• Answers
  • Web
Answer 5 out of 5
 
38 helpful answers

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, Establish Justice,; insure domestic Tranquility, to provide for the common defense, to promote the general Welare, and to Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity, do ordain and establish the Constitution of the United States of America.

A:

Pascal, in very simplistic terms, the right are those who are staunch Capitalists whether or not the middle or lower classes are hurting they, for some inexplicable reason support the right (old line GOP). The Democrats, on the other hand, have some compassion for the middle class and the lower classes, but that is not to say that they have to. But if you look at Senator Rockafella, with all his money, he is no Republican, but a staunch Democrat. For some reason he understands what it is to be without -- a home, food, doctor bills, hospital bills, and any other bills that the middle and lower classes cannot afford to pay. This is the reason that I have been a Democrat all of my life. My Grandfather, my father, my mother and my sibling, and I believe even my children are all Democrats. I guess once born into a political group so you remain. Michael Joel Held

Posted 1 month ago
Michael Joel Held was invited by Yedda to answer this question.

2 Comments About This Answer Add a comment

 
Chaplain John

Michael Joel Held, perhaps you have been deceived. 

It is very difficult to understand your post because you contradict yourself so often.  You seem very passionate about your beliefs, but what is the rationale that led you to believe these things?

The horrors of leftist indoctrination are the bitterest scars that the human race has ever seen.  And it cannot ever improve from that.

Michael, I hope that my efforts to reason with you have not been misread.  But I have also seen what happens in leftist governments firsthand.  These grisly memories still give me nightmares.  The Killing Fields of Pol Pot, satellite reconnaissance of mass graves prove the genocide of Ceaucescu, and not one Russian has come back without psychological scars from the Soviet atrocities that only ended in 1991.

These socialists held that others did not deserve so much as the right to think for themselves, to live without terror, or to have any shred of security.  The atrocities of the Gulag System remain as the highest commendation of the unsustainable Soviet Union. 

China suffered under the yoke of leftist oppression and state sponsored violence until the end of communism.  With the emergence of a functional free-market economy, their darkest age finally healed.  Now, the Chinese people have hope -- for the first time in nearly 65 years.

What humanitarian could advocate a self-righteous oligarchy that denies people the right to simply be human beings?

In Jesus' Name, I bid you peace.

 
Michael Joel Held

Dear Chaplin John, I think that both of us are talking the same message, but we are getting lost in semantics. I believe, with all due respects, that you are referring to Communism and not Socialism or Capitalism. There must be a mixture of Socialism and Capitalism for this Great Nation to survive. Since Communism failed from the very start, then we must look to a combination of Socialism and Capitalism. In this country, today, we have that combination, ie: Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and other Social programs to protect the lower and middle classes in this Nation. Pure Capitalism does not work as is evidenced by the "one percenters" who own more than ninety six (give or take a few percentage points), as well as pure Socialism does not work for the same reason. However, when one examines Europe we find that more than a dozen countries function under a Socialistic Government where money is distributed to those who have nothing to those who will have a fighting chance to survive. As for me, I draw Social Security and Medicare. I owned my own optical business for over twenty years and paid a great sum into the Social Security Fund. Over the years, whenever our Government needed money, they would put an IOU into the "lock box" and remove that money. That is why Social Security may go broke before many of those "baby boomers" will retire and find that they have absolutely nothing left to help them survive in their old age.

If we use the "Universal Health Coverage Bill" now before the Senate, why do you think that there is such an uproar over that bill? My guess is that the Republicans would rather  see people die than to allow them piece of mind by helping them with their insurance premiums. That bill is a good bill that is greatly misunderstood by the majority of American people because the "Party of No" wish to continue to confuse and lie to the American people.

If Social Security could be passed under Roosevelt, Medicare and Medicaid be passed under Lyndon Johnson, then why can't this bill be passed under Obama? Certainly the Democrats have a majority in both the House and the Senate. Certainly they have the "power" to ram this bill through both Houses of the Legislature, but what is preventing them from doing that very thing? They, both houses of the legislature, are afraid of their own shadows. If I was an elected member of Congress, I would have had the bill passed within a short time because it is both necessary and expedient.

I hope that I have clarified my feelings on this bill, and if there be any other questions that you would like to discuss, my email address is heldmx. Michael Joel Held

 
Comment About This Answer (or add your own answer)

Feed - Subscribe to changes to this Q&A Blog
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Answers
  • Web
Copyright © 2006-2009, Yedda Inc. and respective copyright owners