All In Favor Of Socialism

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

Clearly, you've never looked for love in post-apocalyptic Detroit.

Or been a proctologist.

[Shuke-D]

Or been a proctologist.

Clearly, someone needs to see the Doctor.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Finch, good post.

I agree.

[eulesseagle]

I agree.

+1

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

---Is public schools, public hospitals, public fire depts, public ambulances (there weren't any where I lived as a kid, all privately owned in my town), food inspectors, banking inspectors, FFA, CDC, etc.... socialism... where does it stop?? Maybe we should just "trust" everyone to provide safe food and products to the population... maybe we should let each county build the roads they want and not support the interstate system either...that is obviously a socialist big-government idea. Where is the line??? Those ideas at one time in the past would have been considered socialistic. The police interfere with my freedom all the time... I can't drive 90 mph. ..that is government interference of my right to do as I want.

---There are some people who just yell LIBERAL or SOCIALIST if you dare disagree with them on anything or don't attend the church they attend and belief exactly as they do... [ Prohibition anyone?? ] That was big-government (also some religious groups) telling people what they could or couldn't do.

---Row vs. Wade is also a big issue now.... when I was in high school, they were a lot of groups that opposed ANY birth control and especially the pill. Some still do. Times change, as well as issues and attitudes.

[UNTFan23]

---Row vs. Wade is also a big issue now....

I prefer to row versus wade. I don't my feet to get wet.

Not real sure how Roe v. Wade figures into socialism though.

Edited May 13, 2010 by UNTFan23

[MeanGreenTexan]

Not real sure how Roe v. Wade figures into socialism though.

Oh boy... this could get ugly. Time for this thread to go away.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I prefer to row versus wade. I don't like my feet to get wet.

Not real sure how Roe v. Wade figures into socialism though.

It doesn't... but pointing out things change... what some once called socialist ideas are widely accepted now. Once the debate was over birth control pills and now that area that has changed to something else.

--Maybe I live a sheltered life but had not heard that joke. Out here in West Texas, rowing is rarely an option, wading happens quite a bit though, including last night.....LOL.

[yyz28]

---Is public schools, public hospitals, public fire depts, public ambulances (there weren't any where I lived as a kid, all privately owned in my town), food inspectors, banking inspectors, FFA, CDC, etc.... socialism... where does it stop?? Maybe we should just "trust" everyone to provide safe food and products to the population... maybe we should let each county build the roads they want and not support the interstate system either...that is obviously a socialist big-government idea. Where is the line??? Those ideas at one time in the past would have been considered socialistic. The police interfere with my freedom all the time... I can't drive 90 mph. ..that is government interference of my right to do as I want.

There is oversight - legitimate oversight, and then there is bloated bureaucracies that manage this oversight inefficiently and often with a political agenda.

You bring up Education, so let's look closely at that. We spend more per child in this country by a long shot on education than other countries which quite frankly are kicking our ass in that same effort. There are far too many layers of crap between the taxpayer and the student in our system and as a result the actual dollar getting spent ON each child is a very small portion of the huge number that gets spent PER each child. Too many layers of administrators, and debt due to unsustainable pension programs (teacher's unions have done the same thing to the Public School system that GM and the other car guys let unions do to them. When it happens to GM, people call it bad management. When it happens to levels of government, no one is blamed, but our taxes just go up to compensate.), programs designed to get students to pass standardized tests instead of actually learning and wasteful spending are the biggest factors in the waste in the public school system. I notice in a time when teachers are being laid off we never hear news stories of Teacher's unions offering to do more for a little less for the good of the system and the children and families they serve. I never hear about Administrators getting laid off.

Your argument about the police limiting your freedom wins the strawman of the year award. Conservatives depend on the rule of law as the foundation of our belief system. We are not anarchists.

---Row vs. Wade is also a big issue now.... when I was in high school, they were a lot of groups that opposed ANY birth control and especially the pill. Some still do. Times change, as well as issues and attitudes.

Roe vs. Wade is far from settled law. In fact, constitutionally speaking, it is bad law, and is a perfect example of legislation from the bench. In this case, a constitutional right to privacy was made up out of thin air so that the court could side with the Pro Abortion side of the case. Roe vs. Wade should be overturned by the courts and the issue should return to being a states rights issue, OR a constitutional amendment put in place, which would be the two lawful ways to regulate a medical procedure. ...and lest you blast me as a neanderthal pro-life Christian who doesn't like your statement because you "don't go to the right church", I'm personally pro-choice. ...but my political opinion doesn't change the constitution.

I think the argument being made here is that there is a happy medium.

Public Hospitals are fine so long as they aren't abused and taxed beyond their limits by folks who are abusing the system or here illegally (or neighboring counties who won't spend their money to take care of their citizens) - but Private ones are too and if folks want to make their own health care decisions without input from Washington they should be allowed to.

The FDA is fine, but it isn't efficient, and if a private company let as much tainted food on the market they would be hauled up to capital hill and grilled like BP was last week, but the FDA is given a pass.

The reason you're hearing socialism so much right now is the hard swing that this administration and congress has taken in that direction. We've been moving further and further in that direction for decades (since the early 1900's) but now all of the sudden we're adding spending and social programs and making more people dependent on the federal government for their very lives at an astounding pace, and bankrupting us in the process.

We need to tax our people less, give them incentive to depend on themselves and not government and get the hell out of the way of the hard working people and businesses that have made this country great. Giving huge new entitlements to more and more people who don't contribute (either by choice or by situation) is not how we get this economy on solid ground and will only take us deeper into debt and further from a point where we can turn it around.

[meangreenacct]

There is oversight - legitimate oversight, and then there is bloated bureaucracies that manage this oversight inefficiently and often with a political agenda.

You bring up Education, so let's look closely at that. We spend more per child in this country by a long shot on education than other countries which quite frankly are kicking our ass in that same effort. There are far too many layers of crap between the taxpayer and the student in our system and as a result the actual dollar getting spent ON each child is a very small portion of the huge number that gets spent PER each child. Too many layers of administrators, and debt due to unsustainable pension programs (teacher's unions have done the same thing to the Public School system that GM and the other car guys let unions do to them. When it happens to GM, people call it bad management. When it happens to levels of government, no one is blamed, but our taxes just go up to compensate.), programs designed to get students to pass standardized tests instead of actually learning and wasteful spending are the biggest factors in the waste in the public school system. I notice in a time when teachers are being laid off we never hear news stories of Teacher's unions offering to do more for a little less for the good of the system and the children and families they serve. I never hear about Administrators getting laid off.

Your argument about the police limiting your freedom wins the strawman of the year award. Conservatives depend on the rule of law as the foundation of our belief system. We are not anarchists.

Roe vs. Wade is far from settled law. In fact, constitutionally speaking, it is bad law, and is a perfect example of legislation from the bench. In this case, a constitutional right to privacy was made up out of thin air so that the court could side with the Pro Abortion side of the case. Roe vs. Wade should be overturned by the courts and the issue should return to being a states rights issue, OR a constitutional amendment put in place, which would be the two lawful ways to regulate a medical procedure. ...and lest you blast me as a neanderthal pro-life Christian who doesn't like your statement because you "don't go to the right church", I'm personally pro-choice. ...but my political opinion doesn't change the constitution.

I think the argument being made here is that there is a happy medium.

Public Hospitals are fine so long as they aren't abused and taxed beyond their limits by folks who are abusing the system or here illegally (or neighboring counties who won't spend their money to take care of their citizens) - but Private ones are too and if folks want to make their own health care decisions without input from Washington they should be allowed to.

The FDA is fine, but it isn't efficient, and if a private company let as much tainted food on the market they would be hauled up to capital hill and grilled like BP was last week, but the FDA is given a pass.

The reason you're hearing socialism so much right now is the hard swing that this administration and congress has taken in that direction. We've been moving further and further in that direction for decades (since the early 1900's) but now all of the sudden we're adding spending and social programs and making more people dependent on the federal government for their very lives at an astounding pace, and bankrupting us in the process.

We need to tax our people less, give them incentive to depend on themselves and not government and get the hell out of the way of the hard working people and businesses that have made this country great. Giving huge new entitlements to more and more people who don't contribute (either by choice or by situation) is not how we get this economy on solid ground and will only take us deeper into debt and further from a point where we can turn it around.

I wish I had more time right now to reply to your post. While there are definitely things I agree with you on...I have never heard of anyone saying the problem with our education system is the teachers get paid too much????? There are alot of things in the education system that need fixing and teachers pay is one of them, except it is far too low for what we expect them to do. Teacher pay if why we are falling behind in education. Why go to college to become a teacher with a starting salary in the $35,000-$40,000, that will max out at $60,000 when you can go into business or engineering where you will start in the $50-$60K range and proceed from there. That is why we no longer get the best, the brightest, the most motivated to educate our future generations.

[yyz28]

I wish I had more time right now to reply to your post. While there are definitely things I agree with you on...I have never heard of anyone saying the problem with our education system is the teachers get paid too much????? There are alot of things in the education system that need fixing and teachers pay is one of them, except it is far too low for what we expect them to do. Teacher pay if why we are falling behind in education. Why go to college to become a teacher with a starting salary in the $35,000-$40,000, that will max out at $60,000 when you can go into business or engineering where you will start in the $50-$60K range and proceed from there. That is why we no longer get the best, the brightest, the most motivated to educate our future generations.

I don't believe teachers are paid too much; I AM disgusted by teacher's unions who take actions to protect teachers who shouldn't be in teaching, and who have been a part of building pension programs that are unsustainable instead of securing more cash pay for teachers and letting them invest in and for their own futures and retirement.

...you rail against the pay for teachers being artificially low - and I agree 100%. ...now ask yourself why that is. If someone can go to college and go into a private career and make more than they can teaching, what does that tell you about the public school system?

Teacher's pay isn't the problem with our education system. ...the fact that our education system is run by bureaucrats and that a teacher's pay is set by a scale insured by the union and not based on excellence and achievement is a huge problem with education - but it isn't the only problem. Sorry to confuse.

Edited May 17, 2010 by yyz28

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I don't believe teachers are paid too much; I AM disgusted by teacher's unions who take actions to protect teachers who shouldn't be in teaching, and who have been a part of building pension programs that are unsustainable instead of securing more cash pay for teachers and letting them invest in and for their own futures and retirement.

...you rail against the pay for teachers being artificially low - and I agree 100%. ...now ask yourself why that is. If someone can go to college and go into a private career and make more than they can teaching, what does that tell you about the public school system?

Teacher's pay isn't the problem with our education system. ...the fact that our education system is run by bureaucrats and that a teacher's pay is set by a scale insured by the union and not based on excellence and achievement is a huge problem with education - but it isn't the only problem. Sorry to confuse.

--You must not live in Texas, Teacher Union's have no power here. I taught 30 years in public schools (retired but have 34 years in college math classes as well, now part-time) and both of my sons made more their first month on the job in industry than I did my last month in Texas classrooms. That is exactly why it is so difficult to hire good math and science people now, especially male ones. Women are a bit different since some teach so they can have a similiar schedule as their kids and be home with their kids in summers and during some holidays.

---Poor teachers rarely last long but those still around are there often because nothing better exists, so much competiton from the private sector. To say Teacher Unions have any real power in Texas is just showing no understanding of the realities in Texas. What you say may be true in some northern states, not here.

---Salery minimums are set by the Texas Legislature, the local school boards can raise them from there if they chose. Where did you come up with the Union comments??? No Union has any contract with any school district in Texas.

---Ran by bureaucrats??...hmmmm.. locally it is run by schools boards which YOU elect. They even have final say on who gets hired as administrators and teachers in your district. Statewide YOU elect the state school board and the legislature that controls schools.. That is a rather crazy comment. Who do you want to be in charge then???

Edited May 18, 2010 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNTFan23]

--You must not live in Texas, Teacher Union's have no power here. I taught 30 years in public schools (retired but have 34 years in college math classes as well, now part-time) and both of my sons made more their first month on the job in industry than I did my last month in Texas classrooms. That is exactly why it is so difficult to hire good math and science people now, especially male ones. Women are a bit different since some teach so they can have a similiar schedule as their kids and be home with their kids in summers and during some holidays.

---Poor teachers rarely last long but those still around are there often because nothing better exists, so much competiton from the private sector. To say Teacher Unions have any real power in Texas is just showing no understanding of the realities in Texas. What you say may be true in some northern states, not here.

---Salery minimums are set by the Texas Legislature, the local school boards can raise them from there if they chose. Where did you come up with the Union comments??? No Union has any contract with any school district in Texas.

I think he was talking nationally since there was the absence of a specific state in the post you replied to.

[yyz28]

I understand the situation in Texas - my wife is a teacher here.

In fact Unions ARE a factor in how the state and local ISD's run schools. While it is true that they don't have direct contracts here, they do have political power, they do exist in Texas and until yesterday, they have been able to confiscate money from teachers in this state and funnel it to whatever cause, political party and politician they saw fit - and it is these politicians that make up the Texas Legislature.

The Texas Attorney General's office has released an opinion this week (GA-0774) that prevents school districts from implementing automatic payroll deductions as directed by teachers unions from the paychecks of teachers for union spending on political action committees.

Here's the most relevant paragraph as it appears in the summary at the end of the decision:

"Because the Legislature has not expressly or impliedly authorized school districts to process payroll deductions for contributions to political committees such as TSTA-PAC and NEA-Fund, Texas laws prohibits school districts from processing such contributions."

So teachers unions in the Lone Star State will no longer be allowed to forcefully remove money out of teachers' paychecks to that they can spend it on left-wing political causes. This decision will not prevent teachers from individually sending their dues to political causes nor will it prevent unions from spending on PACs and political causes but it will prevent the schools from using school resources to make the deductions and for using school accounting departments to keep track of those deductions.

By its very nature this will take a big bite out of the millions that teachers unions have available to spend on left-wing causes because teachers will have to expressly provide for unions to spend that political money instead of having it simply taken without their ability to direct it personally.

For teachers like my wife who have no use for unions or their political agenda, this is a huge victory.

Naturally, the unions are crying foul saying that Texas is somehow stepping on people's right to "political participation" which is obviously absurd.

Or take the case last year in Houston when the HSID's raise program wasn't adequate to Union leaders who threatened to sue the district

To pretend that the teacher's unions have no power in this state simply because they can't directly ram contracts down the throats of the ISD is to wholly understate the case.

To state that bad teachers don't usually last is laughable, as the results speak for themselves, and I hear the stories every day from my wife and her friends and fellow teachers.

...but all of this talk of unions ignores the real point of my argument. The Federal Government, the layers and layers of waste and red tape and additional funding that has been thrown at education in the last 25 years in this country have done nothing to improve the situation - it has simply made it worse. A lack of funding or attention from the federal government is NOT what is wrong with our education system - in fact, it is what is wrong with it.

To bring this around full circle, socialism in education hasn't made it better. Socialism in health care hasn't made it better (see how efficiently run the VA and Medicare are?) Socialism in retirement hasn't made it better. (Social Security is broke and has no chance of survival unless we just print money and make the program worthless in the process). We don't need more Government - we need less.

Edited May 18, 2010 by yyz28

[yyz28]

---Ran by bureaucrats??...hmmmm.. locally it is run by schools boards which YOU elect. They even have final say on who gets hired as administrators and teachers in your district. Statewide YOU elect the state school board and the legislature that controls schools.. That is a rather crazy comment. Who do you want to be in charge then???

School boards don't RUN the schools any more than a Board of Directors RUN a company. They set policy and then have non elected staff implement that (often very vague) policy as they interpret it.

For someone who's a teacher, are you not offended when these stories come out about having to lay off more teachers, but the staff in the administration building remains safe? I know we are when we hear about it.

Layers and layers of administration at so many of these school districts, most of whom are lifers. These is the bureaucrats who I talk about, and the staff that works for the local and state school boards who aren't moved as a result of election.

[mad dog]

I'm steering well clear of the socialism topic. I have yet to see a debate where socialism is brought up and argued through to mutual understanding. I personally favor a return to the days where neither politics nor religion was brought up in polite company, but that is probably just me.

As someone who was at one point planning to be a teacher, I can say that salary was a secondary consideration. Their salaries top out a little low for my tastes (it'd be a lot more attractive if successful, tenured teachers of 20+ years could sniff 70 or 80k, especially if they held advanced degrees and certifications), but that wasn't the reason I bailed on teaching. I bailed because, in dozens of conversations with existing practitioners from 2003-2005, every single teacher I spoke to said that the creativity of teaching was being drained from the profession.

In the absence of truly fair compensation, I could have at least could fallen back upon my love of education. A job that would provide a creative outlet to teach in new and innovative ways, to improve on the teaching methods that I saw when I was in school, was the big draw for me. But the number one complaint I heard was that "teaching to the test" turned a rewarding career into a machine. Since your entire value as a teacher is determined by how children perform on a test, there's no reason to hammer on anything but the core curriculum you're handed from Austin. They said (and keep saying) that you can't have teachable moments anymore. You can't step outside of the curriculum and you certainly don't have time for innovative and fun projects because the clock is ticking on your mandatory performance levels.

In a way, I find it ironic that the conservative legislature of Texas is in favor of the government staying out of people's lives, and simultaneously legislating every lesson plan in Texas. I'd have thought they'd be in favor of less regulation, and more personal and professional freedom. Let your best teachers take risks, go out on limbs to reach students with challenging material. Test all you want, but make sure that you leave wiggle room for your best to truly reach out and be great.

And maybe pay them a little more, too.

[Quoner]

I'm steering well clear of the socialism topic. I have yet to see a debate where socialism is brought up and argued through to mutual understanding. I personally favor a return to the days where neither politics nor religion was brought up in polite company, but that is probably just me.

As someone who was at one point planning to be a teacher, I can say that salary was a secondary consideration. Their salaries top out a little low for my tastes (it'd be a lot more attractive if successful, tenured teachers of 20+ years could sniff 70 or 80k, especially if they held advanced degrees and certifications), but that wasn't the reason I bailed on teaching. I bailed because, in dozens of conversations with existing practitioners from 2003-2005, every single teacher I spoke to said that the creativity of teaching was being drained from the profession.

In the absence of truly fair compensation, I could have at least could fallen back upon my love of education. A job that would provide a creative outlet to teach in new and innovative ways, to improve on the teaching methods that I saw when I was in school, was the big draw for me. But the number one complaint I heard was that "teaching to the test" turned a rewarding career into a machine. Since your entire value as a teacher is determined by how children perform on a test, there's no reason to hammer on anything but the core curriculum you're handed from Austin. They said (and keep saying) that you can't have teachable moments anymore. You can't step outside of the curriculum and you certainly don't have time for innovative and fun projects because the clock is ticking on your mandatory performance levels.

In a way, I find it ironic that the conservative legislature of Texas is in favor of the government staying out of people's lives, and simultaneously legislating every lesson plan in Texas. I'd have thought they'd be in favor of less regulation, and more personal and professional freedom. Let your best teachers take risks, go out on limbs to reach students with challenging material. Test all you want, but make sure that you leave wiggle room for your best to truly reach out and be great.

And maybe pay them a little more, too.

As the private lover/dancer for a teacher, one thousand times this.

[UNT90]

I'm steering well clear of the socialism topic. I have yet to see a debate where socialism is brought up and argued through to mutual understanding. I personally favor a return to the days where neither politics nor religion was brought up in polite company, but that is probably just me.

As someone who was at one point planning to be a teacher, I can say that salary was a secondary consideration. Their salaries top out a little low for my tastes (it'd be a lot more attractive if successful, tenured teachers of 20+ years could sniff 70 or 80k, especially if they held advanced degrees and certifications), but that wasn't the reason I bailed on teaching. I bailed because, in dozens of conversations with existing practitioners from 2003-2005, every single teacher I spoke to said that the creativity of teaching was being drained from the profession.

In the absence of truly fair compensation, I could have at least could fallen back upon my love of education. A job that would provide a creative outlet to teach in new and innovative ways, to improve on the teaching methods that I saw when I was in school, was the big draw for me. But the number one complaint I heard was that "teaching to the test" turned a rewarding career into a machine. Since your entire value as a teacher is determined by how children perform on a test, there's no reason to hammer on anything but the core curriculum you're handed from Austin. They said (and keep saying) that you can't have teachable moments anymore. You can't step outside of the curriculum and you certainly don't have time for innovative and fun projects because the clock is ticking on your mandatory performance levels.

In a way, I find it ironic that the conservative legislature of Texas is in favor of the government staying out of people's lives, and simultaneously legislating every lesson plan in Texas. I'd have thought they'd be in favor of less regulation, and more personal and professional freedom. Let your best teachers take risks, go out on limbs to reach students with challenging material. Test all you want, but make sure that you leave wiggle room for your best to truly reach out and be great.

And maybe pay them a little more, too.

+3

No one goes into teaching lookiing to be rich. I would guess that if you polled every teacher, maybe 1 out of 1000 will say they went into it for the money. Same with police, fire, etc... There is much more to life than money, and the people that choose these professions know that (the good ones, anyway).

You are right about the Texas legislature. But I think every state has become hooked on the almighty federal teet, which ALWAYS comes with requirements to be met if you want the cash:

http://www.tea.state...x4.aspx?id=5200

I wish the state legislature would tell the feds to stick it and allow local school districts to do what they were initially formed to do; educate the students of that district.

Socialism doesn't happen instantly. It is the slow progression of relegating local responsibilty to the state, and the state to the feds. Why? Because that is just sooo much easier.

Edited May 19, 2010 by UNT90

[GreenMachine]

The post office, VA hospital and the FDA are failures?

Any political/economic system is a failure in its absolute form, whether it be Capitalism, Socialism or Points for Sex.

Thus...balance.

Were you ever in the military and go to a VA hospital? Well I was and I have and yes, VA hospitals are failures. As is the USPS and FDA.

Edited May 19, 2010 by GreenMachine

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

School boards don't RUN the schools any more than a Board of Directors RUN a company. They set policy and then have non elected staff implement that (often very vague) policy as they interpret it.

For someone who's a teacher, are you not offended when these stories come out about having to lay off more teachers, but the staff in the administration building remains safe? I know we are when we hear about it.

Layers and layers of administration at so many of these school districts, most of whom are lifers. These is the bureaucrats who I talk about, and the staff that works for the local and state school boards who aren't moved as a result of election.

--And who hires and fires the administarative staff..?? The school board. They run it and approve many of the decisions and fire those who do things they don't approve of. True they don't micro-manage most details but the buck stops at the school board.

---You really don't know what you are talking about even if your wife does teach, dues to professional organizations (which you seem to think are unions but really aren't) can not legally be spent to support candidates. A PAC of an organization can collect donated money for that purpose can but there aren't many of those in Texas schools plus very few contribute to one. A few towns do have a Labor Union presence but here there is less than 30 members out of about 2000... and it has no power and can't legally in Texas.

--I have no idea about your school but the administration here is running rather lean with little "dead wood". Some districts have cut more administrators than teachers, you statement may be accurate in a few bad cases. Schools just can't do what the federal government can, run up huge deficits. ...sometimes the money just isn't there and people have to be let go. Yes there has been some administrators I would love to see disappear.... it is also true that some great teachers become awful administrators while some average teachers are good in the administrative positions. Totally different deal. In Sports great players often make terrible coaches.. same thing.

--If you have weak spineless school board members that don't have a clue, then elect some that will take action. The buck stops there.

Edited May 19, 2010 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[forevereagle]

What's this thread about again?

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

What's this thread about again?

--hahaha... socialism... some think public schools are a socialist idea and that everyone should home school or send their kids to private schools... as once was done in most of America. I actually know a few of those people personally now. Closing them would satisfy a lot of T-party types.. more tax cuts and let us have religious private schools (unfortunately many just couldn't afford to go).

--If they didn't go would you want them on the streets all day long while you are gone...plus the education level would suffer greatly.

Edited May 19, 2010 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[UNTLifer]

I find a lot of the comments humouros regarding the "Tea Party" and those that oppose this administration. It is not that we don't think there should be social services, public schools, public hospitals, etc..., it is that we, or I should say I, don't want the government making every decision for me. The new healthcare reform is a prime example. The government will penalize citizens if they don't sign up for healthcare, which is a personal choice not one the U.S. government should make for its citizens. Government doesn't need to control every aspect of our lives and make decisions for us.

[GreenMachine]

I find a lot of the comments humouros regarding the "Tea Party" and those that oppose this administration. It is not that we don't think there should be social services, public schools, public hospitals, etc..., it is that we, or I should say I, don't want the government making every decision for me. The new healthcare reform is a prime example. The government will penalize citizens if they don't sign up for healthcare, which is a personal choice not one the U.S. government should make for its citizens. Government doesn't need to control every aspect of our lives and make decisions for us.

But if we like to make our own decisions why do they keep calling us sheep:)

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

But if we like to make our own decisions why do they keep calling us sheep:)

If I make the decision not to make so many decisions, am I a sheep?

Edited May 19, 2010 by BeanCounterGrad'03