Nick et. al.<br><br>What a great reply! <br><br>Odd how the label "socialist" is hurled at those who just want sensible regulation of capitalism. I keep repeating over and over to those who use the "socialist" label to denigrate those who want to regulate capitalism to prevent the worse abuses of the free market, that a strong socialist would demand nationalizing the oil industry, the auto industry, military industrial capacity, and so forth. And many Republicans still support "socialist" programs such as medicare, medicaid, and public schools, even if they recommend some cut backs, while backing a massive Pentagon budget that reeks of waste, fraud and abuse of taxpayer dollars such as to make a fat cat statist socialist drool with envy! Halliburton's no bid contracts in the Iraq war makes this case with no effort at all...Of course this is why many of the fiscally conservative "true" Republicans have turned on the Bush administration, seeing how they waste taxpayer dollars like the stereotypical "tax and spend liberal," though they are doing this by borrowing money from the Chinese and Japanese, which is perhaps worse in the long run than funding the Iraq war with domestic taxes, placing the burden of this debt upon future taxpayers.
<br><br>A good case could be made that the Pentagon is in part a massive taxpayer funded "socialist" military enterprise to protect international resources and markets fueling the multinational corporate/state capitalist system, "corporate/state" meant to deliberately express the now common manipulation with massive donations, lobbying, etc. of the federal government by the most powerful multinationals, who sometimes write their own legislation that is passed through the US Congress. Witness the bankruptcy bill, drug benefit bill, and Cheney's energy corporation handouts in the last few years, all legislation directly written in part by corporate operatives who can literally buy the influence in Washington to make law in their favor.
<br><br>Socialism (i. e. government control of personal private behavior relating to sexual orientation) in the bedroom is what many of these faux conservative religious fundamentalists desire, with their obsession with controlling sexual orientation wasting the governments time and taxpayer dollars, such as we saw with the ridiculous politically motivation dog and pony show in the recent US Congressional effort to pass a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
<br><br>Ted Moffett<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/17/06, <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:nickgier@adelphia.net">nickgier@adelphia.net</a></b> <<a href="mailto:nickgier@adelphia.net">nickgier@adelphia.net
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Greetings:<br><br>I suppose we can excuse a person who says he is a Christian libertarian (a contradiction in terms) for confusing liberalism and socialism. A dictionary defintion of socialism is the state ownership of the means of production. I don't believe this nor would I bet most American liberals believe this.
<br><br>I believe that the free market, with reasonable regulation, is the best way to distribute goods and services. Furthermore, free market capitalism has always been a policy of classical liberalism, to which I happily adhere. See my essay at
<a href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/liberalism.htm">www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/liberalism.htm</a>.<br><br>About three years ago I wrote an essay on Christianity and libertarianism and posted it on this list. (You can read it at
<a href="http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/libchristian.htm.">www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/libchristian.htm.</a>) My conclusion is that you would have to be a really liberal Christian to get these two beliefs together. Christ Church appears to have lot of these hybrid creatures, but none of them have bothered to untangle the logical conundrum that I have presented to them.
<br><br>Incidentally, this thread "These are insults, Sir" was not intended for V2020. A military guy responded to my piece on Veterans Day and I did not notice that he decided to copy the Vision in his last reply to me. My apologies for not detecting this.
<br><br>Nick Gier<br><br>Nick Gier<br><br>Nick Gier<br><br>=======================================================<br> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<br> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a><br> mailto:<a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>=======================================================<br></blockquote>
</div><br>