Replies sorted oldest to newest
Some people need a government to get in their way.
Los Angeles, 1992, when government retreated from South Central.
That was california's problem. Same as new orleans, lousiana when they could have evacuated. Many that could have just walked out like a lot of people did, wouldn't do that because they wanted to run around and loot. Then they wanted a pity party and the lefties couldn't toss them one fast enough.
In the American tradition, the express purpose of government is to protect rights/property, not the gazillion usurped, undelegated powers it uses today.
So, your solution to liberty and freedom is a fascist police state? Sorry, your examples make no sense and are irrelevant to the discussion.
In the American tradition, the express purpose of government is to protect rights/property ...
"That's what governments are for... get in a man's way."---Mal Reynolds Capt. of Serenity, "Firefly-Class" spaceship
When government is "gotten out of the way," that is what happens. There is no government to protect you rights and property. Government doesn't have an ON/OFF switch, to be called only when you want them to pull your chestnuts out of the fire.
Government doesn't have an ON/OFF switch, to be called only when you want them to pull your chestnuts out of the fire.
So it's your contention that we either have a limitless, unquestionable, totalitarian government or anarchy?
I think you're being intellectually dishonest.
Some people need a government to get in their way.
Los Angeles, 1992, when government retreated from South Central.
My "Gov'ment" is always handy...
Some people need a government to get in their way.
And the rest need to be left alone.
In the American tradition, the express purpose of government is to protect rights/property, not the gazillion usurped, undelegated powers it uses today.
Defense of SELF is one of THE REASONS for the 2nd Amendment..
That was california's problem. Same as new orleans, lousiana when they could have evacuated. Many that could have just walked out like a lot of people did, wouldn't do that because they wanted to run around and loot. Then they wanted a pity party and the lefties couldn't toss them one fast enough.
-------------
Which is better: A pity party, or Bush's HUD secretary saying New Orleans shouldn't rebuild the destroyed colored quarter in order to keep the city as black-free as possible?
FRI SEP 30, 2005 AT 10:10 AM PDT
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/09/30/153109/-HUD-Chief-Rebuilt-New-Orleans-Will-Not-Be-As-Black
HUD chief foresees a ‘whiter’ Big Easy
A Bush Cabinet officer predicted this week that New Orleans likely will never again be a majority black city, and several black officials are outraged.
Alphonso R. Jackson, secretary of housing and urban development, during a visit with hurricane victims in Houston, said New Orleans would not reach its pre-Katrina population of “500,000 people for a long time,” and “it’s not going to be as black as it was for a long time, if ever again.”
Your new avatar looks like Uncle Fester with rabies.
So prop, why the deflection? What do his remarks have to do with what I posted? AND, did he say that would be a "good thing" or was he just making an observation? How many times a day do we hear about an area being "predominately white or predominately black"? OK then, how about Nagin's remarks? How about the fact they never bothered with whites that were wiped out by katrina, it was always the blacks, the blacks, the poor blacks. Heck, by reports, other countries would think katrina ONLY hit the city of new orleans and ONLY did damage to "the blacks".
***********************************
Nagin began the speech invoking spirits of Peace, Love, and Unity. He then described a talk he had with Martin Luther King, Jr. earlier that morning (as King was long dead, this was presumably a metaphor or rhetorical device). Nagin then described some of the problems and suffering New Orleans had been experiencing since the hurricane, with the repeated refrain that Dr. King says "I wouldn't like that".
Shortly after, Nagin continued, "We as black people, it's time, it's time for us to come together. It's time for us to rebuild a New Orleans, the one that should be a chocolate New Orleans. And I don't care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are. This city will be chocolate at the end of the day."
Nagin also stated that New Orleans "will be a majority African-American city. It's the way God wants it to be."[2] As most New Orleanians knew the city had been majority African American for decades before Katrina, certain people found the implication of Nagin claiming to know God's will more troubling than the suggested return of pre-Katrina demographics.[3]
In the same speech, Nagin further stirred controversy by claiming that "God is mad at America. He sent us hurricane after hurricane after hurricane, and it's destroyed and put stress on this country....Surely he doesn't approve of us being in Iraq under false pretenses. But surely he is upset at black America also. We're not taking care of ourselves." Nagin then went on to relate an imagined conversation with the deceased Rev. Martin Luther King regarding both the response to Katrina and the modern problems of black America which he believes offended God.[4]
Other parts of the speech were reportedly more disturbing to some New Orleanians than the "chocolate" reference. Nagin had also said, "I don't care what people are saying Uptown or wherever they are." Some people took "Uptown" as a coded reference to wealthy whites, such as those who live in the old mansions on Saint Charles Avenue or around Audubon Park. Uptown New Orleans is, however, one of the most ethnically and economically diverse sections of the Metro area. Furthermore, many of Nagin's original supporters live Uptown
Which is better: A pity party, or Bush's HUD secretary saying New Orleans shouldn't rebuild the destroyed colored quarter in order to keep the city as black-free as possible?
------------------
BTW, what you posted is NOT what he said. Maybe you shouldn't post links that dispute the very lies you're posting. Did you even bother to read the article? Your twisted post is just more of that democratic attempt to keep the races divided. You should be ashamed.
One word for those who advocate secession...Appomattox!
Two words for people who deny secession-
Ford's Theater.
Winston, Revenge may have been sweet for the moment but it did nothing to change the result.The reality is that brute force overcame constitutional argument. If Obama could not use the existing military and had to rely on new volunteers to bring a seceding Alabama back into the Union I doubt if he could raise a platoon from Michigan, New York, etc. to come down to Alabama and force us to return. Most of America would probably say "Good Riddance!"
Sure are a lot of "yankees" retiring/moving to the southern states for them to have such a "low opinion" of the area.
Those who re-locate to Alabama are mostly here because of the weather not the culture, or the educational opportunities, or the employment opportunities, or the ever-present roadside litter, or the prolific crime, or the abandoned downtown buildings, need I go on?
Those who re-locate to Alabama are mostly here because of the weather not the culture, or the educational opportunities, or the employment opportunities, or the ever-present roadside litter, or the prolific crime, or the abandoned downtown buildings, need I go on?
-------------------------
I don't think the weather would draw me to an otherwise undesirable area, and it is not all they consider when moving here either. Maybe you should actually talk to a few people, or better yet, travel a bit and see just how nice this area really is. There are plenty of places where the weather is good, even better than ours.
Best, I hate to burst your bubble but let me tell you...I have traveled , literally, around the world a few times. Additionally, I have visited 49 of the states. I speak with an experienced view. I find in this area known as "The Shoals" that many of the local residents who were raised here have not traveled much. I suspect you are one of them. Consequently many local residents think it is normal to have ever-present roadside litter, garish billboards, flashing roadside signs, crosses along the road where Joe Blow was killed by a drunk driver seven years ago (wonder why we don't get more tourists?), schools that rank # 47 in the nation according to the most recent survey, the list goes on and on. Ever wonder why Alabama can't recruit American Fortune 500 corporations to the State? Ever wonder why the few corporations that do locate to Alabama are foreign (lately German) companies? If you have Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, and Julius Streicher on your national resume than George Wallace and Bull Connor don't look so bad.
I hate to burst your bubble daybegger, but again, if you would only talk to people before you "spoke" you'd save yourself some embarrassment. You'd also find many many people in this area are well traveled. Why would you think I'd never "been out of the area"?
You seem to be one of the more "confused" people that post. All I can suggest to you is, if you hate the area so much, move. I'll be ****** if I'd stay somewhere I detested. Ever hear the saying, "better to light a candle than curse the darkness"? You'll find all the things you moan and groan about are all over the country. In your post, among other off the wall subjects, you mention crosses by the road.
A cross by the road, put there by family, upsets you, yet people, years later, all over the country, still putting remembrances on the spots where "celebrities" were killed/died is OK? By the way, those crosses are placed by the roadside all over this and many other countries. I've been told the "custom" started because the state used to place them to warn people that a certain spot was dangerous and that lives had been lost there. I have no idea if that's correct, maybe someone else knows.
