From: tdsmith@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Timothy Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Term limits
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:49:31 GMT
Reply-To: tdsmith@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Timothy Smith)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In alt.politics.correct, best@anasaz (Mike Best) writes:
>In article <1992Apr6.172037.25939@cs.yale.edu> jovanovic-nick@CS.YALE.EDU (Nick

>In theory you are correct that citizens are responsible to support the
>mechanisms which protect their lives, property, and pursuit of happiness.
>However, people land on one of two sides of this issue.  The left believes
>that the people live to support the government and it's programs while
>the right believe that the government exists to protect individual citizens.

    You have this backwards.  
    The current republican administration believes that government exists 
to protect individual CORPORATIONS, supported by middle class taxation.  
The "councel for competitiveness" is a closed door organization for 
granting regulatory relief to campaign contributors.  No such relief 
is offered to ordinary taxpayers.  Except, of course, in campaign speeches 
paid for by corporate donors...
    As for protecting individual citizens, the republican party is for 
gag limits on sexual issues, manditory prayer in schools (with state
approved religions only), search without cause, seizure before conviction,
etc.  In addition, the right wing elements of the Supreme Court apparently 
believe in torture in prisons, as long as there are no permanent marks.
(As far as Thomas and Scalea (sp?) are concerned there is no conflict
with "cruel and unusual" as long as there is no permanent damage.)

>The "system" under which wealth is created (It doesn't simply exist
>contrary to the left) is the result of a limited government that allows
>the individual to thrive.  The Founders recognized that a strong
>central government was required to protect individual rights but at
>the same time they knew that it must be obliged to watch itself.
>That this was the intention of the Founders is not arguable.

    No argument.

>The problem is that the government (Congress) is no longer "limited"
>in its scope and is seen, by many, as standing in the way.

    CONGRESS is not the government people see. CONGRESS writes laws.
The EXECUTIVE branch runs the day to day government.  Didn't you ever
take civics?

    Congress did not preside over HUD, banking regulators, etc.  The
WHITE HOUSE did!  It always has!  Have you ever heard of seperation
of powers?  Congress passes laws, admittedly vague, then the white house
interprets the laws and makes regulations.  Congress has authority in
the regulatory process other than setting down the framework of laws.
    The White house can always make a government organization look stupid 
by encouraging fraud and waste (e.g, HUD under Regan.  HUD answers directly
to the white house.  That's why congress has to have hearings to find 
out what's going on. CONGRESS IS NOT IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND.)
    The White house can always make the taxpayers liable to the bad 
gambling of your friends by simply sitting on you hands until the problem 
reaches crisis proportions.  (Remember the S&L crisis that went public
just AFTER the last election?  The one which is now going to cost $500B 
to us middle class taxpayers? Look for a similar bank bailout after 
this next election... :()

    The real problem is that the current executive branch re-interprets 
the laws of congress to favor corporate interests at the expense of 
individual rights.  Ours is not a government of the people anymore.

>                     I don't think that in light of the ways in which
>our (OUR) money is spent the term "theft" is more apt.

>Mike Best

    Perhaps what we need is better value for our taxes.  Vote for a
government OF THE PEOPLE.  The corporations seem to be very capable
of taking care of themselves at our expense.

>          {re-quoting}     The Founders recognized that a strong
>central government was required to protect individual rights...

Tim Smith

    Oh, and as for this election, get the FACTS!  Watch what the candidates
do, and have done. The media doesn't give a fair spin on any politician. 
(It's too buisy selling soap to care about fairness.) 
    Watch especialy for BIG issues which don't seem to be getting any 
coverage (like the impending bank bailout, or the national debt,
or medicare/medicaid (and health care in general), or tax favors for large
corporations or industries, or re-interpretation of wetlands, etc).  
These are the issues which REALY matter!
    A good con-artist will always use some gimic to distract from the 
switch going on behind the scenes.  Last month the bank "check bouncing 
scandal" worked pretty well (most people acted like moths at a porch
light).
    I wonder what the distraction will be next month? Flag burning? 
(oh, right, that's been done already...) Photos of Sen. Kennedy in his 
underwear? (done already)  New dirt on HUD? (Naw, too obvous)  An invasion
of Libya? (Hmmmm...promising.)
    Whatever it is it has to be a negative for liberals... How about 
"gay abortionists who collect $billions$ in government grants for anti-christ 
art scams depicting Elvis on stamps, made with the help of drug crazed 
african aliens?"
    Expect anything which keeps the votors disgusted and away from the
poles!  Don't buy it! Get out and vote!  It's supposed to be OUR government!