Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Discrimination is never ok. Dosen't matter who is the victim. I thought the U.S. was a "free country" ? It's just as free as you want it to be. Now I would like to know a reason for this, other than you thinking it's ok to discriminate against a certain group.
You speak of free country, and in the next breath, you talk about the need for control.
Is it OK to discriminate? Depends who you are and your individual beliefs. OK to who, you or them?
Are we free as individuals, to discriminate if we feel free to do so. If we can't are we really free?
If someone wants to discriminate against someone else, or me. I can educate them about discriminating, but it is not my place in a individual in a free nation, to tell them they are not allowed to think, or say things for themselves as an individual.
Carnegie surely was the kind that our present day left would consider one of the nastier people of all time since he did lean a bit to the right, maybe a lot but much of the economic growth of the nation at that time depended on him and others like him.
Carnegie was anti-union but he was also anti-war, anti-military, pro-one world government, and thought that it was the duty of the wealthy to give away their fortunes. He frowned upon inheriting wealth and gave away most of his fortune to help the less fortunate.
A complex man whose attitudes didn't really fit in with today's left or today's right. Then again it's difficult to pigeonhole past figures in the "left" or "right" categories of the 21st century easily.
Quote:
As for Schurz, I, a member of today's right, consider him a bit too far left which might account for your like for him.
Why? Schurz was a very honorable man, who held some positions that today would be considered liberal (like opposition to war and conservationism) and others that would be considered conservative today (fiscal responsibility, the gold standard). Is your beef with Schurz that he was a Union general in the Civil War and so thus he fought on what you'd consider to be the wrong side?
It's called The Internet. Of course, it has problems, but I believe it could be made to work for this purpose. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon.
i see that you don't know much about Cass Sunstein and why he wants to control the internet. Nope, somehow you have to make people prove who they are. Did you fail to see my thread about how various people are using software to create "virtual" people? I guess not from this reply.
I think, at the very least, a foreign born person who spent a major of his or her life here should have the opportunity to run for President. Say for example someone who was adopted as an infant and brought over here. This person has no ties to any other country, doesn't know anything except being an American.
In other words, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck it must be a duck. With all our multiculturalism everybody fills the bill, huh.
I understand enough to know there are flaws. We can fix these flaws.
What's the point in the electoral college? Both Dewey and Gore got the most votes, yet they lost their elections because of the electoral vote.
How is this right?
When will enough of you people understand that there are too many small states around who find that system to be all they have to do many things?
In order to amend the Constitution and do away with the electoral college you need 3/4 of the states to approve the amendment and there are just too many who know they lose some power if that happens. Count all of them that have fewer than 10 electoral votes and see if there are more of them than 16.
To allow naturalized U.S. citizen to become President of the United States?
I do think so! They are being treated like second class citizens. That is wrong. We need to open the presidency to naturalized citizens. There is no reasonable reason not to do it.
I voted NO ..
But if it were changed to reflect your position, I would also like it changed to allow States like Texas, or States in the Pacific Northwest/east to be allowed to secede upon such changes.
Carnegie was anti-union but he was also anti-war, anti-military, pro-one world government, and thought that it was the duty of the wealthy to give away their fortunes. He frowned upon inheriting wealth and gave away most of his fortune to help the less fortunate.
A complex man whose attitudes didn't really fit in with today's left or today's right. Then again it's difficult to pigeonhole past figures in the "left" or "right" categories of the 21st century easily.
Why? Schurz was a very honorable man, who held some positions that today would be considered liberal (like opposition to war and conservationism) and others that would be considered conservative today (fiscal responsibility, the gold standard). Is your beef with Schurz that he was a Union general in the Civil War and so thus he fought on what you'd consider to be the wrong side?
Did Carnegie with his immense wealth create a few jobs for those others? I know all those things about him but I consider his libraries to be worth quite a bit. I know that he was one of those people who muckrakers called Robber Barons but he did so much for so many people and then gave it all away at the end.
As for Shurz, I just didn't like too many of his liberal thoughts. I have never read much about the Union Army that I didn't like so him being one of them makes him the right kind for me. It was his left leaning concerning government.
As for Shurz, I just didn't like too many of his liberal thoughts. I have never read much about the Union Army that I didn't like so him being one of them makes him the right kind for me. It was his left leaning concerning government.
So fiscal responsibility and sound money are bad things? Schurz not wanting to waste taxpayers' money on irresponsible wars was a bad thing?
It's very difficult to place figures from the 19th century in the contemporary political spectrum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are being treated like second class citizens. That is wrong. We need to open the presidency to naturalized citizens. There is no reasonable reason not to do it.
