From: cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 04:12:32 GMT
Organization: WINCO
Subject: Re: Quayle on abortion
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Organization: WINCO
Keywords: 'Y'

In article <1854@celia.UUCP> celia!steve@usc.edu (Steve Tyree) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.141027.7668@pmafire.inel.gov> cdm@pmafire.inel.gov (Dale Cook) writes:
>>How many times do I have to say it Steve?  Please listen this time, ok?
>>I can vote the political "elitist" out.  With majority rule, I have NO
>>recourse.  Kapish?
>
> The entire system is rigged. Remember Jerry Browns speeches. He was right
>on the money about political corruption. Until this year most politicians
>on the hill were reelected rather easily. No one could vote them out. 

Pure Bunk, unless you are saying actual vote counts are altered on a
grand scale, ala a certain Chicago mayor of years past.  I'd like to see
evidence of that if that's what you're saying.

I assume you vote each election.  So do I, and so do millions of others.
They're voting for somebody.  The person with the most votes wins.

> Do you honestly think the people would have allowed government to go
>into such tremendous debt if they had direct control over the money
>the government was stealing from them ? 

I'm not sure what we'd have now if there was direct control of the budget
process by the voting public.

Look, the people are allowing it right now.  They re-elect their congress
critters each time for the simple reason that their reps are real good at
lining their districts with pork.  People place the blame on congress, 
and yet continue to send their own reps back to protect their share of
the pie, or even get a second helping.  I place the blame on the people
for that.
>
>>No.  This makes you an individual who is willing to abandon personal rights,
>>freedoms and beliefs for the "common good".  Sounds kinda Marxist to me.
>
> Are you aware that you currently live in a country which is primarily
>a nationalistic socialist country ? This country is at least 40 percent
>socialist already. Im attempting to unite with Individualist in the 

Hey, I never claimed this was paradise, although relatively speaking, it
is.  I know we have problems.  All I'm saying is that we don't trash the
system because of them.  I'm an optimist - I think we'll work out the
problems, and within the existing framework, too, unless the hysterics
get out of hand.

>attempt to weaken nationalistic socialism. Only when it is weakened 
>could we then go back to 100 percent Individualism. I only think we need
>to give in on maybe 10 issues or less and thats all it would take for
>enough people to come together with enough power to destroy socialism.

Ahh, the proletariats shall rise up against the bourgeois and the end
justifies the means?  BTW, your list of issues on which we need to give
in is growing in size with every post...

>How would you as an individual destroy socialism in this country even
>though it has grown like a cancer.

I don't think anybody needs to "give in" on anything.  A few patches
here and there, such as a presidential line item veto, would make vast
improvements.
>
>>We already have the common ground.  It's called "The Constitution".
>
> And how does it get amended ?

I hope that was a rhetorical question.  Of course, by a 3/4 majority of
the state legislatures.  Are you now advocating that as the solution?
I hope so, because I would go along with that.  I may disagree with the
outcome, and work to overturn it, but I believe in the system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
...Dale Cook    "Quayle doesn't inhale (which explains a LOT)."
                   ---William Hsu
The opinions are mine only (i.e., they are NOT my employer's)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh