General Zinni on Sixty Minutes

In article ,
"Paul J. Adam" wrote:

I got a degree from University College London, and have seen Jeremy
Bentham's preserved body (he sits in one of the hallways, and is a
required presence at meetings of the governing body).

I'm not sure that you mean by "liberal" what many other people
understand by "liberal".

And I'm quite certain of the same for you.

As far as that goes, you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in the modern
political scene who would even accept Bentham's utilitarianism as
"liberal" in the modern sense. Look at the current "liberal" view that
the community has rights over the individual, for example...

Of course, the sort of people who would keep a 150 year old preserved
skeleton around would be considered something like "traditionalists" or
"reactionaries" nowadays, since many of Bentham's ideas have been
accepted in some form or another.

Political terms tend to shift over time. Look at what happened to the
names of political parties in the US, for example.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

In article ,
(WalterM140) wrote:

Clinton
adviser Paul Begala said he'd done a Nexis search and found 13,641
stories about Clinton's alleged draft dodging versus 49 about George
W. Bush's military record.


Alleged? Something is alleged when it is represented as existing or as
being as described but not so proved. There's nothing alleged about
Clinton's draft-dodging.

Clinton's not running.

Follow this link to see a document that shows conclusively that Bush did not
get the requisite 50 points for a satisfctory year of service:

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/g...-73arfspe1.pdf

So the record shows that Bush was dodging his commitment in Texas, Kerry was
in contact with the NVA in the Mekong Delta.

Walt

Walt, that total does not include the 12 gratuity points that a
Reservist receives automatically every year. With the gratuity points,
Bush is easily over the 50 points you state he needs for a satisfactory
year.

"ArtKramr" wrote in message
...
Subject: General Zinni on Sixty Minutes
From: Ed Rasimus
Date: 6/5/04 3:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time

Seriously, I don't think Social Security, Medicare or public education
were implemented at gunpoint. They met the demands of "we the
people"--even when misguided.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)

Social Security, Medicare and public education misguided? So much for
compassionate conservatism.



Social Security and Medicare are great, particularly if, like Art, you are
receiving the benefits of the money and services you never paid for!
Welfare is wonderful!

Jarg

Ed:

I know you know better. Try "opting out" of the various social safety net
programs in order to live by the Constitution. See how long it takes for
the men with the guns to show up. You could probably stay out of prison for
a year; maybe 18 months tops.

Like I said- I *know* you know better; you have posted your bona fides
here several times.

Steve Swartz




"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 18:40:23 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

Ed:

And how, precisely, do "liberal solutions" get implemented?

At gunpoint.

Hardly. We elect representatives who propose alternatives, then amend
and compromise and finally create a marginally effective bureaucracy
that does nothing for most of us, but garners votes from the unwashed
masses for reelection.

Seriously, I don't think Social Security, Medicare or public education
were implemented at gunpoint. They met the demands of "we the
people"--even when misguided.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Ed:

There are plenty of non-totalitarian options.

Libertarianism, for example.

Or Constitutionalism.

You do have an MS (or is it an MA?) in Political Science, right?

The choices are NOT just between "Welfare State" or "Police State."

Steve Swartz


"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 12:56:18 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

A vote for Socialism (in even it's weaker forms) is a vote for
Totalitarianism.

The trend world-wide is for what is referred to as "mixed
economies"--some aspects of communism in that there is central
planning and governmental interference with the natural flow of supply
and demand; and some aspects of free market in which trade of goods
and services for profit by individuals is tolerated. Good example
would be the current state of China.

Interesting to note that the most noteworthy examples of
totalitarianism include Stalin, Mao and Hitler--two from the political
left extreme and one from the political right.

Socialism must be supported by the forced confiscation of the labor of
the
citizenry. This is done by the power of the state. The power of the
state
is embodied in Totalitarianism.

Kudos to Ayn Rand.

You can vote for "a little bit of Socialism" and many believe that the
"little bit of Totalitarianism" is acceptable, as long as hte resulting
Socilaism is "for the greater good."

Certainly in the USA we love our little bits of socialism. Don't try
to take away our Social Security or Medicare. And be sure that we
include tax cuts for the "working poor" who pay no income tax to begin
with.

These folks generally believe that there is a "sweet spot" in the
tradeoff
between liberty and security.

Actually there is. Rousseau's Social Contract says that if we are to
live with the benefits of society we will have to restrict our freedom
of action. The catch is where upon the spectrum you want to place the
line.

So go ahead and answer your own question: is a vote for Kerry (or Bush,
for
that matter) a vote for Totalitarianism?

So voting is totalitarian? Probably not in the case of the upcoming
election. But, there are some clear choices and the appeal to class
warfare on the one side is distinctly off-putting for me. I'm a firm
believer that I can best choose how to spend my money.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Seriously, I don't think Social Security, Medicare or public education
were implemented at gunpoint.

Ed? None of that is a value to me. *None* of it.

And when I don't pay for it, what do you think the state's next
move is?


Billy

http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php

ArtKramr wrote:


Ed, the Pilot, Navigator, Systems Operator; EWO, Bombardier, Radio
Operator, Gunner, and other specialties as required by the mission.

You leave me speechless.

Arthur Kramer

I know there are lots of Pilots, Navigators, Systems Operators and EWOs
still in service. Gunners and Radio Operators I believe are still flying
on specialized aircraft - What happened to the Bombardiers?

Dave

On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 17:35:48 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

Ed:

There are plenty of non-totalitarian options.

Most assuredly. While many dictatorships exist, most are authoritarian
rather than totalitarian. They simply don't have the resources to get
to the level of control required by totalitarianism.

Libertarianism, for example.

Many classifications list libertarianism as an "anti-government"
ideology. While less government is almost everyone's goal, few can
support the basic assumptions of libertarianism--that man is
inherently good and doesn't need government. Certainly privatization
is gaining favor and individual responsibility remains a touchstone of
one branch of American politcs, that is a long war from
libertarianism.

Or Constitutionalism.

And, which constitution would that be? Most who pattern themselves as
"American Constitutionalists" seem to ignore the 216 years of
Constitutional case-law that has adjusted the document to the current
world. I'm not inherently a judicial activist, but most who call
themselves "strict constructionist" or "original intent" choose to
apply their own interpretation to the document.

You do have an MS (or is it an MA?) in Political Science, right?

MPS, Auburn Univ (at Montgomery) 1978
MSIR, Troy State Univ (European Exension) 1981

The choices are NOT just between "Welfare State" or "Police State."

No one has said they were.

Steve Swartz


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 16:57:05 GMT, "Jarg"
wrote:


Social Security and Medicare are great, particularly if, like Art, you are
receiving the benefits of the money and services you never paid for!
Welfare is wonderful!

Jarg

Dunno about Art, but I know I definitely paid for Social Security and
Medicare, both when I was on active duty and in the 17 years since
retirement. I paid income tax on active duty as well.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 16:57:05 GMT, "Jarg"
wrote:


Social Security and Medicare are great, particularly if, like Art, you
are
receiving the benefits of the money and services you never paid for!
Welfare is wonderful!

Jarg

Dunno about Art, but I know I definitely paid for Social Security and
Medicare, both when I was on active duty and in the 17 years since
retirement. I paid income tax on active duty as well.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

I image Art also paid something into the system. I'm referring to the fact
that the typical recipient will receive benefits far above what they put in.
The difference is welfare.

Jarg