 |
|
|
|
 |
Yoepus
Neo-condimist

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: Ketchup fields, Texas
|
|
|
Jun-12-2004 16:42
|
|
|
 |
 |
NYCTrancefan
Destination Everywhere!

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: New York City in a Café del Mar mood
|
|
|
Jun-12-2004 17:54
|
|
|
 |
 |
imokruok
Lawyers, guns, and money

Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA / Milwaukee, WI
|
|
|
Re: Is the United States becoming a Monarchy?
The points you make are nothing new, have happened before, and in many cases are even less of an issue as they were 25, 50, or 100 years ago. It's merely the way the nation and its political system operates.
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
I'm starting to get a weird feeling our country is turning into a Republican monarchy:
- George I followed by his son George II
|
John Adams was our second President, and John Quincy Adams was his son, who was our sixth President. Oh no! Stop the monarchy! The closest thing this nation ever came to a "monarchy" was the now-infamous Kennedy "Camelot," where the family could credit a President, two Governors, several Senators, and a bunch of representatives to its name.
| quote: |
- Close family like ties with another monarchy (the Saudi Royal Family) |
I suppose if you believe various far-left publications, you would think that the Bushes and the Saudis are inextricably linked. The only reason the interaction seems to be greater than with other monarchies is because the rulers of Saudi Arabia actually govern their country, so it is necessary to deal both diplomatically and politically with them. And it's a requirement that we deal because of the oil issue.
We'd have a pretty close relationship with the Queen too if she was both the monarch and the Prime Minister.
| quote: |
- Our leader dressing up in a military uniform
|
No President has ever worn a military uniform while in office, even though they are entitled to by virtue of being Commander-in-Chief. Bush has donned fatigues, Army jackets, Navy jackets, etc. but so has every other President in modern times. These are not uniforms.
| quote: |
- A President who wields unlimited powers
|
Sorry. Unqualified statement.
| quote: |
- An executive branch that rejects other branches of the government from checks and balances.
|
Every President has sought to expand the power of the Presidency. (See FDR for the prime example). But every Congress has sought to expand the power of the legislative branch. And every judiciary seeks to expand their power as well. That why we have those things called checks and balances.
| quote: |
- The mixing of religion with government
|
Religion in government is at its lowest point in our nation's history. At the turn of the century, when there was no welfare state, the government provided assistance to religious charities in order to provide basic social support programs.
Several Presidents had Sunday services for their families in the White House, and the House and Senate have always had a chaplain and an opening prayer.
Bush's "faith-based" initiatives are not a new idea. He's merely going back to an idea that hasn't been around for a while.
| quote: |
- Our President alludes to conversations with God. Just when you thought the divine right of a king was over.
|
So, he goes to church? And he takes what he learns there as guidance. So do millions of Americans on a daily basis.
| quote: |
- A weeklong funeral ceremony fit for a king
|
It's called a state funeral. We've been doing them for 200+ years, and Reagan got little more than what LBJ and JFK got at their state funerals. The only difference was that the week lasted longer because of the trips back and forth from California. But in California, those services were private. So you shouldn't concern yourself with that. Perhaps your issue is better taken up with the news media that made a big deal about covering it.
| quote: |
- And now there’s a bill in congress to replace Andrew Jackson on the 20 with Reagan |
So, what are you saying here? We should take all faces off our money? Because that's your implication. If you're saying that we should leave the faces as they are, then we're treating those already on the money as "kings." I'm sorry that you've never had a recent Democratic President worthy enough for the Democratic party to push for some lasting tribute.
___________________
FLUSHED THE JOHNS!
Last edited by imokruok on Jun-12-2004 at 22:12
|
|
Jun-12-2004 19:22
|
|
|
 |
 |
DaveSZ
When The Levee Breaks

Registered: Jan 2003
Location: ATX
|
|
|
Re: Re: Is the United States becoming a Monarchy?
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
I'm starting to get a weird feeling our country is turning into a Republican monarchy:
|
I'd say we're closer to a corporate oligarchy, as corporations and the state have melded as one.
This situation we're in now isn't new, and we've in fact faced it before at other times in American history.
Tom Delay for example faces a possible 2-10 years in prison for funneling corporate money to political candidates in Texas:
http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/t...pt324_full.html
In return, Delay grants the corporations special favors and pork subsidies.
Bush does the exact same, and is equally as corrupt as Delay.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/10/business/10PHON.html?hp
| quote: |
WASHINGTON, June 9 — In a move that critics say could lead to higher telephone rates, the Bush administration on Wednesday sided with the four regional Bell companies in a court case over the fees they charge their rivals for access to their networks.
Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America, said that the elimination of the regulations could ultimately lead to higher rates for 19 million consumers who get phone service from competitors to the Bells and an additional 30 million who have discounts from the Bells in response to competition.
The administration's announcement followed fierce lobbying and aggressive tactics; each side has raised millions of dollars in campaign contributions for the president and the Republican Party. Before the decision, rivals of the Bells said they had told the administration that if it did not side with them in the dispute they intended to run television advertisements in swing political states accusing the White House of being responsible for higher telephone rates. |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
So, he goes to church? And he takes what he learns there as guidance. |
No he doesn't.
His church opposed his neocon quagmire in Iraq, and I somehow doubt they would sanction the torture he signed off on.
Last edited by DaveSZ on Jun-13-2004 at 00:10
|
|
Jun-12-2004 23:11
|
|
|
 |
 |
R.j.
Di piú! di piú! di piú!

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: L, TX, USA
|
|
|
Jun-13-2004 10:22
|
|
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|