Silly Georgia

i don't believe in the masses voting

 

well thats states rights, not southern rights

whats southern about it?

 

Don’t be silly
We happen to be the only part of the United States that was savagely prohibited to do so.

If this continues lets take it to another thread, I don’t want to go off-topic, which this subject will inevitably do.

 

this is my thread

so you are saying that you think the south should have the right to discriminate racially?

You think you should still be allowed to own slaves?

Obviously i am glad about the civil war's result

are you some kind of skinhead?

 

this is my thread
Very Well




so you are saying that you think the south should have the right to discriminate racially?

No Nor does the North.



You think you should still be allowed to own slaves?

No and I don't believe the war was a result of the south's owning of slaves.
I do however believe it was the extraordinary amount of taxation on Southern Ports, and Mr Lincolns involvement in the party of Henry Clay and his quest to provide monetary support for the ever expanding Industrial complex.
You may read about lincoln on my blog www.contrarianopinions.blogspot.com

Obviously i am glad about the civil war's result
are you some kind of skinhead?
No not at all
I think racism is a horrible unintelligent form of collectivism and has pretty much been abolished intellectually thanks to recent advancements in science stating we all form from a common anscestor.

 

Ok good, was just trying to dig down to what you were really getting at.

Southern pride still annoys the hell out of me though, oh well

 

White Flour!

 

I'm against states rights in most incarnations, because I've never heard an issue I've agreed with argued from the point of states rights.

My state for one. Doesn't have high taxes. It in fact, doesn't have income taxes.

The probelm with that is, all our money is collected through sales taxes, which are regressive taxes. It shifts the tax burden on people who need the money most, low income families.

It also has the problem of no money being allocated for anything. Texas has the highest drop out rate in the nation. California, with similar large populations, and similar immigration issues, has a much higher standard of education, because the states willing to allocate nessecary funds.

I hear states rights being hailed to repeal roe vs wade, to ban gay marriage, prohibition of medical marijuana, and as code for pro seggregation movments. All positions which I'm against.

 

Agreed, and thats why i was trying to dig into what rebel420 meant. i am still not sure what he means aside from pointing out unfair taxation 150 years ago, but i have determined that he does not want some type of segregationist agenda

 

I think states rights are nessecary just to limit the powers and size of the central government. I don't agree with any of those positions either but I think it would be much much worse if the federal government wasn't barricaded a little bit.

 

Well sure, taxation wasn't good for southern states 150 years ago. Largely as a result for northern states to gain leverage against the souths free labor pool vis a vis slavery. So there were other issues for the civil war. That's true. The civil war was just about slavery as much as Iraq was just about terrorism.

But I still have never heard a good position be argued from the states rights issue. If he's saying that states should be allwoed to offer medical marijuana that's good. And I do understand there are conflicts on some issues.

But I still have reservations to people who bring up states rights as an opposition to federalism. For the large part, I support federalism, because I think the larger portion of society will have the most reasoned resonse to an issue.

Look at Gore v Bush.

 

What are your politics out of curiousity? In general?

 

Sounds libertarian. It's funny to me that people think southerners are in favor of slavery and segregation if they are proud of where they come from. In my experiences, people in the south are less racist than other areas.

 

Well sure, taxation wasn't good for southern states 150 years ago. Largely as a result for northern states to gain leverage against the souths free labor pool vis a vis slavery. So there were other issues for the civil war. That's true. The civil war was just about slavery as much as Iraq was just about terrorism.

we agree mostly here.



But I still have never heard a good position be argued from the states rights issue. If he's saying that states should be allwoed to offer medical marijuana that's good. And I do understand there are conflicts on some issues.

There are inhabitants that are just as divergent to the legalization of marijuana as me and you are opposed to the illegalization of it, I don’t agree with it, but I do deem it is healthy from democracy. And states rights should run on a majority of the votes from the states populace, and a near forty-five percent of voters in my state claim to be politically progressive, so I would near say it is impractical for the throwback results that would look like an anti-integration bill from the 50's.



But I still have reservations to people who bring up states rights as an opposition to federalism. For the large part, I support federalism, because I think the larger portion of society will have the most reasoned resonse to an issue.

How would that not be the same in a minimal government. It seems the smaller the central government the more power is given to the citizens.

 

Socially fairly liberal, fiscally very conservative. A very large seperation of church and state, And a non-interventionist foriegn policy.
I guess I am a minarchist-libertarian neo-confederate.

 

I'm still a little miffed that I missed being able to meet Bill Clinton. (He was at my school last Friday)

 

The issue here seems to be somewhat vague.

Do I think that federalism in it's current state is bloated? Yes I do.

Do I think that the federal (and state) governments are involved in many things they shouldn't be? Again, yes.

But that's counterintuitive sometimes. For example. Sodomy laws, which make gaydom illegal, were only deemed illegal on a federal level in 2003. That's clearly one of several examples I could point out of federal power having more sway in the personal freedoms of citizens then would states power.

For the most part, I believe in government responsible to it's people, not nessecarily large or small as such. There are issues where I believe the government should be more involved, such as healthcare.

Because I believe protecting the population is the only main concern of government. And I believe this clearly effects education and healthcare.

 

Do I think that federalism in it's current state is bloated? Yes I do.


My position is this is foreseeable when the central regime is prearranged a supremacy it never stops intensifying, this is where I deem states Rights as a exceedingly imperative part of our constitution and the only obstruction guarding our civil liberties and our delicate freedoms. Even though as you have stated before this sometimes the states give themselves too much power and intercession in personal affairs, I accept as true the central government does a far worse job of providing sovereignty (PATRIOT ACT, etc...)However I do believe even the powers of the state need to be sternly constrained in infringing on personal privacy.



Do I think that the federal (and state) governments are involved in many things they shouldn't be? Again, yes.

We are in solidarity here.



But that's counterintuitive sometimes. For example. Sodomy laws, which make gaydom illegal, were only deemed illegal on a federal level in 2003. That's clearly one of several examples I could point out of federal power having more sway in the personal freedoms of citizens then would states power.

Again my point of powerful central government infringment on rights as an inevitability.


For the most part, I believe in government responsible to it's people, not nessecarily large or small as such. There are issues where I believe the government should be more involved, such as healthcare.

I think alot of our current healthcare crisis has arose out of the Federal governments involvement.


Because I believe protecting the population is the only main concern of government. And I believe this clearly effects education and healthcare.

I do as well but education should remain with the state and local governments.

 

kansas voted for obama........... smart state man!!!! 80 percent to 19......