VENEZUELANS REJECT CHAVEZ'S PLANS! HEY LIEBERALS, ARE YOU PAYINGATTENTION???

[SteveL]

On 03 Dec 2007 21:27:10 GMT, Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:

>stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com (SteveL) wrote in
>news:boGdnQ0j2YvG7snanZ2dnUVZ8uydnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> As for the rest. He's been elected. If he has a mandate from the
>> people to nationalize his country's industries then so be it.
>> That's democracy.
>
>Could that be done in our "democracy", or do you think that the
>constitution might be an impediment? Do you think it should be an
>impediment?

Venezuela is not the USA, and neither is France, the UK, Sweden or
Canada. Yet they allow their governments to legally nationalize
industries, and yet are not dictatorships.

We keep making the mistake of trying to impose our ideals on people,
as long as the people are consulted what does it matter about the
details?

As for whether the Constitution is an impediment to nationalization of
industries, I don't know. Do you have a specific passage that bans it?

Should the Constitution remove the power to do such things from a
government with a mandate?

>
>Minus the restrictions imposed by such a document, a democracy is
>nothing but a self-serving mob. Or more often, a mob put into service
>of someone who claims to be its sole representative.

I'm sure democracy can do fine as a concept without the US
Constitution.

 

[Herbert Cannon]

"SteveL" <stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:CKednfFEEsLW7MnaRVnyuQA@giganews.com...
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:03:11 -0600, "Herbert Cannon"
> <hcannon18@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>If he holds another referdum and wins, I am quite sure the left will
>>defend
>>him inspite of the stench from the ballot box.
>
> Well you guys are currently attacking him inspite of the distinct
> lack of a stench from the ballot box.

The fat lady has not sung yet. She will sing when and if he leaves the
presidency. If the past is any indication, well you should be able to figure
that out without much help.

 

[SteveL]

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:37:12 -0600, "Herbert Cannon"
<hcannon18@cox.net> wrote:

>
>"SteveL" <stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote in message
>news:CKednfFEEsLW7MnaRVnyuQA@giganews.com...
>> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:03:11 -0600, "Herbert Cannon"
>> <hcannon18@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>If he holds another referdum and wins, I am quite sure the left will
>>>defend
>>>him inspite of the stench from the ballot box.
>>
>> Well you guys are currently attacking him inspite of the distinct
>> lack of a stench from the ballot box.
>
>The fat lady has not sung yet. She will sing when and if he leaves the
>presidency. If the past is any indication, well you should be able to figure
>that out without much help.
>

If there's one thing that the past is truly an indication of here, it
is that the left has not tended to support Latin American dictators.

I support democracy. All the rest is bullshit.

Like you say. We'll see.

 

[Bert Hyman]

stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com (SteveL) wrote in
news:6LCdnR3oKcZF68nanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@giganews.com:

> As for whether the Constitution is an impediment to nationalization
> of industries, I don't know. Do you have a specific passage that
> bans it?

Well, the way our government is constituted, you'd have to find
something in the Constitution that allows it. Remember: limited and
enumerated powers.

The 4th and 5th Amendments were intended to emphasize that the state
can't simply confiscate property at will. But they are, as Hamilton
said, "exceptions to powers not granted" and as such provide a
"colourable pretext to claim more than were granted", hence the
recent problems with eminent domain.

> Should the Constitution remove the power to do such things from a
> government with a mandate?

Absolutely.

The Constitution is subject to amendment by a well-documented
process. If a People's State is what the people want, they'll have to
be explicit about it and work for their own enslavement.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

 

[Herbert Cannon]

> Chavez is basically an idealist in an uncertain position. He's a
> potential Castro, but Castro wasn't really that bad a fellow either.
> His options were limited.

Why no, of course not, he really was a really good fellow, he just murdered
the oppostion; and he just recently locked up the dissidents. Not a bad
fellow at all, if you like living in communist dictatorships. If you dont
you float.
What utter bullshit.

He did the best he could.>

I would say he did a pretty good job of murder.

> Once we get rid of Bush and implement some economic reforms
> domestically, South America will restabilize, and the temptations of
> Communism will recede.

Yes and the world will turn nice and fuzzy and warm; and the terrorist will
all turn into hippies: and we can all surrender our arms; and we can disband
our armies; and Islam will be a peaceful religion; and everyone will love
everyone; and I have some bridges and some plots of land to sell you - the
snake oil I throw in for free.

As I say, my nickname for Bush is "Instant
> Communism".

My nickname for you is moron. Unless of course you want to buy my plots of
land, then I will call a dumb customer.

He makes Communism look good, as an alternative to
> imperialistic fascism.

Gee that must be why we are having a presidential election in the future
because we are a imperialistic fascist. The Bush Brown shirts are under your
bed.

 

[Bert Hyman]

stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com (SteveL) wrote in
news:6LCdnR3oKcZF68nanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@giganews.com:

> On 03 Dec 2007 21:27:10 GMT, Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>Minus the restrictions imposed by such a document, a democracy is
>>nothing but a self-serving mob. Or more often, a mob put into
>>service of someone who claims to be its sole representative.
>
> I'm sure democracy can do fine as a concept without the US
> Constitution.

As a concept? Sure. And I said "such a document", not "that
document."

But in a real-world implementation, limits must be agreed to and
codified and made difficult to overturn. That's where constitutions
come in.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

 

[hal@nospam.org]

like why is everyone posting several times each to this silly thread?
I mean, this is too weird....


Hal

 

[hal@nospam.org]

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:28:30 -0600, "Herbert Cannon"
<hcannon18@cox.net> wrote:

>
>"Jerry Kraus" <jkraus1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1304773c-713a-41a8-bc08-e3b3fa927956@x69g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>> On Dec 3, 2:56 pm, "Herbert Cannon" <hcanno...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> > Bert, go away. You're saying nothing, and you know it. Go off and
>>> > play.
>>>
>>> You have wandered into a newsgroup full of martial artists. For your own
>>> safety dont wander into any dojos.
>>
>> Actually, people as stupid as you are don't frighten me much.
>
>Sonny, people as dumb as you frighten me a lot. If you get your way, I see
>a nation of enslaved wimps.
> Sorry
>> to disappoint. Although, it tends to explain your fascination with
>> violence.
>Aww how touching a Mr. Non violent. You gonna march around the block with a
>candle and chant take back the night next. Did anyone ever tell you that
>when sheep flock together wolves are not frightened.

they are if the sheep have laser beams on their heads...

 

[Herbert Cannon]

>
> When the U.S. restabilizes, so will the hemisphere, and to some extent
> the world.

Utter cark.

Bush has created ripples of violence and extremism
> throughout the world.
Here is a clue for you, moron, Islam and the extremism it promotes has been
around since the sixth century. You might want to visit the library and
check out the book " Unholy Terror." That was long before Bush - it was
Clinton's time.
Sorry Bush did not cause your plantar warts nor your jock itch either.

 

[Herbert Cannon]

> they are if the sheep have laser beams on their heads...

Damn Hal I think even you could whip this guy's ass. He is a left wing loon.
You might want to explain to him that the world is going to fall apart and
all us right wing facists will cook him and eat him when it does.

 

[Herbert Cannon]

<hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
news:47547a03.351654281@news.newsguy.com...
> like why is everyone posting several times each to this silly thread?
> I mean, this is too weird....

Well I am ill and cannot leave; therefore, extremely bored. How about you?

 

[Herbert Cannon]

> If there's one thing that the past is truly an indication of here, it
> is that the left has not tended to support Latin American dictators.

I would have to say considering Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Uncle Ho, and few
others, the left's record, worldwide, is a bit spotty in that regard.
>
> I support democracy. All the rest is bullshit.

Amen. Too bad CNN does not. Then of course there is the democracy of radical
Islam - one vote - one person - one time.
>
> Like you say. We'll see.

Yup.

 

[SteveL]

On 03 Dec 2007 21:47:56 GMT, Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:

>stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com (SteveL) wrote in
>news:6LCdnR3oKcZF68nanZ2dnUVZ8radnZ2d@giganews.com:
>
>> As for whether the Constitution is an impediment to nationalization
>> of industries, I don't know. Do you have a specific passage that
>> bans it?
>
>Well, the way our government is constituted, you'd have to find
>something in the Constitution that allows it. Remember: limited and
>enumerated powers.
>
>The 4th and 5th Amendments were intended to emphasize that the state
>can't simply confiscate property at will. But they are, as Hamilton
>said, "exceptions to powers not granted" and as such provide a
>"colourable pretext to claim more than were granted", hence the
>recent problems with eminent domain.

Thanks for reminding me. Yep looks as though the US Constitution bans
nationalization.

However, that was just an aside. The real point was that other
countries have their own constitutions and their own ways of doing
things. They are no less democratic just because their constitutions
allow for nationalization.

But even that's not the point. If, through its own internal democratic
process, another country allows itself to nationalize its own
industries for what the people see as their betterment, then that's
their call despite what our constitution says.

Certainly less of a danger to democracy than us sticking OUR NOSE IN
because we don't like the result.

>
>> Should the Constitution remove the power to do such things from a
>> government with a mandate?
>
>Absolutely.
>
>The Constitution is subject to amendment by a well-documented
>process. If a People's State is what the people want, they'll have to
>be explicit about it and work for their own enslavement.

So nationalizing one inductry is no different from having a People's
Republic? Tell it to the Brits.

And if it's the wrong choice (or becomes the wrong choice years
later) the people can vote in a government that sells it off again.

Just like the UK.

 

[Pierre Honeyman]

On Dec 3, 11:10 am, Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 1:06 pm, Mark Goldberg <msgoldb...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Jerry Kraus wrote:
> > > I see you're a martial arts and gun freak.
>
> > He's a father, parent, former soldier in service to his nation, a
> > neighbor, a friend, a curious viewer of politics, a man who enjoys self
> > defense, a man who enjoys sharing his sense of security and honor with
> > his neighbors and colleagues.
> > Why am I not surprised?
>
> > Because you are a pimp... and he's a man.
>
> > > I realize the concept that people should work together to try to solve
> > > social problems would be difficult for someone who sees destruction
> > > and killing as the only useful forms of social interaction to
> > > comprehend, but there are, believe it or not, other ways of doing
> > > things.
>
> > > Actually, you've already lost. The only way to keep the U.S. economy
> > > going to move to the left -- socialism.
>
> > And the deaths of 150 million due to marxism, and the destruction of
> > their entire economies, and destruction of the principles of liberty,
> > all of which were rejected except by the left wing pimps who prattle...
> > like yourself, about nothing, nothing at all.
>
> > Pure vapor.
> > And how about the anniversary last week of the 4-10 million Stalin
> > starved with his collectivizations? and all the other anniversary's of
> > marxist economic destruction.
>
> > You dumb pimp, you dumbass cross posting leftist... why am I not surprised?
>
> > Mark
>
> Now, now, Mark. Let's not decry your "jewish heritage". Marx was a
> fine philosopher and a good man. And Communism is really just applied
> Judaism, when properly understood. And the Chinese have done quite
> well with Marxism, thankyou very much.

They have? Based on what standards? Is it the wonderful standard of
living that the majority of Chinese live by? Perhaps, instead, it is
their world-renown for political, economic, and social freedoms?
Maybe it's the rapid pace of Chinese innovation, creating new
products, new techniques, new ideas for the world to benefit by? If
so could you maybe explain why Canada, a nation of 30M people, is
sending economic aid to China, a nation of over 1Bn people?

Um, hooray for Marxism?

Pierre

 

[hal@nospam.org]

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 16:00:32 -0600, "Herbert Cannon"
<hcannon18@cox.net> wrote:

>
><hal@nospam.org> wrote in message
>news:47547a03.351654281@news.newsguy.com...
>> like why is everyone posting several times each to this silly thread?
>> I mean, this is too weird....
>
>Well I am ill and cannot leave; therefore, extremely bored. How about you?
>
I am sorry you are ill. Bird flu? I was wondering why you were
posting multiple times to a thread about Chavez when you can't tell a
democratic socialist from a totalitarian communist, or a dictator from
a penis and a potato.

Hal

 

[hal@nospam.org]

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:09:31 -0500, "David L. Burkhead"
<dburkhead@sff.net> wrote:


>You do realize you continue to engage in argument ad hominem, don't you?
>
>You do realize that is a logical fallacy, don't you.
>
>You do realize that you are undermining your own position with every post
>you make, don't you?
>
>Actually, you probably don't.

coming from a guy who thinks that the cure for poverty is wealth. And
the cure for overconsumption is to consume more.

Hal

>
>--
>David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
>mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
>My webcomic Cold Servings
>http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus!
>Updates Wednesdays
>
>
>

 

[Bert Hyman]

In news:nuCdnSZq-uUd48nanZ2dnUVZ8umdnZ2d@giganews.com SteveL
<stevelon@deletethisbitntlworld.com> wrote:

> And if it's the wrong choice (or becomes the wrong choice years
> later) the people can vote in a government that sells it off again.

Maybe. Sometimes these things become one-way traps and voting is no
longer an option.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably
the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute
Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such
Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

 

[Pierre Honeyman]

On Dec 3, 3:05 pm, h...@nospam.org wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:09:31 -0500, "David L. Burkhead"
>
> <dburkh...@sff.net> wrote:
> >You do realize you continue to engage in argument ad hominem, don't you?
>
> >You do realize that is a logical fallacy, don't you.
>
> >You do realize that you are undermining your own position with every post
> >you make, don't you?
>
> >Actually, you probably don't.
>
> coming from a guy who thinks that the cure for poverty is wealth.

What is the cure for poverty then?

Pierre

 

[Herbert Cannon]

>>news:47547a03.351654281@news.newsguy.com...
>>> like why is everyone posting several times each to this silly thread?
>>> I mean, this is too weird....
>>
>>Well I am ill and cannot leave; therefore, extremely bored. How about you?
>>
> I am sorry you are ill. Bird flu?

I wish - more like bad food.

I was wondering why you were
> posting multiple times to a thread about Chavez when you can't tell a
> democratic socialist from a totalitarian communist

That is because the only difference is the desire for the democratic
socialist to become the totalitarian commnunist unless stopped by the people
like Chavez was.
His hero was Castro. Birds of a feather flock together. There is no
difference.

, or a dictator from
> a penis and a potato.

I love you too. Everytime I flushed today, I said there goes Hal again.

 

[David L. Burkhead]

hal@nospam.org wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:09:31 -0500, "David L. Burkhead"
> <dburkhead@sff.net> wrote:
>
>
>> You do realize you continue to engage in argument ad hominem, don't
>> you?
>>
>> You do realize that is a logical fallacy, don't you.
>>
>> You do realize that you are undermining your own position with every
>> post you make, don't you?
>>
>> Actually, you probably don't.
>
> coming from a guy who thinks that the cure for poverty is wealth.

This is a straw man.

> And
> the cure for overconsumption is to consume more.

As is this, plus circular logic.

--
David L. Burkhead "Dum Vivimus Vivamus"
mailto:dburkhead@sff.net "While we live, let us live."
My webcomic Cold Servings
http://www.coldservings.com -- Back from hiatus!
Updates Wednesdays