Is the American experiment still worth striving for?

[ishmael]

Ya look at it, and pretty soon you get wrapped up in corruption. Corporate, govenmental. Leon's quote of Carter, about the oil companies, rings true. All manner of other people, the defense contractors come to mind, are there chomping at the bit. Is this model workable?

Personally, I like that I can still speak out, but even that is under threat from pervasive cameras and data mining.

The American experiment isn't perfect, but those men attempted something unprecedented.

"A republic, if you can keep it."

Franklin. On the steps of Constitution Hall.

[Popeye]

too much government secrecy and too little civic resistance and freedom.ain't no more

based on those two general courses of action alone, pretty sure you can kiss it goodbye

too bad nobody noticed the day when the justice system quietly crumbled

[LeeG]

er,,I'm gonna have yogurt and granola this morning, no striving here.

No striving here. Regular exercise and roughage in my diet.

[S/V Laura Ellen]

The ideal American experiment is and always will be a noble cause. I think the problem is that the US has strayed from (radically deviated from/ignored) the tenets that make the experiment valid. The current experimentation is far from what your founding fathers envisioned.

[Kaa]

What exactly is the "American experiment"?

Kaa

[S/V Laura Ellen]

I'm assuming it's "Ish speak" for the tenets contained in the Constitution and the Declaration.

Ish, am I close?

[Popeye]

i think its a set of core values
sadly lacking in canader too

[John of Phoenix]

Personally, I like that I can still speak out, but even that is under threat from pervasive cameras and data mining.

You're worried about cameras? And data mining?
You must have missed the day habeas corpus died.
And the fourth amendment.
The rule of law.

[S.V. Airlie]

You must have missed the day habeas corpus died.

I think that happened during the Civil War.. Wasn't alive although I am old...:rolleyes:

[John of Phoenix]

I think you missed the day gone-zo amended the Constitution.
He IS the Attorney General you know.

Denial of right to Habeas Corpus in the U.S. Constitution
On January 18 2007, Gonzales was invited to speak to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he shocked the committee's ranking member, Arlen Specter [R]Pennsylvania, by stating that there was no guarantee to the right of Habeas Corpus in the United States Constitution. An excerpt of the exchange follows:

Gonzales: The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme —

Specter: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The Constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?

Gonzales: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that.

Senator Specter was referring to 2nd Clause of Section 9 of Article One of the Constitution of the United States which reads: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." This passage has been historically interpreted to mean that the right of habeas corpus is inherently established.

[S.V. Airlie]

Just aq leg pull John.. I think Lincoln suspended it in 1863...

[ishmael]

"You're worried about cameras? And data mining?"

Yes. The legal aspects such as haggis body, too. But they, as Jaimie mentions, have been in limbo before. I'm much more worried about this pervasive surveillance than I am about the legalisms.

When are they coming for you, because of your opinions? It's not far off.

[John of Phoenix]

I think Lincoln suspended it in 1863...
That would have been the rebellion clause. What do you think the US Attorney General was referring to? Why would he want to suspend habeas corpus?

So Jack, what are you doing to disrupt this pervasive surveillance and get your privacy back?

[Kaa]

"You're worried about cameras? And data mining?"

Yes. The legal aspects such as haggis body, too. But they, as Jaimie mentions, have been in limbo before. I'm much more worried about this pervasive surveillance than I am about the legalisms.

Habeas corpus is no more a legalism than the right to free speech, or the right to due process. If you want it in non-legal terms, the stance of the current Administration is that it can put anyone in prison for indefinite amount of time by declaring them an "enemy combatant". Specifically, they claim that they don't need to involve the courts or even present any charges whatsoever.

And if you're worried about surveillance, just watch Britain for a while. They are much further along this particular road and it will be interesting to see what comes out of it.

Kaa

[glenallen]

Corporations have taken over the position previously held by citizens.
"We, the corporations of the.....blah, blah, blah"

All our elected officials cater to corporations, not citizens. A large percentage of "lawmaking" is concerned with corporate interests, not citizens.
What's good for Exxon-Mobile and Monsanto is good for the people.

[S/V Laura Ellen]

What's good for Exxon-Mobile and Monsanto is good for the people.

Close, but it should be "What's good for Halliburton is good ..."

[glenallen]

Close, but it should be "What's good for Halliburton is good ..."

Yep, them too!

[Popeye]

'we the people' is over , it's a relic , an artifact

today it's all about money and megawealth

[S.V. Airlie]

I wonder how many ex-politicians are lobbiest for the big companies? I think I might try to find a way to google that...:rolleyes:

[glenallen]

I wonder how many ex-politicians are lobbiest for the big companies? I think I might try to find a way to google that...:rolleyes:

Bunches of them!
There is a revolving-door that never closes.

[Leon m]

I'm just wondering when "We the People" are going to grow some balls, and let the government know who they relly work for ?

My answer to you Jack, is yes.

[Leon m]

Government
The test of a government is not how popular
it is with the powerful and privileged few,
but how honestly and fairly it deals with
the many who must depend on it.

Jimmy Carter, Inaugural Address as
Governor of Georgia

A strong nation, like a strong person, can afford
to be gentle, firm, thoughtful, and restrained.
It can afford to extend a helping hand to others.
It's a weak nation, like a weak person, that must
behave with bluster and boasting and rashness and
other signs of insecurity.

Jimmy Carter, 10-14-1976, NY,NY
Source:A Government as Good as It's People

[LeeG]

"You're worried about cameras? And data mining?"

Yes. The legal aspects such as haggis body, too. But they, as Jaimie mentions, have been in limbo before. I'm much more worried about this pervasive surveillance than I am about the legalisms.

When are they coming for you, because of your opinions? It's not far off.

Jack, re-read Kaa post a few times. You are just going off with your hand fluttering again.

When habeus corpus was suspended I went down the WhiteHouse for a protest,,all of about 80people there.

NRA fetishists will cry about the ability to carry a gun while ignorant of the gov'ts abilility to sock them away without any notice.

There you are in the middle of the woods talking about cameras and pervasive surveillance. If there was an ounce of intergrity behind your words reflecting your state of being (apparently paranoia) you wouldn't even be on-line.

You just like to talk, talk, talk.

[Norman Bernstein]

Denial of right to Habeas Corpus in the U.S. Constitution
On January 18 2007, Gonzales was invited to speak to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he shocked the committee's ranking member, Arlen Specter [R]Pennsylvania, by stating that there was no guarantee to the right of Habeas Corpus in the United States Constitution. An excerpt of the exchange follows:

Gonzales: The fact that the Constitution — again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it’s never been the case, and I’m not a Supreme —

Specter: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The Constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?

Gonzales: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that.

Senator Specter was referring to 2nd Clause of Section 9 of Article One of the Constitution of the United States which reads: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." This passage has been historically interpreted to mean that the right of habeas corpus is inherently established.

The moment that Gonzales made that statement was the moment I became convinced that he didn't deserve to be Attorney General.

[Leon m]

"If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." --- Abraham Lincoln

[John of Phoenix]

Gonzales: I meant by that comment, the Constitution doesn’t say, “Every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right to habeas.” It doesn’t say that.
The moment that Gonzales made that statement was the moment I became convinced that he didn't deserve to be Attorney General.
At that point, he didn't even deserve his law degree least of all the office.

[seafox]

lincoln was the first president who diverted radically from the constution. buchannon has been reviled for not forcing the suceding states to remain in the union they volentarly joined, but he knew the federal goverment had no power to do so. lincoln didn't care about any stinking scrap of paper.
then FDR really perverted the goverment and threatened to stick another 8 justices on the supream court if they didn't agree with him.
the bad point is that of the " greatest generation" who were to busy leading their lives to demand back the freedoms they were losing and now I belive it is too late.
it is not gonzolies or bush they might be the "current bosses" but they come and go. its the burocrats who stay and stay and govern.

[Osborne Russell]

lincoln was the first president who diverted radically from the constution.

How?

[S.V. Airlie]

Osbourne.. I think he did actually suspend Habeas Corpus.. It was a time of war though.. so it may not have gone against the stipulations as specified. A lot of people in the north were not happy with that..

[John of Phoenix]

If the Constitution permits suspension during rebellion, how did Lincoln violate it?

[S.V. Airlie]

Read my post.. I indicated that he probably did not violate it but it still po'ed people.

[ishmael]

It always has been a mess, but a healthy one, seems to me. I think if I were to point to one thing that frightens me about it today it would be the lack of awareness of civics and history in young people. In order to move the mess forward and protect what is warranted by our constitution it takes people aware of what it is and where it came from.

Every once in awhile I catch a "man on the street" interview by a talk radio guy. He asks basic questions about American history and civics of young people pulled at random. One in a hundred knows squat. What are our three branches of government? Larry, Curly and Moe, of course.

I don't think this is just typical grumbling stemming from gray hairs, I really think kids aren't being taught much of it today. When and what was our civil war? Um, didn't that start when the Japanese attacked San Francisco?

[LeeG]

and those surveillance cameras in the forest. Jack, what do you DO with your civic education?
You're playing a caricature of a concerned citizen.

[WillW]

To an outside observer, this sounds like an odd way of posing a question. An experiment has a finite life, and at some point you can say yes, I think we've proven the hypothesis, or no that's not true at all. After 200 years you should probably be able to draw some conclusions.

If America is an experiment, just what was the original theory? If the experiment is considered successful (probably yes in this case), where do you go from there? This is probably the current dilemma.

[ishmael]

Lee,

Let's u and i just bury this hatchet.

In answer to your question, I do what most decent folks do. Try to work hard, pay my taxes, and learn what is going on a bit so I know who and what to vote for. I'm honest in my dealings and if someone needs a hand I offer it, if I've got the means. Just a fellow. I'm really glad in some ways for this experiment, because I know an awful lot of the world is in much deeper shyte.

How 'bout you? You rarely offer much personal, like a garden, or a story of your animals, or what have you. Kinda an enigma to be calling me a caricature.

[Popeye]

the finest nations have always elected moderates who in turn steer free democratic societies , the burden is now placed squarely on the shoulders of the people

[LeeG]

Jack, So now the problem is the young folks these days.

It's the young folks who are pushing for new information, it's the young folks pushing for answers. Most young folks learn other things as they get older. I know a lot more about Iran now than I did when I was a young person. A little bit more about US history.

The young folks who can't answer a classical history question are the same old folks who can't bother to research a topic such as the basis for pre-emptive war. THEY'RE THE SAME KIND OF PEOPLE.

No hatchet Jack, if you want your words to represent meaning and not just a script for a character called Jack I'll chop away. I think there's a person called Jack actually typing away, if Jack just likes to type and see a response, then it doesn't matter to the character called Jack whether he's being attacked. And it doesn't matter to me that the character could feel attacked because the character is something scripted and can be re-written.

[LeeG]

How 'bout you? You rarely offer much personal, like a garden, or a story of your animals, or what have you. Kinda an enigma to be calling me a caricature.

that's for people in my life. Not an anonymous forum. You have a persona called Ishmael. You post threads with colorful manner of speech. Whenever a topic is pursued that involves details or reference to objective information you dissapear to colorful phrases of speech. We have different priorities.

[ishmael]

Sheesh, Lee. What bee is in your bonnet? I never said our youth were bad, just illeducated these days. I stand by that. Do you think our youth shouldn't be well educated about history and civics.? That all they need to know is "new information?"

Who are you? I've told a multitude of stories here about me, you can find me in the phone book, who are you? You talk about words representing meaning, well let's hear some from you.

[Wild Dingo]

oooh strewth fellas such a simple opening post and you end up like a couple of school yard dipsticks havin a go back an forth back an forth... :rolleyes:

Now to the question... lets just say the American experiment failed miserably and is steadily going down the toilet and leave it at that... a fine dream now covered in dust blood and gore but a dream from the days of yore when things were simpler and men were honorable such as has not been seen for far too many years... the experiment with has slowly become an over ripe orange bursting with flavor on the outside but rotten with corruption inside

And I like you blokes... wouldnt live there but wouldnt mind a visit... why anyone would want to live there is a bit beyond me unless you were borned and raised there and knew no better... and of course one must go there if your escaping poverty in places like Mexico and Chili along with many other places around the globe... it "offers" opportunity and a false sence of "all things are possible" but few attain any of it... but they keep trying cause the alternative is worse thats all the alternative is the worst option

Of course same can be said for Aussie too I guess... but we werent talking about the "Aussie experiment" were we... and come to think about it I dont believe weve ever had an Aussie experiment experience yes but experiment? no I think not...

anyways!! carry on fellas :cool:

[ishmael]

We'll see how it plays, but I think this experiment, and all the other experiments it fostered, is a fine thing.

One of the misunderstandings about it is that everything is going to be resolved by a stroke of the pen. Nup, people are just as rough and randy as they always have been, and fine words on a parchment are not going to fix it,

After the ratification there was a group of western farmers who were disgruntled whisky makers. Pennsylvania and Ohio. They rebelled against the tax on their product, because it was the only thing easily moved around. It wasn't a minor thing, Washington rode at the head of four thousand troops to put the lid on it. Danial Shays, in MA, a revolutionary war guy, just about tipped the young republic over the edge.

It's very worthy thought and idea, out of genuine people, trying to find a resolve. I stand by our constitution.

P.S. It's set up to change. Those crazy white Englishmen made a point that it was going to change.

[PatCox]

I would say the american experiment is still ongoing, and the american dream is still worth striving for. That way I would make sense.