Liberty has never come from government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. -- Woodrow Wilson\n\nThe general (federal) government will tend to monarchy, which will fortify itself from day to day, instead of working its own cures. -- Thomas Jefferson \n\nWhen you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship. -- Harry Truman \n\nSociety in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. -- Thomas Paine \n\nNo man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session. -- Mark Twain (1866) \n\nExperience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. -- Thomas Jefferson, Bill for the More General diffusion of Knowledge (1778).
132390
Very good quotes,  If you think those are scary try reading the Declearation of independence.  \n"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. 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"\n\nWhat does you question have to do with Bush suporters?
636466
I'm not sure, but I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said, "The only difference between a dictatorship and a democracy is the right to bear arms." Meaning that if the population is not armed at all whose to stand up to an oppressive government. The government could become very oppressive if they knew they would have almost no resistance.
90392
Pro: They each ensure our liberty and civil rights, as well as protecting us from the abuses of the government and those who would abuse governmental powers.\ncon: They make it hard,but not impossible, for the government to do the hell whatever they please.
417842
Check out the Wikipedia article on John Locke.  His ideas in government were best laid out in his "Two Treatises on Government," so check out what he said there.  \n\nHe was one of the influential Social Contract theorists, if you understand what that means, versus a State of Nature, you'll be very close to not only having the answer, but understanding it as well.  I'm sure that Wikipedia has good articles on those two subjects.  You'll be able to find much more online as well.\n\nHave at it!
193971
Thomas Jefferson put it quite succinctly when he said "Government is a necessary evil". However, the important thing to do, is never allow your government to get out of control, such as ours has.
674506
Well, we were founded as a country of individualists, and I find that a good thing.  That's what Liberty is all about.  But your point is well taken, that we need to help each other.  The problem we have is in deciding what the fix should be, both in goals and in methods.\n\nTake poverty, for example.  Some people feel the solution is to tax the rich and provide hand-outs to the poor.  I prefer the idea of helping poor people to become self-sufficient.  Provide the opportunity to learn new things, to do things as co-ops and non-profit organizations, to experiment with self-employment without a ton of regulations and certifications and licensing and bureaucratic garbage.  \n\nA lady knows how to do those clever little braids with beads on them that look so cool, but she has to spend a year or two in cosmetology school to get a license to do them for her friends and neighbors.  A fellow has a talent for handyman work, and can fix just about anything, but he's got to get a business license and a contractor's license and so forth, or be illegal and subject to fines and sanctions.\n\nPeople used to support lots of fraternal service organizations that gave help to those in need, but now they can't afford to because the taxes take too much from them.  But for every dollar in taxes, I'd be surprised if even one whole penny actually gets to a person who needs it: it gets absorbed in salaries for bureaucrats, and costs for their office furniture and their computer upgrade and their dental insurance.  So much money is wasted by the government that we could cut the taxes by 90% if we just eliminated the things that don't actually do what they are claiming they do.  \n\nAnd I agree, there's no point going about telling other people how to run their country when we do such a crappy job of running our own.\n\nVote Libertarian for a change!
484011
I'll use the wisdom of the founding fathers on this one\nBenjamin Franklin: Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both\n\nhow amazing two thumbs down for a direct quote from Ben Franklin, I guess the people that gave those are part of the Hate America Crowd,amazing\n\nThe problem from things  Warrentless Wiretapping programs are that they are without scrutiny, all we need to is look back at history and remember how Nixon abused the power and privialge of office to understand these mechanisms cannot be fully trusted without judiciary and/or congressional oversight, who decides what an enemy combatant is, and where is the line going to be drawn, can I be declared an enemy combatant simply for excersing my free speech rights? Who determines this one man or many? ABUSE of power is the central concern of those opposed to these programs and there are consitutional remedies to make them more transaparent WITHOUT destroying there ability to function Raw power without oversight is always ripe for abuse and this is has a great deal of precedent, it was abuses of power afterall that lead to the birth of this nation and the concept of Democracy as we know it today
440800
As many have already said, those lines you use are from Thomas Jefferson's editted 'Declaration of Independence'.  It was merely congressional document forwarded to the British King, and not an official policy of America.\n\nOur founders were idealistic of this country.  Although when you get down to the truth of the issue, all of them wanted America for white people.  Even Jefferson believed that slaves would have to be eventually shipped to Africa to prevent the calamity between the two races (which he highly feared), and what he thought were cultural difference.  It's not that they were overtly racists in todays terms, they were more or less realists to how different the cultures were.   Within many of our founder journals they noted it would take quite sometime for even eastern europeans to evolve enough to be part of America.  Thus the reason why immigration was restricted to the western europeans for sometime.\n\n 'The People' in all essence were American born or former western europeans.  The founders really wanted to make a country like Europe, but without the messy politics of Europe.  Only when the 14th amendment was made (which was more or less forced on to the south), was anyone but white considered a person with constitutional rights.\n\nIn the case of foreigners/illegal immigrants not having special rights in America,... it's fairly simple.  The Constitution give Congress the right to dictate policy on immigration/naturalization.  While history shows you that for consesus building, the Constitution did a horrible think in permitting slavery; it also shows you the pragamatism of politics.  Reality is illegal immigration has conflicting nature like slavery.  People of all sides favor it or disfavor it, depending on the interests.  While you might consider it wrong, the laws of our land and our people say in larger force that it's right.  It may not be perfect, and it may have to be worked on, but that's government, and people. \n\nI would not pull the race card on this, though, as it depletes the actual nature and reasoning of why we have it today.  As I've shown you (very honestly), that our past exhibits many wrongs, but our present has much more to do with structural capabilities and cultural harmony.
386890
Our greatness lies in the beginning of the Declaration of Independence that ALL men are created equal and deserve life, liberty, and the pursuit of hapiness. Our leaders forgot that concept in the need to forge power for themselves and this nation. Other nations were sold out to brutal puppet governments for the sake of our prosperity and security, but in the end, they sold our security for greed, for power, for corporate interests, because people everywhere will fight for their freedom against all odds and all costs no matter how horrible. We are living now in the "reckoning". Continued hypocricy will destroy us. When America wakes up, we will save ourselves, and in that saving, will again be a great nation based on the enlightnement of our founders.
497856
I spent a lot of time on this answer, so I do hope you'll read it.\n\nDisclaimer: I come down firmly in the liberal camp.\n\nThe major differences, in my mind, are in 1) how government should give economic assistance, 2) where the focus ought to be in terms of social issues, and 3) whether ideology or reality ought to ruel.\n\n1) Economics\nConservatives believe that the government is a necessary evil, and that any enforcement of the "social contract" through taxes, "entitlement programs," and business regulation ought to be minimal. They believe a freer market is a better market.\nLiberals believe that the government is the mechanism by which the people of a country achieve their vision of a fair playing field. They believe that government should regulate business and help the less fortunate get a foothold, and they believe that taxes are necessary to allow public works to go forward. They believe a fairer market is a better market.\n\n2) Social issues\nConservatives look to the past and to tradition to determine what is moral. They balk at change and feel that the country has a duty to prevent the degeneration of morals. They want to spend time on issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, and decency in the media. Many of them interpret the words of the Founding Fathers to mean the Founders were staunch Christians who believed the country should have  Christian values.\nLiberals look at the world through a prism of social justice. They feel that the relevant question is "Who is helped or hurt by this?" and bristle at "It's always been this way" as an excuse for an unsustainable argument. Many of them interpret the words of the Founding Fathers to mean the Founders were deists who believed the country should base itself on nondenominational, social-justice values. They want to spend time on issues such as equal rights, poverty, and peace.\n\n3) Ideology\nThis distinction is a tad fuzzier than others, but it's worth mentioning.\nFor the most part, conservatives lean on morality to make distinctions about policy. Certain concepts are morally right and therefore policies based on those concepts are untouchable. Thus, opposing policies must necessarily be not just wrong, but evil. (This is how you come to the conclusion that having liberals in power would lead to chaos in destruction - not because you have judged the policy proposals by liberals ineffective, but because they are not in line with the conservatives' proposals and must therefore have the opposite effect.)\nLiberals draw from the social-justice template and are interested in what has been proven to be effective or ineffective. They are interested in empirical proof rather than statements of ideology, and believe that opposing policy proposals are not necessarily evil. However, liberals do see as evil the compromising of those basic social-justice principals, and thus the rescinding of habeas corpus, the use of so-called alternative interrogation techniques, and the launching of military action without a UN resolution are highly offensive.\n\nI hope this helped you understand our side. Please feel free to correct me if  you feel I've misrepresented you.
676505
Well i could be wrong in the eyes of many people but here goes.\n\nRepublicans -  Small government. First and foremost. Little to no regulation on a federal level. Smaller government gives people more power over how things are done and who pays for them. You want a new baseball field? pony up the cash and you can have it. Want to ban a gun? Get your community behind you and ban it in your area. The idea is that you will do what is best for you with your money.\n\nWell fed and funded military. Can't spend too much on the defense of our nation. The idea is to keep the peace we must be ready for war at all times. If we have a big stick and everybody knows we can win with it. Why start a fight?\n\nRich folks. Rich people own everything right. Sure they do. But and a big but is that rich folks hire everyone else. Poor people don't own factories and they don't make new jobs. Rich folks do. Rich folks have a tendency to be rather smart. (Not always..egad not always.) They go to college and know how to run big businesses and they like to get bigger. They make jobs and they build factories and they fund research. This makes the poor folks richer in turn. When they build a factory they make jobs. From scientist to janitors. they build schools, they build communities.\n\nAmerica First. Sure we love our allies but we are Americans. Who should i worry about first. Africa or Detroit? Sometimes they get thrust into outside affairs and they have a tendency to step on toes. Their idea behind this is well...the French don't vote.. Well sure they vote but not for us. This can be problematic and all but a President is only around for 8 years at most.\n\nDemocrats - Big government. How can you play a game if their are no rules. How can you play a game with no Ref there to blow the whistle? Well the Democrats think that we as a nation can't. The bigger government is the more smart people are in charge. We have all of the scientists. Allot of folks with PhDs and we are going to tell you what is good for you. We are going to tax you for it and take care of you with that money. We are going to tell you what and when to eat. For your own good. Ok. It may sound a bit outrageous and i think it just might be. Democrats are great savers. The cut deficits down by taxing. The cut high cost programs that they don't like for one reason or the other. They "Trim" the fat off of the military, which means making it as my Drill Sergeant told me "Better and smaller". So no more big bombers we have bombers. No more high tech missiles we have high tech missiles.\n\nRich folks. Sure rich folks are smart but they are getting away with murder (And i am not talking about the Kennedy boys). They have allot and they do pay allot but is it fair? So lets not tax the poor. Let’s raise the taxes on the rich and then we can have more social programs. Sounds good doesn't it. Kinda like Robin Hood and all. Take from the rich and give to the poor. But.. Then the rich don't have all of that money floating around to spend on other things. But never fear we have awesome social programs. Can't get a job? The Reps would tell you tough luck. We will cut you a check. In debt? No Prob. We have all of this tax money. Visa or Master Card. But let me tell you this. It works. They both do. When the rich are Really rich the build stuff. When they are not quite so rich.. well we have their money. \n\nWe are one world. People dying.. Cut'em a check. Something small and photogenic. well maybe some of that Army we have left. Ok that was harsh. But from what I have seen and I can tell you I am no expert on this. When we went into Kosovo and Bosnia it was NOTHING like going into Iraq. We went in with force sure. But Shock and awe was not in our play book. Dems want to take care of the world not be the police. They want big government. And what could be bigger government than the UN. Sure its HUGE and overly complicated and they can't a
60504
"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception."\n\n- Mark Twain\n\n\nCheney made the most and everyone got rich on arms stocks. Oil companies are at record profits despite being at the highest prices to consumers.
59290
Al Franken may have quoted Benjamin Franklin. It's a good quote and makes a very good point. Unfortunately, the key word here is "deserve."\n\nWe're constitutionally obligated to provide safety even to those lunk-heads who would try to usurp our rights out of their own fear.\n\nAlso, "liberty" is an unalienable right and can't be "deserved."\n\nIt's a bombastic quote that can't be put into practical use.
507654
Notable ideas: tabula rasa, "government with the consent of the governed"; state of nature; rights of life, liberty and property \nInfluences: Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Grotius, Descartes, Hooker, Hobbes
320870
=====================\nThere's a quote by Winston Churchill that says something like: "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others."\n\nRepresentative government means that people elect people to represent them in government.  \n\nIts advantage is that everyone is involved in government activities.  Everyone works and fights for the same cause.  Representative governments supposedly give everybody a chance to succeed and have their problems in the world resolved.  Supposedly, there are checks and balances so that no one group takes power and uses it against others.  That's why we have 3 branches - executive, legislative and judicial.  You have different people making laws, different people enforcing the laws, and different people judging whether or not the laws and their enforcement fit the Constitution.\n\nNow please do your own homework, silly!  Make it up if you have to.
631033
well my best saying is \nUNCERTAINITY CAN NEVER BE THE STARTING POINT OF ANYTHING\n and \nGOD HELPS THOSE WHO HELPS THEMSELVES\nand others are like \n>> road to the success is always under construction \n>>Born free; Taxed to death. \n>>If our constitution allows us free speech, why are there phone bills?
248824
America has turned out the way they FEARED it would.\n\nI predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.\n\nI tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever.\n\nOur country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.\n\nQuotes by Thomas Jefferson