If the general welfare clause is all-inclusive why were the powers of congress specifically enumerated right after it? Why even bother to list them?
Look at the tenth amendment please. Since all powers of promoting general welfare are reserved to congress what IS left to the states? Promoting the general destruction?
What is your stake in this? You’re parsing through the document looking for an excuse to vest power with the federal government. I’m parsing through trying to protect my personal sovereignty and that of my fellow man.
Your source is a HS textbook? Maybe you should dig a little deeper past the propaganda.
If you disagree with nullification, I guess you would side with Lincoln and maintain the
states had no right to secede. Even though that right was specifically reserved in the ratification documents of several states.
Anyway I’ll continue with my way of thinking. You’re free to jump up and down shouting " take my liberty".
Not quite the same, no. Remember, “The Establishment” is an British borrowing, and carries tones and nuances of old, old money, of a privilege so inborn and native, it is almost never asserted, or enforced, simply worn about the shoulders. Even the oldest American money doesn’t go back to the Tudors.
The Establishment in America? Buckley, maybe, “ruling class” but not all that rich.
Thing is, the money. In the years since that time, the rich have evolved as well, and by the miracle of compounded interest, they went from rich to really rich to filthy rich beyond dreams of avarice. It is hard to guage the importance of that much money because its so fucking huge. So rich, they don’t even own the money, the money owns them. I don’t particularly want to go to McDonalds, jump up on a whim and go grab a burger, but I can, and Bill Gates can’t.
But the rich aren’t the Ruling Class, the rich don’t rule, they have people for that. People that don’t have to be recruited, more than eager to serve. *The Great Gatsby *captured that for the 20’s, for the 60’s-70’s, God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater. Norman Musharian, the lawyer with the damp, brown eyes.
This is most likely not a great answer. I can make it longer, but I don’t think I can make it better. Maybe once I get old enough.
The head of the IMF says the European banks are in desperate trouble. The problem is they don’t know the state of the CDOs held in France, Germany and UK. Shapiro claims the crisis is more serious than the 2008 crash. The CDOs are , I am sure you remember, were the Credit Default Swaps dreamed up by our bankers.
Here is a demand, Jail those pricks. If not next month they will face mobs and pitchforks.
Do you know what I saw on the news today? A couple of dingbats chain-smoking and holding up signs reading “CHEMTRAILS ARE MURDER!”. That oughta get the message to of Wall Street.
If they are going to protest corporate greed, they might like to keep it current. Check out Jim Hightower’s article, Playing Washington’s Inside Game:
The government should be serving the people, but that has changed. Now more than anything it serves the corporations, with the people coming second. I’d like to see the protesters oppose the way corporate influence is managed in Congress.
Or check out this quote from the old Ayatollah Khomeni, from here: ('luci, you might want to take the free subscription and read this one for the further evolution of ‘Mr. Rosewater’.)
Now take a look at Feds to Crack Down on California Pot Shops. Looks like things were tilting too far toward just allowing pot to be available for the Feds’ liking. The article doesn’t cite any actual harm caused by pot in California- no, all the harm falls on the side of the effects of the crackdown.
One might make the claim that Iran is funding the election campaigns of every elected member in government, and that’s why they are now choosing to go after California’s 15-year old medical marijuana establishment. And no one could prove me wrong- there is no way to prove who is funding what campaign anymore. But more likely it is Big Pharma behind it. Not content to hijack Obama’s campaign promises for health care reform by squashing the public option and preventing negotiation for lower drug fees, no, now they want to put the kibosh on mmj as well so that Americans’ choices are artificially limited to more expensive, less effective remedies. Ones only they can manufacture and sell. ‘Recreation’ is counter to working like a slave for the man and not allowed.
But the point is that this process of corporate takeover will make our country look more and more like Iran. Instead of people being free to make their own decisions, the government will impose by force obedience to distant, heartless entities that are only in it for themselves. Clean air limits corporate profits, so screw your health. Corporate taxes hurt billionaires’ bottom lines, so to hell with Social Security or education. Pot is the least of it, but the protesters definitely ought to fight for the end of pot prohibition.
But really, the most appropriate thing the protesters to do is what they are already doing: have no specific message at all. Ask yourselves: How much money can these protesters contribute to political campaigns? None? Now that money is speech, well, speech isn’t money. In the abscence of money, post Citizens United, the only thing elected officials can or will hear is “nothing”.
That was one long post, but it came down to this last paragraph. The point you are missing here is not money, but votes. Look at the profile of these demonstrators, young, college educated, heavily in debt for college, they have degrees, and they can not find a job worthy of their accomplishments. Last June television reported that entire graduating classes from college could not find jobs.
Think about your first job. It does not matter what you learned in school, you were just a lump of flesh that knew little to help your employer. My first job was fortunate, I was an intern at a national advertising agency. I spent my first two years learning how the billing and filing systems worked so we could charge clients, but mainly work out discepancies. I spent my days running from floor to floor bugging creative people with things like, “That sign you designed for end isle displays in grocery stores for (xyz food corp), was printed on glossy stock instead flat cardboard. There was a cost overrun, who do you want to bill it too?” I was viewed as a pest, it was the nature of my job.
Then after two years of grunt work, I was made an assistant account exec on xyz foods, and guess what. The actual work remained pretty much the same. My employer took a chance on me. I could have left for another employer - a filing/billing system is a filing/billing system. My employer invested the time of their employees teaching me the details of our work, for at least the first year, I was pretty much a liability with some promise.
These young demonstrators know how first job employment works, and they are getting screwed. If they do not start out well with their first job, they will end up like the protestors who are 50 that employers do not want to retrain because their longevity with the firm will be limited. Add to these two groups American labor unions.
Unions have the organization and membership to build OWS (Occupy Wall Street as the movement seems to be called). We all know the Republicans are going to try to turn this into a union political ploy. The protestors, and American people will see through that. Three years of Teabagger bull sh*t have taught us that.
Oh gee. The racist copout. I guess you consult your high school texts when deciding what the Civil War was really fought over. If the war was fought over slavery, why did Lincoln free only the slaves in rebelling states in the Emancipation Proclamation? If it was a moral stand why not free them all? His object was to preserve the Union. In fact he stated that if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave he would do it.
The vast majority of southerners didn’t own slaves why risk their life to maintain the practice.
I guess men like Sherman were the moral stalwarts of the age. Are you serious?
:rolleyes: Nevertheless, I think you’ll find the consensus among historians was that it was all about slavery. That’s not even seriously debated any more. There were other points of difference between North and South (e.g., tariffs), but they all went back to slavery – and aristocracy – one way or another.
Well I don’t think people should necessarily feel entitled to a career path simply because they have a degree. It depends on what field a person is going into of course, but college can definitely be overrated. An entire class graduated and could not find a job? This is not my full opinion, but it sounds like ‘how to get a job’ has been stripped out of the curriculum. Do these people have unrealistic expectations? Do they think that piece of paper really makes them That special? What else are they willing to do to get ahead besides sit on their asses and listen to lectures?
If we are going to share personal anecdotes, my story boils down to- awesome scholarship. Education hijacked by family and evangelicals- certain forces wanted me to represent their bullshit. Graduated, but it basically wasn’t worth going in the first place. I didn’t go about waving my diploma in the air, I continued to acquire skills and did what was actually necessary to compete and win a decent position anyway. Now my hobbies include acquiring an investment income and dismantling the evangelical movement.
Colleges these days are graduating a lot of crybaby Suzies who need to roll up their sleeves and really figure out how to make themselves useful. That said, corporate influence over our society is becoming in many ways rather unproductive in terms of helping people to have good lives. It isn’t obvious to a lot of people what they have to do to achieve X standard of living. The old routes to success are becoming too crowded, there are only so many positions to be filled that way, and the people that lose out don’t know how to pick a plan B, or else conditions are such that no plan B is really available. Add to the fact that limited resources mean it is a bad idea/not possible for everyone to have a high standard of living and we are left with our current situation of people feeling like they’ve been ripped off. Obviously that’s magnified by the fact that we actually have been ripped off by the banks &etc.
But we’re getting off track. Back to votes, corporations have already thought of that. They have bought local Republican officials all over the country to make it more difficult to vote. They killed ACORN. They are instituting voter ID requirements, limiting voting hours and doing anything else they can to cut the less enfranchised people out of the process. Tea party leaders have stated explicitly that poor people ‘vote wrong’. One of the goals of corporate influence is to silence the voice of the people.
At this point the Wall Street protesters would benefit more from issuing appealing slogans rather than specific demands. Getting too specific about too many issues risks splintering the movement. For example, open borders very tangibly damages the economic interests of employees who are already American citizens.
Also, because the Wall Street protesters do not have any power yet, issuing demands causes them to lose credibility. During the War in Vietnam student protesters would issue “non negotiable demands” to school officials. This was only marginally effective when those school officials sympathized with the students about the War in Vietnam, and when there was wide spread support for those demands among the student body.
Although I am sympathetic to the protesters, I have yet to see any public opinion polls about popular sentiment. What matters in the United States is not how many people show up for demonstrations, but who wins on election day. Millions of people demonstrated against the War in Vietnam. Nevertheless, Richard Nixon was elected in 1968. He won by a landslide in 1972. Part of his landslide was probably generated by backlash against the anti war demonstrations.
During the War in Vietnam many Americans thought the anti war protesters were traitors, and cowards. Because anti war sentiment was strongest on the most prestigious universities, it was difficult to see the anti war protesters as losers. Many Americans do seem to think of the Wall Street protesters as failures who cannot find decent jobs. That is not my attitude, but I detect it.
Any large crowd is gonna attract dingbats, Czarcasm, focussing on the dingbats and ignoring the overwhelming thrust of the protests is the sort of thing Fox News “journalists” are doing. I’m disappointed in you.
Don’t be disappointed in me. Be disappointed in the local news stations(not Fox, btw) that showed all the different people with all the different and unrelated causes. Blame organizers that didn’t do more to let people know why this was called a “Wall Street protest” just so they could rack up big numbers of protesters.
You are correct that Lincoln would not have freed a single slave if he could have preserved the union without doing so. The Emancipation Proclamation was pure politics. In fact Lincoln wanted to release it months earlier, but waited to do so until after a Union military victory. Things were not going well for the Union at that time, 1862.
Slaves were freed in border States only as a scare tactic for the south. You are also correct that the average southerner did NOT enlist because of slavery. There were many reasons, but plantation owners were the ruling class, and they wanted the war. Like all wars it was really about MONEY, not slavery. The south was stupid in my opinion because all they had was cotton, the Union had more people and all the manufacturing, including weapons. When the Union closed southern sea ports the export of cotton ended, and the money flow to the Confederacy stopped. The south should have seen this coming, but they were arrogant and emotionally pumped up. Jefferson Davis was not the brightest bulb either.
People ask me how I know things about American history that happened decades before I was born. There is a book called The Almanac of American History by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr that chronicles every day since recorded history on this continent began in the tenth century. When you read just facts in chronological order, it all falls together. It is also cross-indexed by event. It is a great starting point to discuss American history. I particularly found the late 19th century interesting after the Civil War. The book makes a great gift for the serious, but casual lover of American history. I also enjoy posting with the knowledge that I can win almost any argument because I have the facts at my finger tips, then I just Google for a link. My secret is out, join me. Winning is fun!
