His version of taking it apart:
The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 - you have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke. That's dumb. It's functioned fine for that long and only recently had revenue problems. The modern world wouldn't exist without this outstanding example of government success.
Social Security was established in 1935 - you have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke. No. It's made the money that won WW2, you ignorant fool. The government made the US the dominant superpower in the 20th Century and at the same time created many of the problems we now face.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - you have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke. You don't know jack about the financial system either. Why post? We haven't had any depressions since then. That isn't really a fail and it is so so so much more complex than that..... why even post when it is plain to anyone who knows that you don't know what you are talking about?
The "War on Poverty" started in 1964 - you have had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our money is confiscated each year and transferred to "the poor"; it hasn't worked and our entire country is broke. What are you on about? That administation ended before you were born. Probably, anyway. I don't know your birthday. Not asking. Your giving nothing here. No one has talked seriously about a "war on poverty" for many many decades except emotionally damaged radio show hosts who can just make up crap and often do
Trillions of dollars were spent in the massive political payoffs called TARP, the "Stimulus", the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009... none show any signs of working, although ACORN appears to have found a new b***h: the American taxpayer. How dim are you? TARO was a Republican program from a Pres that you probably voted for and also I know this has been in the news http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...lies-in-house/
Is your head so far up your own ass that you missed it?
And finally, to set a new record:
"Cash for Clunkers" was established in 2009 and went broke in 2009! It took good dependable cars (that were the best some people could afford) and replaced them with high-priced and less-affordable cars, mostly Japanese. A good percentage of the profits went out of the country. And the American taxpayers take the hit for Congress' generosity in burning three billion more of our dollars on failed experiments. Get some decent source of news. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...rs_cash12.html
So with a perfect 100% That would be your own 100% failure rate to make a point... failure rate and a record Not really, I have often seen you fail to make any respectable point that proves that "services" you I didn't do shit but vote and you need to get over illinformed and pathetic self shove down our throats are failing faster and faster, you want Americans to believe you can be trusted with a government-run health care system? Why even talk to someone who would make points as foolish and not inane as these? It's better just to vote with my own majority that is still holding the Republicans to some degree responsible for the poor state of the nation. Compared to how Republicans left this country almost a year ago, it is doing pretty good. Republicans have good values to share but you will need to learn what they are because what I see here is reasoned poorly and written the same. I'm sure there is some community college somewhere that might pass this sort of crap but that doesn't mean it is good. I can argue your side of this debate much better than you have demonstrated.
[/quoteWho is insane? The people with brain damage or those that argue with them?
The Police have an obligation "to protect and serve" I know that reading is difficult when those cop cars drive by so fast. I understand that this is not executed 100% effectively but the fact is still there that it is their duty despite how powerless anyone might have felt in their life. The idea that all hospitals have to take all people but cops don't have to help people is just plain dumb dumb dumb dumb and ignorant ignorant ignorant ignorant. In the end cops are held to more accountability becaue that is what public sevants can do (be held accountable) unlike buisnesses which are expected and given leeway to screw over anyone they can. Cops actually get caught, unlike hospital administrators.
This country has been a fusion of a free market and socialism for most of the 20th Century which is almost half lifespan of the entire system and has had elements of socialism prior to that in the form of public works. I realize that people who are ignorant don't realize this, but that doesn't change it. I am sincerely sorry that I have not been able to express this amazingly simple fact in words and word-bytes small enough to be understood by the people here. It's really a failure of our entire school system that there is any confusion on this fact at all.
There would be no manifest destiny without the role that government has played and the role hasn't stopped. We still have a train system. We still don't have rats in the sausage generally.The mail has been delivered generally on-time for 230 years all due to private enterprise in the form of federal express which started service in 1775 by Benjamin Franklin and has always out preformed government programs because God only loves private ventures. (Or is that last one bullshit...)
Glen Beck is a emotionally challenged fool with a questionable background in history. Thank heavens he has come along because Rush Limbaugh couldn't ever suck hard enough for the entire country with his pill popping habits and his $10,000 watch wearing stand for the common man. Keep repeating what he says because it will make you real smart. I promise.
The biggest challenge facing our nation is one of education. That's the problem with this thread is that despite whatever credintials are held by the posters here. The US government certainly was not found on anything as redundant as "self independence" and our stab at "limited government" ended with the articles of confederation which were abandoned in favor of a strong federal government by flawed hypocrites that some like to think were magic men who got everything correct because,,, they were magic or some crap like that. Which is baloney.
Frost, you are wrong. What we have, the MRIs, nuclear everything, and many high tech procedures come to us by virtue of the government dime. I'm sorry you were lied to by sincere seeming people on the radio but, for good or ill, our government has made this county what it is, warts and all. Praise it. Condemn it. Whatever. But don't assume that Ma and Pa Kettle made this country with the sweat off their brow because that just isn't correct in any way shape of form. I just don't have the patience to go through this anymore.
I want to thank anyone who has read the posting I have done here. It was very nice to feel free to express some opinions and engage with the sort of people that I usually wouldn't have but I'm past it now. My political opposition isn't anything personnel although some of the temper tantrums (not necessarily in this thread, meaning rather out in the world) generally earn my contempt because they are pathetic.
I am going to do my best to refrain from posting here in the future.
Now you're talking about things I know about. I have a degree in criminal justice and to back up my claim about the police don't have to take care of you, maybe you should consult case law.
Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981). Two women were upstairs in a townhouse when they heard their roommate, a third woman, being attacked downstairs by intruders. They phoned the police several times and were assured that officers were on the way. After about 30 minutes, when their roommate’s screams had stopped, they went downstairs they saw that the police never came, but the intruders were still there. “For the next fourteen hours the women were held captive, raped, robbed, beaten, forced to commit sexual acts upon each other, and made to submit to the sexual demands of their attackers.” The three women sued the District of Columbia for failing to protect them, but D.C.’s highest court exonerated the District and its police, saying that it is a “fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen.” (please note that is a QUOTE.)
DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (109 S.Ct. 998, 1989). The Court in DeShaney concluded that Constitutional duties of care and protection only exist as to certain individuals, such as incarcerated prisoners, involuntarily committed mental patients and others restrained against their will and therefore unable to protect themselves. “The affirmative duty to protect arises not from the State’s knowledge of the individual’s predicament or from its expressions of intent to help him, but from the limitation which it has imposed on his freedom to act on his own behalf.”
Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department. (901 F.2d 696 9th Cir. 1990) Ms. Balistreri, beaten and harassed by her estranged husband, alleged a “special relationship” existed between her and the Pacifica Police Department, to wit, they were duty-bound to protect her because there was a restraining order against her husband. The Court of Appeals, however, concluded that DeShaney limited the circumstances that would give rise to a “special relationship” to instances of custody. Because no such custody existed in Balistreri, the Pacifica Police had no duty to protect her, so when they failed to do so and she was injured they were not liable.
Hartzler v. City of San Jose, 46 Cal. App. 3d 6 (1st Dist. 1975). The court held that the San Jose police were not liable for ignoring Mrs. Brunell’s calls for help after her husband told her he was coming over to kill her. They said to call back when he got there. Before she could, he stabbed her to death.
Riss v. New York, 240 N.E.2d 860 (N.Y. 1968).
Linda Riss obeyed the law, yet the law prevented her from arming herself in self-defense.]
Freeman v. Ferguson a police chief directed his officers not to enforce a restraining order againsta woman’s estranged husband because the man was a friend of the chief’s. Theman subsequently killed the woman and her daughter.
Davidson v. City of Westminster (1982) 32 Cal.3d 197, 185 Cal.Rptr. 252: A husband and wife who were assaulted in a laundromat while the assailant was under surveillance by officers, brought legal action against the city and the officers for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress and for negligent investigation, failure to protect and failure to warn. The Supreme Court held that: (1) the mere fact that the officers had previously recognized the assailant from a distance as a potential assailant because of his resemblance to a person suspected of perpetrating a prior assault did not establish a “special relationship” between officers and assailant under which a duty would be imposed on officers to control assailant’s conduct; (2) factors consisting of officer’s prior recognition of assailant as likely perpetrator of previous assault and officer’s surveillance of assailant in laundromat in which victim was present did not give rise to special relationship between officers and victim so as to impose duty on officers to protect victim from assailant; and (3) victim could not maintain cause of action for intentional or reckless infliction of emotional distress, in view of fact that it was not alleged that officers failed to act for the purpose of causing emotional injury, and that in the absence of such an intent to injure, officer’s inaction was not extreme or outrageous conduct.
Westbrooks v. State (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 1203, 219 Cal.Rtr. 674 : The widow and sons of a motorist who drove into the void where a collapsed bridge had been, brought action against the State, county, and county deputy sheriff. The California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) was aware that a violent storm with heavy rains had caused a bridge on State route 118 to collapse. A county deputy sheriff had observed the beginning of the collapse, reported it and requested assistance from Cal Trans. A jury award of $1,300,000 was reversed in part by the Court of Appeal which held: (1) the county deputy sheriff had no duty to warn drivers that the state highway bridge had collapsed during the storm, and his efforts to warn drivers did not in any way increase the risk of harm to users of the highway, and therefore the county was not liable to motorist’s wife and children; and (2) the judgment was upheld against the state because the Cal Trans was notified at 1:52 a.m. and at 2:35 a.m., but no Cal Trans personnel nor CHP officer appeared at the scene until 5:45 a.m., and that such delay was unreasonable.
Antique Arts Corp. v. City of Torrence (1974) 39 Cal.App.3d 588, 114 Cal.Rptr. 332: “The statutory scheme makes it clear that failure to provide adequate police protection will not result in governmental liability, nor will a public entity be liable for failure to arrest a person who is violating the law. The statutory scheme shows legislative intent to immunize the police function from tort liability from the inception of its exercise to the point of arrest, regardless of whether the action be labeled â€˜discretionary’ or â€˜ministerial.’”
California’s Government Code, Sections 821, 845, and 846 states, in part: “Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals.”
Bower v. DeVito (1982) 686 F.2d 616 (No federal constitutional requirements that police provide protection.)
Calgorides v. Mobile (1985) 475 So.2d 560
Morgan v. District of Columbia (1983) 469 A.2d 1306
Sapp v. Tallahassee (1977) 348 So.2d 363, cert.denied 354 So.2d 985
Keane v. Chicago (1968) 98 Ill.App.2d 460, 240 N.E.2d 321
Simpson’s Food Fair v. Evansville 272 N.E. 2d 871
Wuetrich v. Delia (1978) 155 N.J.Super. 324, 382 A.2d 929
Chapman v. Philadelphia (1981) 290 Pa.Super. 324, 382 A.2d 753
Morris v. Musser, (1984) 84 Pa.Cmwth. 170, 478 A.2d 937
Pinder v. Johnson, 33 F.3d 368 (4th Cir.1994)
Champman v. City of Philadelphia
Thurman v. City of Torrington
McKee v. City of Rockwall Texas
Ne Casek v. City of Los Angeles, (1965) 233 Cal.App.2d 131, 43 Cal.Rptr. 294
Susman v. City of Los Angeles, et al (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 803, 75 Cal.Rptr. 240
Zinermon v. Burch (110 S.Ct. 975, 984 1990)
Stone v. State, (1980) 106 Cal.App. 3d 924, 165 Cal.Rep. 339.
Jamison v. Chicago, (1977) 48 ILL.App.3d 567.
Silver v. Minneapolis, (1969) 170 N.W.2d 206.
Weiner v. Metropolitan Authority, and Shernov v. New York Transit Authority, (1982) 55 N.Y. 2d 175, 948 N.Y.S. 141