It moves the problem from Federal down to the State government. Doesn't solve it. If you don't like the current social experiment, tax climate, solution in your state, you can move...but the underlying problem still remains. I say that the government has no business at the state OR federal level being involved in a whole lot of issues and functions. What we see now is Control, not Governance. Control of the MONEY for the most part. I do agree that moving a larger portion of governance to the states DOES begin to address the problem, but I think proscribing the power of that government is ALSO needed.

I'm all for debunking political theology regardless of color of stripes.

I have conservative "values".

My foundation is not based in "theory"/theology.
Anything is "fallible" except Truth. It is constant.
Natural occurences are even fallible...but correctable, naturally.
The laws of physics are fallible. But not changable. Capable of correction, but not "change" without catastrophic results.
Man is but a "law of physics". A dynamic. Correctable, but "to change"...catastrophic results.
Control is an attempt to change. Result catastrophic.
To dedirect a dynamic with knowledge applied will minimize the catastrophe...

I "support" a conservative agenda...guaranteed to be protected,defended and preserved thru/by The Constitution. MY inalienable right to support.

Again, I'm not sure where you think(?) you're attempting to lead me...but you better bring a flaslight and a lunch...we're gonna be here a long time.

I will not be pushed, and I am even harder to lead.

__________________






The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.

And does not a representative form of governance best address that?

__________________






The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.

I cant move! I live in Idaho and I'm paying for Calif failed experiment!

Ah! but we are closer to an agreement!
It's to late for change in Washington, it will almost have to be at the state level, not about your elected Representative but the man in the street telling that rep enough is enough!

I'm talking about the states telling the fed NO!
Cap and Trade, NO!
Universal health care, NO!
Ownership of banking and manipulation of financial institutions, NO!
Taking over and maneging private corporations, NO!

Not in my state!

We the States/Countries created the Federal Government! Not the other way around. And we can dismantle it.

We can just say NO!
I make it sound easy, I know it wont be but this revolution starts at the state level, on the street, in front of your state capital, telling your Representative NO!

Washington will hear that!

Nothing of value is ever "easy"...and I would suggest this is the most valuable asset we have...Individual Freedom and Liberty.

__________________






The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.

I probably share some of those conservative values. I also have some of what would be considered liberal values. I am not precisely religious, and not precisely secular. Discussion of those distinctions is best left to another forum.

I am completely in favor of ALL people in this country having the freedom to believe and practice their faith, moral and intellectual pursuits as they see fit. On the other hand, I'm not in favor of the government saying what is or is not acceptable in that regard.

To my mind, both liberal and conservative "theologies" as we have come to discuss them, attempt to impose those values on others who do not share them. That's where I see the line between a social contract and government being drawn. Are there specific acts and activities that are criminal and wrong? Yes, and I think there would be nearly universal acceptance of those. There are some however that can be and are hotly debated. Fine. but I don't think government is the arbiter.

As to government, in my view, liberal and conservative agendas are a huge part of the problem.
Discussion of the nature of Truth is best left for another forum. It may be constant and infallible, but our understanding of it is not.

The "laws" of physics are no more than an imagination and thought creation based on imperfect observation. So it is with man. The laws have been shown time and again to be subject to revision in order to resolve to new information and observation. Man may be dynamic, but not changeable, only the conversation about him is to be re-discovered or refined to fit what IS. Same with the so called "Laws" of Physics.

Yup.

I would not be so arrogant as to attempt to lead you anywhere, save to an understanding of my point of view. Rather, I enjoy learning what YOU think, and appreciate your consideration and critique of my ideas. Still, I expect to require said flashlight and lunch, as I expect you will.

California should be left to resolve its OWN crisis. How is the failure of their government Idaho's or Arizona's problem? They need loans to keep things from falling apart? Let them ask each state, and let each state government decide whether and to what extent we are willing to risk the money and/or reap the interest on those loans. How is it the federal government's business is to spread the failure of one locality among all of us?

Indeed we are. What you propose WOULD change Washington. It would strip it of it's ill gotten, poorly wielded power. If the state representatives actually represented US, and not just the existing parties. It would also provide an environment that would return a local character to the politics and environment in a given place, and one can hope, stopping the homogenization of the places we choose to live.

I see all the NO!, but what would you do to solve the problems/functions these try to address? Whether nationally, or by state? Or do you deny there is a problem to address?

Agreed, but we'd better be ready to deal with the consequences and responsibilities that entails.

What the heck does any of this have to do with Biden in Iraq? LOL

This is informative, if not educationaland demanding.

__________________






The public cannot be too curious concerning the characters of public men.

LOL! Biden who?
Most of these problems you'd agree where created by "our Federal Representatives" So if "NO!" solved half of em than I think "power" in the hands of the people with a vested interest in solving these problems at the local level would produce some creative idea's!

But it's time to eat so thats my short answer!

Values are mutable, and local. Here, cannibalism is wrong. Yet there are or have been societies in which the practice is perfectly acceptable. The list of abhorrent (to us) practices in the world is extensive, and while the values WE judge them by may not change, our values are not their values. Are they wrong? Or are we? Is it our place to cause them to change? I think it's theirs. My guess is, you subscribe to a point of view that contends there is right and there is wrong, and judgment is already in place in that regard. I'm not so certain.

The discovery of new information, new properties, previously unobserved, or wrongly interpreted, are not changed by the fact of our eventual observation, but our description or formulas used to understand them can be proven to be faulty, or incomplete. In fact, a change in the formula, or it's suppositions may be necessary to account for the new observations. I think. LOL, but I'm no physicist, I barely passed physics. As to the application to people and government, we are not unchangeable, and while elders hope to pass on their point of view, change is both inexorable and inevitable. Thus government is required to change to account for the change. The greater the degree of intrusion on the values of people, the more it has to change to remain relevant. Keeping the government altogether out of issues of moral and social values allows it to be more perfect. Not less so.

Again, I do not presume to educate or pretend to be able to place any demand on your obvious intellect. If you are informed by my points of view, I count that worthwhile. I disagree with you in certain ways, but that's par for the course. I think you are more socially conservative than I am, and can forgive or endorse greater intrusion of that set of values by government than I would. I could be wrong. that's just an interpretation of what I think I read.

Can you believe it? My 6yr old daughter thinks I MUST read to her from The Velveteen Rabbit before bedtime... no time for this now! Priorities MUST be observed.