I think there are a lot of people who would love to vote for a president that calls a scumbag a scumbag. There are plenty of candidates that will flatter.TIGERassault wrote:And how exactly do you expect a president that tells people they're scumbags to be elected? It's just not going to happen. Like I said, the best agenda they could push is better school education, but I haven't seen any of your party candidates trying to push that.
From what I can see, all government has managed to do is degrade schooling. It's been dumbed down. That's why home-schoolers are typically so much smarter. Schooling belongs in local hands (as local as possible), as far as I'm concerned. But responsibility should be forced on children (;)) first and foremost in the home.
I find that to be a very interesting statement.TIGERassault wrote:Well, the true solution is to completely abandon democracy and take on a 'Big Brother' approach of giving up all privacy and some rights so we can all be monitored to make sure we're not screwing up.
That's why I don't talk about a true solution.
Maybe that would more effectively coral the people who refuse or were never taught to take responsibility for themselves, but a fascist government is not what's best for civilized people. The founding fathers new this. That's why America was created. Self government is the best government, but it can only work as it should if people are responsible (there may be more resolution to the full answer, but that about sums it up).
No, not the same people. Sometimes violence is the only way to answer the violent. Not many people are reasonable enough to consider others' interests equally with their own. That's why our country has a military. That's why our cities have police departments.TIGERassault wrote:So... getting people to use violence in an attempt to reduce those same people from using violence?Sergeant Thorne wrote:(This is where a militia could step in. See? It's not outdated!)
See Will's 2nd to last post concerning the effects of gun control measures. I also agree that the second amendment protects the individual's freedoms from government.Sergeant Thorne wrote:Hey: if the IRA and our regular police can do it, I can't see why you lot can't.
Do you realize that if it doesn't we have no choice but to be ruled, not self-ruled? I think it's safe to say that a people that will not rule themselves must be ruled by another. Otherwise you've got anarchy.TIGERassault wrote:You do realise that's never going to happen? Especially considering you don't even have a specific level of responsibility that's required in the first place.Sergeant Thorne wrote:there needs to be greater responsibility on everyone's part, and responsibility being demanded by all.
And don't say "as responsible as you can", because I don't see you making a Mother Theresa out of yourself.
"Mother Theresa," heh. No, I have a specific degree of responsibility in mind. Absolute responsibility. As responsible as you need to be to not encroach on the freedom of another.
A little sarcasm there.TIGERassault wrote:Weren't you just specifically stating how your recent presidential candidates don't tell it like it is?Sergeant Thorne wrote:If we're to believe our recent presidential candidates, then the "greatness" of the American people should certainly be up to the task.
