[Info-vax] HP stopping VMS paper documentation ?

[Kulin Remailer]

Jan-Erik Soderholm <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com> wrote:

> Fritz Wuehler wrote 2011-12-09 01:29:
> >> In article<4edf3847$0$2098$c3e8da3$a9097924 at news.astraweb.com>, JF Mezei<jfmezei.spamnot at vaxination.ca>  writes:
> >>>
> >>> A government running puplic transit or national railways or the post
> >>> office is not really socialism because it is a basic service like roads
> >>> and water which are expected to be provided by government and which do
> >>> not interest private enterprise.
> >
> > Well go and read the Constitution. The federal government has very specific
> > authority ("enumerated powers"). Any thing else is resevered to the people
> > or the States. It turns out "postal roads" *are* within the purview. Public
> > transit is not. When the federal government regulates (our definition, not
> > the Constitution's) anything they weren't chartered to regulate, they start
> > down the slippery slope of socialism. Welcome to today.
> >
> 
> Are you realy saying that the US constitution in some way is a rule
> to decide what is socialism or not ?

No, I'm saying the Constitution grants specific, limited authority to the federal
government. One of the reasons it was constructed that way was to explicitly
limit the power of the government, which is a protection against many evil
things, socialism / fascism among them.

> Those that wrote that document had no clue about socialism.

Oh really? And why not? Was socialism invented during your lifetime?

Unlike you, who apparently learned from textbooks written by people who
believe the world was created in 1995, the people who wrote the Constitution
were experts in political history and they examined the failures of other
political systems throughout human history in detail and designed a
government where the people were preeminent and the government was their
servant, specifically to address shortcomings with other forms of
government.

See the Federalist Papers, the writings of the Anti-Federalists, and the
record of the Constitution Debates and you will feel very ashamed at the
silly, ignorant, and incorrect statements you are making.

> Thinking that something written over 200 years ago has to be
> rellevant for the world of today, has it's problems. Things change.

Funny, intelligent people know just the opposite. Human nature never
changes and that is the very point.
> 
> The US constitution was probably a big-deal at the time when it
> was written, but probably less rellevant today. It was a very
> different time.

It's relevant more now than ever. The fact you are unable to understand that
doesn't change that reality.