Previous 21 - 30 Next
Nothing is certain, a Zombie Apocalypse might happen tomorrow or a giant Asteroid might come down on us. What is certain is that Black Death was a result of ignorance of the causes and could easily have been prevented by simple hygiene. It is also certain that the only reason we have Hygiene and education of its needs, is due to the wealth of our society. Which is why Pandemics do not tend to happen in the first world nations. There is only one certainly in life, everything else is a matter of trying to do least harm.
Pandemic is a threat to the population within a nation; and thereby arguably the province of the Government by definition of what our Founding Fathers put in place. However Ron Paul point is that it is precisely due to the Government as to why such threats and including Ebola are possible. No matter how we try to justify it; the foreign aid as well as other "helps" that we provide are in fact reasons why so much of the world is suffering from Famine and Pestilence. Why it is impossible to answer "what if", it is possible to say (since it is provable) that our money is arming those whose goal is dominance of others. Would the world be panacea if US just went back home? No of course not! However without our influence we wouldn't have the destruction we do have today that is directly caused by us. The moral choice should first always be: "Do no harm", and not "Because it makes us feel better". Doing the right thing doesn't mean doing that which makes us feel superior to others.
Black Death spread primarily due to the wars and due to ignorance spread by the powers at the time. Which is to say by Church and Government (which back then was also Government depending on which state). There was no possibility of individual actions since everything had to be sponsored by the only organization with any means i.e. The Government. So in other words your point is moot. Due to our education spawned by the development of the Free Markets we do know now what Black Death is, and have wealth of our own to make our own choices. The correct question isn't who you rather trust the question becomes why have we trusted Government throughout our history; even though their track record has been so abysmal?
In response to:

Is the French Revolution Our New Model?

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 09, 2014 2:10 PM
Be careful what you wish for... to the best of my knowledge there never been a revolution that ended up in freedom; American Revolution wasn't. It was a secession, after which much of the former system was retained. Also do keep in mind that the decision between King or not came down to Washington not taking up the mantle, a very tenuous hope at best. That's because those who run revolutions want to run peace after as well. What we do needs, is either Secession or taking over of Media and thereby the Culture.
In response to:

Is the French Revolution Our New Model?

Marek3 Wrote: Oct 09, 2014 2:07 PM
LOL.. sounds like you are as much of a Nerd as I am. Yeah I've noticed that too, which bugged me because time period was wrong.
In response to:

Success or Failure?

Marek3 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 12:43 PM
Why because obama promised to act, finally now that he has no other choice? I am thinking if anything that proves Dr. Sowell column THAT much more.
In response to:

Success or Failure?

Marek3 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 12:42 PM
Yeah , I do have to say that I am always surprised by giving obama any moniker of great intellect. He isn't retarded to be sure; but he most certainly isn't all that smart either. If I was placing his IQ, based on his knowledge and how he speaks without a prompter I would say he is maybe 110 tops. He most certainly is not overly smart.
Any man who strikes a Women is no longer a Man. I don't care if that sounds Chauvinistic or not; the PC crowd can stuff it. Women, for whatever reason, seem to forgive abusers too often. I don't understand why, but it happens far too often. Personally, I applaud Ravens (whom normally I seriously dislike) for this. Now if Government was to get involved in this, I would disapprove of that; unless (of course) she files abuse chargers in which case Government needs to forefill its duty as a judge.
Amen tinsldr2! BTW people get called RINO for different reasons. Some would call me a RINO because I am not a social conservative (I am a Classical Liberal), even though I am very strong fiscal conservative. And of course there is the reverse, someone who is very strong Fiscal Conservative but weak on economical issue may be called a RINO as well. Gardner is way above Udall in all issues, and I will vote for him in a heart beat. The only thing that scares me about CO is that Udall with everything he has done is even in the race! Republican must take over Senate.
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 2:14 PM
Some certainly do, people like Jackson, Sharpton, Clinton, Late Kennedy, LBJ, etc.. all those kinds of "people" are using the system to gain more power. They learned long time ago (as a matter of fact in America in the 1936 elections when FDR divided people into single issue voters) that by pushing Racism and throwing scraps they can get rich and powerful. HOWEVER I maintain that those are in the minority, vast majority of Liberals are well meaning. And that's where the real challenge begins. A person who is in it for power/money will only go as far as his personal benefit will last. When such ends, they will shift, since they have no personal stake in any of it. However a true believer will continue down the same road regardless of any path or obstacle or even proof to the contrary. That's because they are convinced of their righteous cause. Such people will never concede nor give up.
In response to:

We Don’t Have to Have More Fergusons

Marek3 Wrote: Aug 25, 2014 12:33 PM
"Gentle Giant" I suppose if one considers violent thug as a "gentle" :P
Previous 21 - 30 Next