[MD] Intellect battles the [immigrant] barbarians

[Case]

[Case]
Now, now Platt, and we were doing so well. It is sad to see you turn into
Ham's errand boy. 

Is there a single thing on that list below that you think is good? Do you
support abandoning the rearing of children to television and the dispersion
of extended families? Are you for personal gratification over responsibility
to loved ones? Are you seriously against public investment in infrastructure
and human capital? Are you against stewardship of the environment?

I am also curious about this comment:

"Yes! FDR's "freedoms" were socialist from the get go. We are reaping the
whirlwind of the FDR presidency, and going broke to boot."

I had to look this up but here is what Roosevelt said:

"The first is freedom of speech and expression -- everywhere in the world.

The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way --
everywhere in the world.

The third is freedom from want -- which, translated into world terms, means
economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy
peacetime life for its inhabitants -- everywhere in the world.

The fourth is freedom from fear -- which, translated into world terms, means
a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough
fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical
aggression against any neighbor-- anywhere in the world.

That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind
of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is
the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the
dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.

To that new order we oppose the greater conception -- the moral order. A
good society is able to face schemes of world domination and foreign
revolutions alike without fear."

Clearly Roosevelt was wrong. These goals still elude us. In fact reading
over the last to paragraphs it is almost like we decided if you can't lick
'em join 'em.

But do you seriously oppose these freedoms? 

Are you against free of speech and worship?
You think people should be unhealthy or at war?
You support a climate of Fear?

I don't mind being called a left winger because it is true. But I am
actually a sucker for a rational argument if you can offer one up.

Oh yeah, and remind your pal Ham that it was Reagan who ran up more debt
during his tenure than all of his predecessors combined. Or perhaps the two
of you could get together and explain how Clinton had balanced the budget
and was actually having surpluses. But then poor George took over, spent the
surplus and started borrowing again. What kind of economics is it you guys
support again?

Here is something I read on a bumper recently that might be worth pondering:

Clinton ruined a dress. Bush ruined a nation.


__________________________________________________________
> [Case]:
> > Among the many things that disturb me about our times
> > is our flagrant disregard for our children. It seems to me
> > that an enlightened society would be totally focused on
> > the upbringing of the next generation not setting up an
> > an economic system:
> >
> > That forces both parents into the work place.
> > That exposes children to endless violence: visually, verbally and
> > vicariously.
> > That glorifies personal gratification over responsibility to loved ones.
> > That encourages the dispersion of extended families. That mortgages the
> > future for short term gain and neglects public
> investment
> > in human capital, physical infrastructure and intellectual capital in
the
> > form of pure research. That promotes the consumption of not renewable
> > resources without regard for replacing them. That sees itself as the
> > master rather then the steward of nature.

[Ham]
> Is he suggesting that these are faults of capitalism or the free
enterprise
> system?  It would seem to me that we have fallen into debt and profligacy
> due to irresponsible behavior and a disregard for traditional values.
This
> is negligence on the part of individuals, not defects of our "economic
> system".

[Platt]
I agree. Case's accusations against capitalism are right out of the left's 
book of talking points. It would be nice if they would talk about hard 
work, personal responsibility, individual initiative, delayed 
gratification, self-discipline, openness to competition, etc. etc., but 
don't hold your breath. It's "the system" that's always to blame. And, of 
course in the twisted morality prevalent today, it always pays to be 
"oppressed." To these folks even the environment suffers from oppression.. 

[Ham]    
> I didn't want to get involved in a debate with Case over what he
> meant by "an enlightened society" and how he thinks we could achieve his
> ends via the MoQ, but you might want to raise this issue with him.

[Platt]
The left is a religion, and like all religion impervious to rational 
argument.