[MD] Contents of Moq_Discuss Digest, Vol 21, Issue 8

[MarshaV]

At 03:27 PM 8/5/2007, you wrote:

>[Marsha]:
>
>
> > I don't believe this country is the best country that ever existed, and I
> > certainly don't want this country to be the most powerful country.
>
>Why?

There are this countries ideals, and then there are this countries 
actions.  And as far as I can tell, there is no similarity between 
the two.  In the name of "our national interest" we support brutal 
dictators, promote the overthrow of democratically elected 
governments, plot to destroy those who reject our exploitations, lie, 
lie, lie, etc., etc., etc.  I believe the people of this country are 
basically good.  Unfortunately, they are far to gullible.



>As an Americian citizen, why wouldn't you want your country to be the most
>powerful?
>Is this confession based on that much abused quotation "Power tends to
>corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."?  I find it hard to
>believe that a parliametary retort issued by a British Lord in 1887 would
>cause you to have doubts about the humanistic platform on which this
>nation's power structure was built.

The last six and one/half years may be a typical example of the 
corruptibility of power, but this present Administration, in my 
opinion, has not made a competent decision yet.  And that's in spite 
of God talking directly to Bush.


> > I would like to see this country become a 'good' country.  Right now it
> > seems we've strayed far off that mark.
>
>How so?  In what ways are we not a "good" country?

Again, I think the American people are basically good.  The 
government is quite ill.  It is not the terrorist that America needs 
to fear, but its own government.  So much doublespeak, greed and deception.


> > Education and transparency in government would seem an answer.
> > Not a job related education, but a classical education that would
> > promote thoughts of quality instead of consumerism.  I am sick to
> > death of evaluating the world through a lens of economics.
>
>You seem to be advocating a liberal arts education, as opposed to a major in
>Science or Economics.  As far as I know, this option is still available to
>eligible students, just as are trade and business schools.  However, the
>fact that the rewards of success are often measured in economic wealth does
>not make the pursuit of success immoral or bad.   Or, does it in your view?

Science is worthy, economics is not.  Economics is an empty shell 
game, and needs to be replaced by something of higher 
value.  Critical thinking should be taught in high school, 
literature, music and art too.


> > And if there is to be government participation, the citizens need to
> > be able to know what it's representatives are doing.
>
>Agreed.  That's what the journalists of Capitol Hill provide us on a daily
>basis.  The voting records of congressmen and representatives are also
>published by the Library of Congress.  I understand there are even cable
>channels that televise congressional sessions all day long.  It isn't that
>that our elected bureaucrats are operating in secret, but that the general
>public could care less about what's going on in Washington until election
>time comes around.  And then they echo the sound bytes of politicians,
>typically the negative ones about their opponents.

When I had television, I would watch both the House and the 
Senate.  Many journalist of Capital Hill are embedded in the glam of 
Washington.  It's only been within the last two years that some have 
retrieved their heads from political butts.  Do you have any 
understanding of the K-Street project?  Or the opaque nature of 
lobbying and earmarks.  There have been improvements made within the 
last few days, but there is not enough transparency yet.  There is 
not enough oversight.  And there is not enough money to support the 
amount of investigative reporting required in this worst of times.


> > I try to stay informed, and write, call and email my Senators and
> > Representative.   The last subjects I wrote about were earmarks and
> > lobbying reform (transparency), ending the war in Iraq, and
> > impeachment.  I think the Dems are improving the access to education,
> > but much, much more needs to be done.  Education is much more
> > important than "things".
>
>And what has been the response?  I can only hazard a guess as to whom you
>want to "impeach", and I don't see ending a war with an enemy who is out to
>destroy us being accomplished by a congressional vote.  But I'd be
>interested in learning how you think the Dems "are improving the access to
>education".  Is it by their policy of "affirmative action" or by government
>subsidization of education at the taxpayers' expense?

Who is out to destroy whom?  Oh right!  The War on Terror.  What a 
bunch of baloney!   Doublespeak.  Propaganda.  On the one hand we're 
told that oil is commodity and the obscene profits made by the oil 
companies is legitimate.  On the other hand, we're told procuring oil 
is in "our national interest", and justification for making Iraq into 
a killing field.  Billions of dollars have just disappeared in 
Iraq.  The reasons given for initiating this war have changed so many 
times that I find all explanations absurd.  We may owe the Iraqi 
people reparations, but we need to get our destructive asses out of 
there.  Hopefully, more competent minds can find a solution.  And I 
am not saying anything disparaging against the military.  I respect 
the men and women in our military, highly respect them.

And yes, since it is the taxpayers money, I do think education should 
be heavily subsidized by the government. It would be a better 
investment that Halliburton and the Iraqi sand.  I said the Dems have 
made some improvements, but nearly enough.

Marsha