, 2009 at 8:29 a.m."
"Greyrider, when conservatives come up with legislation like the Patriot Act, you really can't pretend that only liberal politicians are tearing up the Constitution. The Patriot Act does far more to trample the Constitution and rape our rights as citizens and human beings than the Stimulus ever possibly could, but conservatives accept the Patriot Act because it gives them more power over us and it coincides with their political agenda."
If the Patriot act is so evil, why haven't the Dem's in Congress and Obama tossed it?
March 21, 2009 at 12:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Canada is yet another quasi-socialist state (provinces) that does not maintain a massive military.
Again, When the EU and Canada have the military budget that the US has for its military, (even before the war on terror) then we can compare. Until then, they play socialist at our expense.
We rebuilt europe and Japan after WW2. Many of these quasi-socialist states woiuld have been unable to be prosperous without the US covering their collective arses.
They all depend on a strong US military, not only them, but S.Korea (although I think S. Korea could take care of themselves) Japan, Taiwan, and many more "prosperous" nations.
March 21, 2009 at 8:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
France must pull NATO weight
Saturday, March 21, 2009
France is coming home to NATO, 43 years after it pulled away and 20 years after the end of the Cold War. Better late than never. Now will it pull its weight in Afghanistan?
http://www.charleston.net/news/2009/m...
March 21, 2009 at 8:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vuduchld (anonymous) says...
To MsSun, first of all retard is a vernacular term that squarely fits some of the people posting comments on here. I have NO PROBLEM with folks who disagree with my views, but when I continue to hear the incessant silliness and stupidity people come up with to hinder progress then it's time to go into attack mode.
For far too long a chosen few have sought to stifle and hinder opposing views while trying to claim the moral high ground. THOSE DAYS ARE OVER!! We've had 8 years of so-called "leaders" who made terrible decisions that others have to now try and correct.
The reality for South Carolina is this: 10 percent unemployment with some counties approaching 20 per cent. Crumbling and over crowded schools, a largely uneducated work force, high teen pregnancies, low wages. This state is at or near the bottom of every category that matters to the lives of it's citizens and to have a so-called governor who is more than willing to throw his citizens under a bus in order to preserve his "conservative principles" is sick!
Now, you can sit back and critique me all you want, but what I have posted is fact, not fiction. Other states that want to prosper in the 21st century are looking for ways to solve problems, government is one of many ways to achieve that. So please, don't make me the issue, I'm just the messenger, the proof is there for all to see.
March 21, 2009 at 9:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
steelersman (anonymous) says...
This article should have been placed on the Op-Ed page or at least in the funny section since that was what it was meant to be - a tongue in cheek play on rebellion in S. C. history. But the point of the article is lost on you who took it seriously, and that is the real problem with our state, nation and our times...we can't take a joke. Hicks and the editor should know this and place the article in the appropriate section of the paper.
March 21, 2009 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
vuduchld; "Crumbling and over crowded schools,"
Evidently you live in a very remote isolated part of the state and pay no property taxes. I see new state of the art schools going up all around the low country.
The majority of property taxes are allocated to paying for school bond debt (bonds of which I hold a good number of) or school operating expenses. You see, I'm doing my part by underwriting some of the costs of new school construction and paying property taxes so I have a dog in this hunt.
What are you doing Voodoochild?
Maybe you should sacrifice a chicken and come up with a plan that will reign in the spending frenzy of our legislators,
March 21, 2009 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
I agree, this is definitely an opinion piece. Why do people fear the patriot act? I'm not a terrorist, I have no terrorist ties and I obey the law. So I have no reason to live my life in a state of paranoid delusions. Do you really think the gov't listens in to your conversations about fixing your cars engine, when your wife picks up the kids from school or how Grandma bakes a pie ? Gimme a break.
March 21, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by vuduchld "The reality for South Carolina is this: 10 percent unemployment with some counties approaching 20 per cent."
LOL, 20%..really? California, the biggest leftist state in the "union" is 10.5 percent now. That doesnt include the illegal population, at least I dont think it does. That state has the 7th or 8th largest economy in the WORLD.
Think about that. vuduchld, your vudumaster is sticking pins in your vudu brain! LOL, Crumbling schools. My kids school is brand new, and it is large, and not even close to over crowded.
Your facts are fact-lite!
March 21, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
vuduchld, its not jus SC;
"Georgia's jobless rate rose to 9.3 percent, Ohio's climbed to 9.4 percent Wisconsin's increased to 8.8 percent
Unemployment rose to 7.5 percent in Pennsylvania from 7 percent, and Tennessee's rate rose to 9.1 percent from 8.6 percent, the states reported.
Unemployment in California rose to 10.5 percent from 10.1 percent in January, its Employment Development Department reported today in Sacramento. Neighboring Oregon's jobless rate rose a full percentage point to 10.8 percent, and Nevada's increased to 10.1 percent
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pi...
March 21, 2009 at 10:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
melvinthebarbarian (anonymous) says...
I'm really wondering what some of you have against socialism? We LIVE in a socialist country. Consider these 'socialist' concepts:
1.Public Education supports equality and class mobility by providing a good education for children from families who might not otherwise be able to afford it.
2.Roads and Bridges provide a low cost way to move goods, thus supporting equal access to markets.
3.Antitrust is to the Capitalist economy what damper rods are to a nuclear reactor. Compare phone service in the sixties to the Internet now. Want to give that one back?
4.Social Security provides for citizens in their old age. As the recent economic downturn showed, even the best retirement plans can be wiped out by the vagaries of the market.
There's plenty more : government support for the arts, food and drug regulation, patents and copyrights, etc. These may look like nannying if you're a big corporation, but they look like quality of life to the rest of us.
Capitalism and socialism are both like good booze, best taken in sips.
As for this State's Rights nonsense? That's just Mark Sanford running for president in 2012 ...
March 21, 2009 at 11:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vuduchld (anonymous) says...
To Get Serious Help: The states you mention gladly accepted stimulus money as South Carolina dithers. If you don't believe then here is the data to prove my point.
http://eascinc.com/unemployment_rate
March 21, 2009 at 2:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Coolfreaknbeans, people fear the Patriot Act because it allows the government to arrest and imprison people with no charges, no trial and no chance to face any accusations. The government has already admitted that they have done this to people who were not terrorists. This isn't about fitting punishment for people who have committed crimes, this is about basic fundamental rights to be free from government oppression. Under the Patriot Act, the government could label anyone a terrorist and make them disappear and never be made to answer for that crime. This is a bad thing for everyone. To paraphrase Jefferson, if you trade freedom for safety, you end up with neither.
The Stimulus Bill might seem a bit overbearing, but it gives states a measure of freedom as to what they can do with the money. Granted, Sanford's plans to pay off state debt got squashed, but should the federal government really be paying states' debts anyway? The best use of the money is to fund short-term projects and to prevent job loss by using the stimulus money as a stopgap solution. It's like a patch on the knee of an old pair of pants - you can tell it came from somewhere else, but it holds them together and keeps them from falling apart, and filling the pockets is the job of the pants' owner. Or something. The metaphor sounded better in my head.
The state should be more concerned that the federal government, under the power of the Patriot Act, can spirit away any state citizens for basically no reason whatsoever, with no proof whatsoever, and never have to answer for it.
March 21, 2009 at 2:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Mabilene (anonymous) says...
holycowbatman!
The lunatics after you are like those KIDS that tell you to "just write a check." They know you don't have any "money" -- but you've got those CHECKS.
no...earthly...idea...
March 21, 2009 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Posted by vuduchld
'To Get Serious Help: The states you mention gladly accepted stimulus money as South Carolina dithers."
Good for them, it will be their problem when the money runs out, they will be right where thye started if not worse. More people will expect more "pork-us-all" bills to be passed.
But we can not keep just prining money, at some point the dollar will devalue so fast, we will be getting $10,000.00 bills to buy a dozen eggs.
ltgrunt, again on the Patriot Act?
Democrats including obama (in 06) voted for the Patriot ACT. On March 2, 2006, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 with strong bipartisan support.
Senate Republicans Voting Yea: 100%
Senate Democrats Voting Yea: 80% <---Obama (D-IL), Yea
Senate Total Voting Yea: 89%
Dont forget that FDR interned 120,000 japanese Americans, & during World War II, FDR's denial of Americans' constitutional rights - included German, Italian and Latin Americans.
I have not shared a quote with you in awhile, grunt. So here ya go;
"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action." George Washington
"When all government, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the Center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated." -- Thomas Jefferson, 1821
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain,
AND YOUR Favorite;
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.
For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." -- Cicero (106-43 BC)
March 21, 2009 at 6:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
Oh, one more thing about the Patriot Act, dont forget that great man of the union, good ole Abe;
In 1861, Lincoln had already suspended civil law in territories where resistance to the North's military power would be dangerous. In 1862, when copperhead democrats began criticizing Lincoln's violation of the Constitution, Lincoln suspended habeas corpus throughout the nation and had many copperhead democrats arrested under military authority because he felt that the State Courts in the north west would not convict war protesters such as the copperheads. He proclaimed that all persons who discouraged enlistments or engaged in disloyal practices would come under Martial Law.
Among the 13,000 people arrested under martial law was a Maryland Secessionist, John Merryman.
http://www.civil-liberties.com/pages/...
***13,000 people***
***war protesters**
***persons who discouraged enlistments***
***or engaged in disloyal practices***
March 21, 2009 at 7:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
I see no reason for you to keep posting the same quotes which you have failed to demonstrate understanding of or relevance for, GSH.
Additionally, Jefferson Davis was known to imprison, suspend rights and even completely ignore the concept of freedom of speech, especially in the Southern press.
Lincoln suspended habeas corpus only in specific areas of the nation which showed open signs of rebellion, and the only people arrested or detained under martial law were those who had actively rioted or attacked federal and military establishments. Rights were still observed, and imprisonment was under specific charges and trials were given or scheduled. Lincoln's application of Martial Law was an overreaction, but nothing so abhorrent as the Patriot Act.
Also, this is an explanation of the abject wrongs that the Patriot Act has inflicted on the American people. The fact that both parties allowed it to some degree makes it no less intolerable, nor does it make it any more acceptable that our state government should overlook the unconstitutionality of that legislation while complaining about stimulus spending.
March 21, 2009 at 10:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
newsreader74 (anonymous) says...
This article is baffling. The author chides a state government for investigating passing a proclamation reminding the federal government of its constitutional limitations. When looking at a federal government who governs itself with convenient interpretations of constitutional 'meaning' instead of fairly clear written rules, who prints money out of thin air in order to run up huge debt that could threaten the livelihood of every American, and who now looks motivated more by securing votes than anything else in structuring the government's powers - this proclamation seems like the kind of move that our founding fathers would have taken. It is reasonable and lawful. I, personally, scoff at the readers who think we should be quietly thankful that the federal government is dumping billions of dollars of Monopoly play money into our state. When you're paying $25.00 for a gallon of milk, who's going to bail you out?
March 22, 2009 at 8:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yird (anonymous) says...
What is so Machiavellian about all this is the fact that the "money" they want is like a desensitizing vapor that the politicians have broadcast across the country numbing those inhaling it to the reality of the impending doom that possibly awaits.
I wonder how progressives will cope if the bread lines form and kerosene for lanterns is being purchased in one liter quantities by people traveling on their new environmentally friendly Columbia or American Flyers?
No say the believers, that could never happen here!
March 22, 2009 at 9:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Mabilene (anonymous) says...
Holy Cow P & C!
Give NewsReader74 a column. Great reasoning & great post.
###
Holy Cow SC Legislature!
Pass this resolution!
March 22, 2009 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eds777 (anonymous) says...
Check out http://www.oath-keepers.blogspot.com, and then think about what YOU can do for South Carolina. Socialism is NOT the answer! "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me Liberty, or give me death!!" Yes, I support Governor Mark Sanford 100%!!
March 22, 2009 at 12:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Valkyrie (anonymous) says...
According to Jerry Robinson, author of the new book "Bankruptcy of Our Nation," the $1.5 million savings by the Fed amounted to 0.00000699 percent of it annual net income of last year.
"You would think that such a broad economic and inflation indicator would be continually produced, analyzed and monitored," says Robinson. "However, when the announcement came, it fell on deaf ears. This bold new move by the Fed caused some stir among economists, but it never received any real media coverage."
Just last Wednesday the Fed said it would flood the teetering financial system with an additional $1.2 trillion.
What the Fed does not explain publicly is how those kinds of infusions of money out of thin air, with nothing to back it, reduce the purchasing power and assets of all Americans by devaluing the dollar.
"While the Federal Reserve has become less transparent in its actions than ever, we do know that right now, the printing presses are rolling and that the Federal Reserve is injecting massive amounts of currency into the U.S. economy," he explains.
Scarcity of currency, he writes, stabilizes its value, but overproduction reduces its value.
"And is the value of the dollar falls, what does that do to the prices of consumer goods?" he asks rhetorically. "It drives them up."
"And it will only serve to delay and enlarge the scope of the impending day of reckoning for the United States," he adds.
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa...
BUY Gold, MREs and silver NOW!
March 22, 2009 at 12:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
alyssondra (anonymous) says...
Thank you Brian Hicks! The hypocrisy is so painful. Every year since 1981 South Carolina has willingly taken more in federal spending than it pays in taxes.
See table http://www.taxfoundation.org/research...
We like whine about the feds but put our hands out first for picking up the tab for roads, agriculture subsidies, job creation, human services, security and more.
March 22, 2009 at 1:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
vuduchld (anonymous) says...
To Get Serious Help: You underestimate the strength and determination of our people and of our nation. All of the economic catastrophes this country had endured to become stronger and more prosperous than it was before. Yes, states will have to pay the money back because it is at the end of the day, the people's money.
What you fail to comprehend is the fact that if the money is used correctly on SHORT AND LONG TERM INVESTMENTS, then the economic benefits gained by the states will out weigh the money owed.
In 1993, Republicans lambasted Bill Clinton when he raised taxes, folks were saying that the people would be eating beans and living hand to mouth, well, we know that did not happen. Remember Y2K? Well the zombie masses were suppose to be trolling for food, killing and pillaging the cities and towns of people who had it. Seen any of that happen lately!?
We will be back from this wiser, stronger and more prosperous than before. We as Americans have and always will adjust,that is what makes us Americans!!
"In the youth of a state arms do flourish, in the middle age of a state, learning and then both of them together for a time; in the declining age of a state, mechanical arts and merchandise" Francis Bacon (1625)
March 22, 2009 at 3:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Snead (anonymous) says...
Talk about biting the hand that feeds. South Carolin has a proud, strong history of influencing the US of A since colonial times, but we are quickly making ourselves irrelevant. Shame on these supposed leaders who waste time on this resolution when they should be working to get us off the Federal welfare teet.
March 23, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lantanagurl (anonymous) says...
AMEN to the story! Especially about the Patriot Act STRIPPING AWAY OUR RIGHTS! I have no tolerance for fear-mongers and that's what the last admin was guilty of, in addition to a host of other folly's under the guise of "protecting" us.
ltgrunt.. thanks so much for pointing out that we are a Republic. I honestly don't believe many people in the USA realize this. There are lots of well thought out responses here & I appreciate the thinkers. As for those of you who are uninformed, ignorant of the issue, or simply reacting with emotion, PLEASE reign it in! The local library has lots of FREE history books to check out & it may behoove you to look into checking out and READING.
If you're looking to fuss about how our tax money is spent then take a look at SPAWAR and other entities like it. Fraud and Abuse abound! YEAH Federal Government. Keep on promoting till you find their level of incompetence just as you generally do. But by all means, do not fire the fools. Just make them go to another Code (aka dept. in the real world). (sarcasm intended).
March 23, 2009 at 10:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
SC_Native_ElCid07 (anonymous) says...
Don't take the baited hook Sanford!
Many of you should be ashamed of yourself by being so quick sell your freedoms down the river for a piece of this toxic funny money Obama proposes. You and your children will pay dearly in the future and be saddled with taxes and "Federal support" that will NEVER go away... Typical American public though, always looking for the quick fix and not worrying about tomorrow... Thats how we got here in the first place! This bad economy took time to wind up, its going to take time to wind down.
It would be an outrage to ask the people of SC to shoulder increased Federal taxes & control if we don't accept this money. It would be wrong and a violation of our states rights. I feel confident Mr Sanford would also voice this to Washington and let them know that the people of SC will not be holding to Federal taxation due to state stimulus dollars. No how no way period. There will be no taxation without the proverbial representation.
If other states want to sell their collective souls and give up on their children's chances of freedom and the American dream for two years of a doomed quick fix, thats their business.
SC should remain sovereign - God willing, we can sort out our own problems in due time with hard work and ingenuity as the market naturally corrects and begins to uptick.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to PURCHASE a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin 1775
March 23, 2009 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
charlestonbill (anonymous) says...
YES, WE SHOULD SECEEDE AGAIN!! LET'S DO IT FRIDAY AFTERNOON AFTER 5:00PM (GOVERNMENT CLOSED). WE SHOULD THEN SET UP TOLL BOOTHS ON I95 AND I77. THE TOLL SHOULD BE $50 AND 5# OF TOWELS. THIS WOULD GET THE TEXTILE BUSINESS GOING AGAIN. WE CAN GIVE UP AT 6:30AM ( GOVERNMENT OPENS AT 9:00) MONDAY MORNING. WE WOULD GET CONQUERED NATION STATUS AND A TON OF $$$ FROM WASHINGTON. IN ADDITION, THE SC DEBT WOULD BE GONE. PROBLEM FIXED AND NOT A SHOT FIRED.
March 23, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Mabilene (anonymous) says...
Shots would have more impact.
We want shots!
March 23, 2009 at 1:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
scottmcx (anonymous) says...
Lincoln, great politician that he was, destroyed the definition of Freedom by tying it to slavery. Forget that he was a war criminal and dictator.
Factually, he freed no one. He enslaved us all to the Federal Government, Banks and the "Yankee" industrial complex.
You'll be paying the Federal debt, paying banks that screwed up loans and bailing out Detroit.
When you work for a master who takes your money and does with it whatever he pleases, you are a slave.
The master is the US Goverment. They'll tell Russia to give up their "Republics" without a fight, but don't try it here or get your butt kicked.
If you look at the voting map and the States asserting the 10th Amendment the "New Confederacy", will cut the entire country in half.
California, Oregon and Washington on one coast and the North East thru to Wisconsin on the other.
This three nation solution is the answer to many of the worlds problems.
Then, the rest of the world won't have to worry about us kicking their butts whenever we feel like it.
It is time for a divorce. The gronds for which do not involve race, simply freedom and the Constitution.
March 23, 2009 at 5:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
AMAZING (anonymous) says...
crime state rankings 2009 are in, south carolina ranks 48th highest in crime
The methodology for determining the state comparision rankings involves a multistep process in which the reported crime across six crime categories:
-MURDER
-RAPE
-ROBBERY
-AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
-BURGLARY
-MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT
http://os.cqpress.com/rankings/statec...
March 23, 2009 at 6:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
Scott, that's a terrible idea. Destroying a nation that has such resounding effects on the rest of the world would make things worse for everyone. Further, Lincoln actually did free slaves - in rebelling areas, namely the Confederacy. This was done mainly to disrupt the South's ability to continue to fight, as it would hopefully cause enough chaos at home to prevent the Southern war effort from functioning at full efficiency. The results were arguable. And of course, the main reason that the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free slaves in any Union states was that there were barely any states in the Union that still allowed slavery, and of those that did it was clearly a dying practice. Abolitionists strongly outnumbered slavery supporters and tended to rally harder and louder. That "institution" was clearly doomed.
ElCid, your insulting attitude toward the "typical American public" seems disingenuine and hypocritical. What possible reason could anyone have to believe that you are anything other than a "typical American" ready to be just as or even more lazy and greedy than any other? Also, Jefferson's quote is far more relevant in regard to the Patriot Act than it ever could be for this stimulus bill. The American people are giving up no freedoms for the temporary measures of the stimulus bill. Nothing the federal government does will prevent me in any way from spending my money as I see fit. Actually, it seems that I'm getting more money right now, so in essence I'm getting more economic freedom in addition to potential economic safety. Realistically speaking, though, the cost will be taxes, which we're all obligated to pay anyway, so it's a moot point. The only eventual difference I see is that the wealthiest individuals and corporations will soon be paying their fair share of taxes rather than getting every conceivable and illegitimate tax break and loophole. I can't say as that bothers me all that much, but then again, I'm not a millionaire.
Oh, and even though Sanford arrogantly and irresponsibly declined the $700M, that's not really a rational reason for SC to not pay taxes. First off, there is the fact that we've been a welfare state for years, so if anything, we'll be paying back what we owe. Second, it was painfully obvious that the stimulus would be funded by taxpayer dollars, and knowing that our fair share would be contributed, Sanford should have taken the money so it would come to us. Third, we have never lost our state representation, so we are not being taxed without representation; it just so happens that some of the politicians that have been elected by the majority here in South Carolina are idiots, so in effect, we are represented by idiots.
March 23, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
To be blunt, there doesn't seem to be a violation of the 10th Amendment here. Once again, that card is being played as a publicity stunt. The states were offered federal money for specific tasks and given the freedom to deny that money and not accomplish those tasks. No one's hand has been forced by federal oppression. No one's toes are being stepped on. If Sanford wants to pay of South Carolina's debt then he should figure out a tax scheme that actually works and make the state generate revenue for once. It shouldn't be the federal government's job to pay each state's debts.
March 23, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Get_seriousHELP (anonymous) says...
China gets it, Obama is destroying the dollar with his insane spending schemes
China calls for new reserve currency
By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing
Published: March 23 2009 12:16 | Last updated: March 24 2009 00:06
China's central bank on Monday proposed replacing the US dollar as the international reserve currency with a new global system controlled by the International Monetary Fund.
"This is a clear sign that China, as the largest holder of US dollar financial assets, is concerned about the potential inflationary risk of the US Federal Reserve printing money," said Qu Hongbin, chief China economist for HSBC.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7851925a-17...
Oil climbs above $54 on stock market rally
March 23, 2009 at 8:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ltgrunt (anonymous) says...
The article says quite clearly that Zhou Xiaochuan - governer of the Central Bank of China - never actually mentions the US Dollar. What Zhou is actually suggesting is a system that gives the International Monetary Fund control of special drawing rights and foreign exchange reserves with an international currency not tied to one specific nation.
The reason cited for this suggestion is "the outbreak of the [current] crisis" (notice the key term, "outbreak," as in "not the attempted solution").
It's interesting that a quote would be thrown in by Qu Hongbin, employee of HSBC, one of the largest banks in the world and one which would see certain advantages in disparaging a stimulus package design not only to stabilize the US economy but also to protect other banks here in the US. To say that Qu's comment is clearly delivered out of self-interest and not necessarily out of sound economic reasoning is a plausible argument.
Stocks rallying or falling a few dollars either way is hardly significant. It's also interesting that you would choose to insert that headline in at the end of your misleading quotes from the financial article. It's almost as if you're trying to deliberately misrepresent one as having caused the other, confusing correlation with causation in an attempt to make a conclusion where no actual evidence exists to support one.
I can also play the sensationalist headlines game:
Dow jumps almost 500 points
Wall Street posts its best day since November as investors welcome Obama administration plan to buy close to $1 trillion in bad bank assets.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/23/marke...
March 23, 2009 at 11:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.