Scare Tactics

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by justplugit

You are insulting our intelligence Mr. Obama.
JD, i disagree, Obama is not trying to "sell" it, he and his chronies are trying
everything possible to jam it down our throats, a corrupt bill imho.

Sell is a relative term. Corrupt bill, corrupt war. It doesn't matter the topic. Politicians will demonstrate in detail, crazy extremes to further their agenda.

We've already seen this exact same scenario before. Fabricate numbers, twist facts, induce fear - then get what you want.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by JohnnyD

Sell is a relative term. Corrupt bill, corrupt war. It doesn't matter the topic. Politicians will demonstrate in detail, crazy extremes to further their agenda.

We've already seen this exact same scenario before. Fabricate numbers, twist facts, induce fear - then get what you want.

JD, I agree sell is a relative term ,but by definition it should involve showing features and benefits. I haven't seen either.

We don't even know what's in it and neither do most congressmen, as it's being done in smokey rooms behind closed doors.

From what i gather the only benefit is to Obama, to further his Big G socialistic agenda.

[scottw]

this is all Bush's fault...things would be much much better right now if that pillar of honesty and integrity had won, I mean, hadn't been cheated out of the presidency in 2000.....

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is all Bush's fault...things would be much much better right now if that pillar of honesty and integrity had won, I mean, hadn't been cheated out of the presidency in 2000.....

I'm not saying this is all on Bush's shoulders. However, what I am saying is that these tactics shouldn't surprise anyone. This is the new method of pushing policy. With 24-hour "news" stations to push polarized agendas, death and destruction stir up the masses and build ratings.

If this was a real democracy, an electoral college would not exist and Bush wouldn't have won that election. Bush never would have been in Office to get almost single-digit approval ratings and Obama never would have been able to develop the support to be president.

[scottw]

we are a republic

Madison’s observations in The Federalist number 10 are noteworthy at this point because they highlight a grave error made through the centuries regarding Democracy as a form of government. He commented as follows:

"Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed, that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions."

Democracy, as a form of government, is utterly repugnant to--is the very antithesis of--the traditional American system: that of a Republic, and its underlying philosophy, as expressed in essence in the Declaration of Independence with primary emphasis upon the people’s forming their government so as to permit them to possess only "just powers" (limited powers) in order to make and keep secure the God-given, unalienable rights of each and every Individual and therefore of all groups of Individuals.

A Republic

A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general. The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment--with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Here the term "the people" means, of course, the electorate.

if this was a real McDonaldland...we could elect Mayor Mc Cheese