Government for or against the people

Dr. Price, you make a good point about government seeking to limit individual freedom. Unfortunately you're confused about the people who are seeking to take that freedom. Let's look at just a few examples and who is ACTUALLY threatening individual freedom.

Adult's choice of whom to marry--Liberals: all adult citizens should be able to marry their chosen partner regardless of gender; Conservatives--Only a man and woman can marry--Pretty clear who is seeking to limit individual freedom herem unless you consider forcing one group's religio-moral views on others freedom.

Adult's choice on whether to carry pregnancy to term or not: Liberal--A woman should have a right to control her own body; Conservative--A woman should not be able to chose, in some cases even is cases of rape and incest. Hmmm, a pattern here of one group trying to imposse their religious based views on all--is that Freedom?

Drug use and legilization: Liberal--Adults should be able to make a choice on if and how they become inebriated; Conservative--Adults can only use alcohol, nicotine, caffiene or large assorted of prescription meds to get a buzz (although I will say some Conservatives are actually on side of Free Choice in this issue) and we should continue a failed war on some drugs

Corporations are classified as people legally: Liberals--Businesses are not actually people and should not enjoy the same protections; Conservatives--Businesses are people and should have those protections. Well it's pretty much common sense individuals' need goverment protection and corporations have plenty of money to bribe (sorry lobby) government to get what they want--but hey a corporation is a person just like you and me.

In general--Republican conservatives tend to take the position of supporting big corporations and ultra wealthy at the expense of the middle class of our country. Examples include liberalized lobbying like unlimited PAC monies to lobby for positions (including a special PAC in which the contributors can make unlimited donations and do not have to be identified); no restrictions against lucrative jobs directly after leaving government--in many cases for industries they were "regulating" or instrumental in passing sweetheart bills in support thereof; continued support for Bush era tax cuts that greatly benefit the ultra wealthy of the country at the expense of the working middle class; support for less regulations of big industries like the banking industry for example--remember the lack of regulation during the Bush administration that was a MAJOR FACTOR in the economic problems we are now having--Bush and the Republicans turned a blind eye while Wall St fat cats were enriching themselves while knowingly taking on VERY RISKY investments and then that same Bush administration bailing them out with hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds with NO STRINGS ATTACHED (so the execs could still get their $10million bonuses).

You quote: “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” which is what our country should be about. But only an extremely confused or deliberately misleading person can say our government and the conservative Republican party in particular stand for the people (well maybe the big corporations since they are "people" and the top 1%--but certainly not the majority of working Americans).

The unregulated Freedom you espouse is great for the very few with lots of money or political connections, but is certainly not the best for the majority of the people of this country. Maybe you mean the Freedom to continue enabling the multi national corporations and mega rich to take advantage of the many for the economic benefit of a very few; or the Freedom to impose your belief system (and yes Christianity is ONLY A BELIEF) on everyone else and dictate how they live according to what one group believes is "ordained as right".

Or maybe you believe we should allow our old people to make it on their own without Social Security (hey let them eat cake); or let those lifelong workers lose their houses and starve without Unemployment Insurance who have lost their jobs as a result of conservative pograms like tax breaks for moving jobs overseas and destruction of our economy be unregulated economic profiteers who made millions while seriously damaging our economy; or let children, who have little or no control of their life situation starve rather than their family getting food stamps; or let businesses pay workers wages that are too low for them to survive, much less enjoy "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" by abolishing minimum wage laws--all of these Socialist travesties. You may be right--maybe the vast majority of our citizens don't really deserve this fair shake and should just be allowed to starve so a few moguls can add an extra billion to their hoards.

I thought you were a Christian minister. If you listen to what Christ preached it is socialism--it is for the common people--not the rich and privileged. Hard to understand how any Christian can reconcile not standing for ALL the people when if you turn away from the least of your brethren you turn away from Christ--at least according to Christ's words in the Bible.

GM--I disagree with free handouts and lifelong entitlement takers. I do believe we should help those who are handicapped and truly unable to work. For those who can work but seek to live off the government forever, I think they should get nothing. But for those who work and have worked, they should be able to earn a living. Perhaps you would prefer to see the retired set adrift on an iceberg rather than have Social Security. Or the lifelong worker lose everything and starve when layed off from a job because of the economic problems caused by the greed of a few supported by our corrupt government and not get Unemployment Insurance.

You talk about religious freedom, then complain about not having 1 of those religions tacitly endorsed by prayer in school. It was government sanctioned religion that drove the Pilgrims to the US (they did not worship the "right" religion) and it was this understanding of the danger of a government sponsored religion which led to the clauses you quote. Not the freedom to endorse one religion over others. Big difference.

You may not have read my post very closely. I work a full time job. I have worked for over the past 30 years and have supported myself since adulthood.

That is why I am so upset with the conservative Republicans in this country that support the multinational corporations and give my hard earned money to the banking system so their execs can get bonuses bigger than I will earn in a lifetime--even with a college education and "professional" job.

I just happen to believe that the working people of this country (which includes office workers, company management and small business owners) should get protection from our government rather than them helping to redistribute our wealth to the top 1% or the big multinational corporations with overseas connections.

It angers me to have worked hard, saved, and tried to "do the right thing" and pay my own way to now see an economy destroyed by monied interests who took outrageous risks and when those stupid chances kicked back upon them were bailed out by the government (Bush gave them $ no strings attached, at least Obama got money back for what we gave) so their connected execs could keep their obscene bonuses.

It should anger most of the folks in this town, but so many are so blinded by the propaganda of the conservative right and the lies they spout daily on the plethora of talk shows in a media largely owned and controlled by the big money conservative interests.

I just don't understand why the working people of this country see continued tax breaks for the ultra wealthy and giant corporations like GE paying 0 taxes on billions of earnings or Capital Gains taxes set at 15% (also disproportionately benefits the very wealthy who are far more likely to get a higher share of their income from investments) is "right" and good for our country. If most people cannot buy things the economy will collapse--one of the major contributing factors to the great depression in the 30s.

As for the argument higher corporate taxes will cause higher prices. When a corporation is making many billions in profits (that is after expenses, taxes, etc by the way) they could afford to pay a bit more and not raise prices. And as a country we could choose to stop buying from corporations who are taking advantage of the people and put them out of business pretty quick, and 5 more smaller businesses will quickly fill their place--to the greater benefit of all of us. As a country, our buying power is a great strength that could and should be used to bring the multi national corporate thieves and banks to thier knees.

In response to 5.2.2. As for companies moving away because of higher taxes, I say instead of giving the big corporations tax breaks for moving jobs overseas for extra profit we should penalize them through the tax code if they move. For example, if a multinational closes a plant in US and opens another plant outside US(or moves production to outside US plant) then there should be a special "Deserters' Tax" added onto their products through additional import duties. Ideally these duties and taxes will replace the revenues they cost our society and take up every penny they make extra due to the move. Use revenues to help the displaced workers and replace lost government taxes. If they raise price of their product to cover the much ballyhooed Free Market will reject their high priced items for competitor products and they will lose the US market, which is just what they deserve. Other US based companies will take up the slack, hopefully helping build more small businesses which employ Americans.

Unions. Look back at the Wall St crooks and big monied interests that have damaged our economy. It was the fat cats making obscene profits and multi million dollar bonuses that has thrown the economy in a tailspin, not the regular workers represented by ever diminishing Unions. While Unions do have drawbacks, it was not Unions and regular workers who caused these problems--unless you are talking about Wall St Execs unions that I am not aware of. Of course when you have the money to buy politicians you don't really need a Union. And since workers in our country are NEVER TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF every day (and getting worse) we certainly don't need to band together to get a fair shake. But maybe you think it is "right" that Execs may 100s of times more than employess and many Wall St crooks get annual bonuses that are more than most people make in a lifetime.

So you worked and paid into Social Security and instead of standing with the other workers in our society you support the big corporations and Wall St thieves that are robbing us all. Yeah, that makes perfect sense!