Why are the WW2 vets angry at the Obama Admin?

[pErvinalia]

:tinfoil: :foil: :tinfoilhat: :foilhat: :fuckentinfoilhatwearinggrinningsmiley:

[piscator]

Group files ethics complaint against Neugebauer

A Washington, D.C. watchdog group filed an ethics complaint against U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, for his spat with a park ranger at the National World War II Memorial this week.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a complaint Friday with the Office of Congressional Ethics against Neugebauer “for conduct that reflects discreditably upon the House,” according to a news release from the organization.

“Rep. Neugebauer’s mistreatment of a federal employee who was doing her job is disgraceful,” Melanie Sloan, the group’s executive director, said in a news release. “The blame for the government shutdown and the resulting closure of the memorials lies squarely on the shoulders of lawmakers like Rep. Neugebauer who refuse to fund our government.”

The group claims Neugebauer’s conduct violates House Rule 23, which requires all members of the House conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.”

“By publicly assailing a federal employee who was acting in accordance with the will of the House and attempting to coerce the ranger to allow access to the memorial — despite the fact that federal law requires its closure — Rep. Neugebauer abused his position,” the release states.

...

http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/201 ... neugebauer

[Collector1337]

Because capitalism breeds selfish people. Like libertarians.

So, Libertarians are selfish because they want freedom?

Or are they selfish because they want the freedom to do business?

Are they selfish because they want the freedom to work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labor?

What about socialists who refuse to get a job and expect others, who do work, to take care of them?

Isn't that selfish?

Expecting free shit and expecting other people to take care of you... is that not selfish?

Seriously, I'm asking. What specifically is selfish about Libertarianism and what's not selfish about socialism?

Who are these shadowy people? Where do they meet to plot the enslavement of humanity? Do they have a secret handshake?

Did you not watch skepitcus' video on "The Story of Your Enslavement?"

It was pretty decent.

[piscator]

Seriously, I'm asking. What specifically is selfish about Libertarianism and what's not selfish about socialism?

The insult to my intelligence posed by that willful false dichotomy demonstrates a callous disregard for the pain you inflict on logic.
It's selfish to demand others indulge such twisted thinking.

[Tyrannical]

Group files ethics complaint against Neugebauer

A Washington, D.C. watchdog group filed an ethics complaint against U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, for his spat with a park ranger at the National World War II Memorial this week.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a complaint Friday with the Office of Congressional Ethics against Neugebauer “for conduct that reflects discreditably upon the House,” according to a news release from the organization.

“Rep. Neugebauer’s mistreatment of a federal employee who was doing her job is disgraceful,” Melanie Sloan, the group’s executive director, said in a news release. “The blame for the government shutdown and the resulting closure of the memorials lies squarely on the shoulders of lawmakers like Rep. Neugebauer who refuse to fund our government.”

The group claims Neugebauer’s conduct violates House Rule 23, which requires all members of the House conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.”

“By publicly assailing a federal employee who was acting in accordance with the will of the House and attempting to coerce the ranger to allow access to the memorial — despite the fact that federal law requires its closure — Rep. Neugebauer abused his position,” the release states.

...

http://amarillo.com/news/local-news/201 ... neugebauer

The Park Service is not going to escape the back lash of their illegal activities during the shut down, such as evicting people from their homes located on federal land and arresting veterans trying to view an open air monument.

[piscator]

The Park Service is not going to escape the back lash of their illegal activities during the shut down, such as evicting people from their homes located on federal land and arresting veterans trying to view an open air monument.

The National Park Service is required to keep out vandals, Libertarian poachers, and publicity stunts out of their Trusts even if it doesn't have the funding to be fully operational. Organic Act of 1916.

If folks don't like that, they can petition their Congressmen to either repeal the Organic Act of 1916 and disband the National Parks, or send up a budget bill to the Senate.

[pErvinalia]

Because capitalism breeds selfish people. Like libertarians.

So, Libertarians are selfish because they want freedom?

Or are they selfish because they want the freedom to do business?

Are they selfish because they want the freedom to work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labor?

What about socialists who refuse to get a job and expect others, who do work, to take care of them?

Isn't that selfish?

Maybe, but socialism isn't an ideology centred around the individual like LIbertarianism is (i.e. libbism is selfish).

Expecting free shit and expecting other people to take care of you... is that not selfish?

That's not socialism.

Seriously, I'm asking. What specifically is selfish about Libertarianism and what's not selfish about socialism?

Socialism is about a minimum level of dignity and survivability for all. What's the maxim - "each according to his means"? Libertarianism is centred around the individual and their right to do as much as they can get away with without concern for broader effects. It's inherently selfish. But I was more concerned with capitalism, as opposed to libertarianism. Even though it is a selfish ideology, I mainly stuck it in as a dig at Seth. Capitalism relies on out-competing your fellow man to ensure success. The "he who dies with the most, wins" maxim is a pretty good description of the drive of capitalism.

[pErvinalia]

Who are these shadowy people? Where do they meet to plot the enslavement of humanity? Do they have a secret handshake?

Did you not watch skepitcus' video on "The Story of Your Enslavement?"

It was pretty decent.

Dude, I'm on dial up now. Don't make me say it again!

[Audley Strange]

While I agree that fear of death is the beginning of slavery. Death is also often the only freedom people can have. Freedom is, as Funkadelic said, free of the need to be free. Example, If all you want to do is read the koran and worship Allah, you can do that from a prison cell.

Doing what you want is simply enslavement by one's own ego and evinces a lack of discipline.

[pErvinalia]

That's a bit silly. There's really no such thing as an ego. And if you maintain that there is, then how do you escape that alleged enslavement?

[Audley Strange]

That's a bit silly. There's really no such thing as an ego. And if you maintain that there is, then how do you escape that alleged enslavement?

A bit silly? A BIT??!

Anyway to answer your question and make my nonsense at least internally consistant, sublimate your desires to the will of another's ideas. Lots of people do it all the time.

[pErvinalia]

sounds like wibble to me.

[Coito ergo sum]

So, Libertarians are selfish because they want freedom?

Or are they selfish because they want the freedom to do business?

Are they selfish because they want the freedom to work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labor?

What about socialists who refuse to get a job and expect others, who do work, to take care of them?

Isn't that selfish?

It's selfish to not want to work for other people involuntarily, including layabouts. Pathological laziness is a disability.

Expecting free shit and expecting other people to take care of you... is that not selfish?

no, because it's all about "fair share." Fair share doesn't mean "a person's proportional interest in a good or service." no, it means some portion of the cost of a good or service proportional to wealth. Wealthy people should, if they paid their fair share, pay $100 or more for their movie tickets, and the pathologically lazy should be allocated a fair share of zero, or perhaps a few pennies. It's not fair that layabouts have to pay for their movie tickets while rich people get to go for what amounts to nothing in comparison with their wealth. Welfare cases should get the large popcorn for the price of a small, whereas the rich should pay twice the large popcorn price for a small. That would be an unselfish society.

Seriously, I'm asking. What specifically is selfish about Libertarianism and what's not selfish about socialism?

in Marxist socialism, by way of example, the State takes away private citizens property, and mandates that people work if they are able to work in exchange for having their "needs" met." This is the definition of altruism. The State takes without compensation, and distributes according to internal party politics. What's not fair and unselfish about that?

[Coito ergo sum]

While I agree that fear of death is the beginning of slavery. Death is also often the only freedom people can have. Freedom is, as Funkadelic said, free of the need to be free. Example, If all you want to do is read the koran and worship Allah, you can do that from a prison cell.

Doing what you want is simply enslavement by one's own ego and evinces a lack of discipline.

Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose,
Nothing don't mean nothing honey if it ain't free,

[Seth]

The Park Service is not going to escape the back lash of their illegal activities during the shut down, such as evicting people from their homes located on federal land and arresting veterans trying to view an open air monument.

The National Park Service is required to keep out vandals, Libertarian poachers, and publicity stunts out of their Trusts even if it doesn't have the funding to be fully operational. Organic Act of 1916.

If folks don't like that, they can petition their Congressmen to either repeal the Organic Act of 1916 and disband the National Parks, or send up a budget bill to the Senate.

You don't get it. The Organic Act is a statute, not a constitutional provision. The government cannot perform ANY of its functions, including the enforcement of most regulations, without an appropriation to fund that activity. The Park Service is CLOSED. Not the parks, the NPS itself. It cannot provide any "service" at the moment. It's employees are required to to NOTHING right now, by federal law. The sole exceptions are protection of life and property. If someone's life is not in danger, or someone's property is not in danger of imminent harm, the NPS CANNOT ACT, it's illegal for any park employee to do anything that is not an "essential service," which doesn't happen to include closing parks, erecting barriers and obstructing citizens much less writing tickets or picking up trash.

That's why the power to deny appropriations is the power to shut down the ability of a rogue agency to do ANYTHING AT ALL not mandated by the constitution. And the House has that power. The President does NOT have the power to have government employees do work that Congress refuses to fund by appropriation. It's a "high crime" for him to order government employees to defy the House's defunding of federal activities, so he can be impeached for doing so.