- This topic has 1,090 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM #458829September 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM #458029
dbapig
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Felix: I think what gets lost in all this smoke is the intent of the Founding Fathers and the dynamic, “living document” nature of the Constitution.
One of Clinton’s little acolytes, Lani Guinier, riffed on the “Tyranny of the Majority” criticism in a book carrying the same title and you now catch that same stench emanating from the Left under Obama.
The Founding Fathers were as anti-authority, anti-monarchy, and anti-tax/anti-confiscation as it got. That thread runs through nearly all of the contemporaneous writings, as well as documents such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Am I opposed to radicals and reactionaries? Nope, far from it. What I am opposed to are those individuals that favor confiscatory and redistributive government, under the rubric of a “social” society.
The Left is now reduced to pathetically calling those Americans with the temerity to protest, “racists” and “extremists” and “un-Americans”. You have useful idiots like former President Carter and Keith Olbermann and Joe Klein prevaricating about racism and bigotry, simply because these buffoons (Olbermann), anti-Semites (Carter) and elitists (Klein) are stunned that average Americans are now rousing themselves from their debt-addled stupor and acting.
All of this, however, does not constitute legitimacy of the GOP. They are as complicit as the Left in this fucking mess and their current answers are really no better.
What is needed is a return to core American values, these being self-reliance, self-autonomy, frugality, humility and the civil use of free expression.[/quote]
/Sarcasm On
Useful idiots on the right:
Bush, Glenn, LimbaughThat about equals out the balance so that now America is not tilted to the right or left.
About self-reliance, self-… That’s all good.
Let’s kill Social Security and Medicare and let everyone plan/pay for their own retirement and health insurance after turning 65. Too bad the old folks will have to worry about getting their private health insurance dropped by the insurance companies just when they need it the most.
Free enterprise = insurance company is free to do what ever it thinks is necessary to earn a buck or two.
/Sarcasm OffSeptember 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM #458219Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Felix: I think what gets lost in all this smoke is the intent of the Founding Fathers and the dynamic, “living document” nature of the Constitution.
One of Clinton’s little acolytes, Lani Guinier, riffed on the “Tyranny of the Majority” criticism in a book carrying the same title and you now catch that same stench emanating from the Left under Obama.
The Founding Fathers were as anti-authority, anti-monarchy, and anti-tax/anti-confiscation as it got. That thread runs through nearly all of the contemporaneous writings, as well as documents such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Am I opposed to radicals and reactionaries? Nope, far from it. What I am opposed to are those individuals that favor confiscatory and redistributive government, under the rubric of a “social” society.
The Left is now reduced to pathetically calling those Americans with the temerity to protest, “racists” and “extremists” and “un-Americans”. You have useful idiots like former President Carter and Keith Olbermann and Joe Klein prevaricating about racism and bigotry, simply because these buffoons (Olbermann), anti-Semites (Carter) and elitists (Klein) are stunned that average Americans are now rousing themselves from their debt-addled stupor and acting.
All of this, however, does not constitute legitimacy of the GOP. They are as complicit as the Left in this fucking mess and their current answers are really no better.
What is needed is a return to core American values, these being self-reliance, self-autonomy, frugality, humility and the civil use of free expression.[/quote]
/Sarcasm On
Useful idiots on the right:
Bush, Glenn, LimbaughThat about equals out the balance so that now America is not tilted to the right or left.
About self-reliance, self-… That’s all good.
Let’s kill Social Security and Medicare and let everyone plan/pay for their own retirement and health insurance after turning 65. Too bad the old folks will have to worry about getting their private health insurance dropped by the insurance companies just when they need it the most.
Free enterprise = insurance company is free to do what ever it thinks is necessary to earn a buck or two.
/Sarcasm OffSeptember 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM #458552Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Felix: I think what gets lost in all this smoke is the intent of the Founding Fathers and the dynamic, “living document” nature of the Constitution.
One of Clinton’s little acolytes, Lani Guinier, riffed on the “Tyranny of the Majority” criticism in a book carrying the same title and you now catch that same stench emanating from the Left under Obama.
The Founding Fathers were as anti-authority, anti-monarchy, and anti-tax/anti-confiscation as it got. That thread runs through nearly all of the contemporaneous writings, as well as documents such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Am I opposed to radicals and reactionaries? Nope, far from it. What I am opposed to are those individuals that favor confiscatory and redistributive government, under the rubric of a “social” society.
The Left is now reduced to pathetically calling those Americans with the temerity to protest, “racists” and “extremists” and “un-Americans”. You have useful idiots like former President Carter and Keith Olbermann and Joe Klein prevaricating about racism and bigotry, simply because these buffoons (Olbermann), anti-Semites (Carter) and elitists (Klein) are stunned that average Americans are now rousing themselves from their debt-addled stupor and acting.
All of this, however, does not constitute legitimacy of the GOP. They are as complicit as the Left in this fucking mess and their current answers are really no better.
What is needed is a return to core American values, these being self-reliance, self-autonomy, frugality, humility and the civil use of free expression.[/quote]
/Sarcasm On
Useful idiots on the right:
Bush, Glenn, LimbaughThat about equals out the balance so that now America is not tilted to the right or left.
About self-reliance, self-… That’s all good.
Let’s kill Social Security and Medicare and let everyone plan/pay for their own retirement and health insurance after turning 65. Too bad the old folks will have to worry about getting their private health insurance dropped by the insurance companies just when they need it the most.
Free enterprise = insurance company is free to do what ever it thinks is necessary to earn a buck or two.
/Sarcasm OffSeptember 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM #458623Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Felix: I think what gets lost in all this smoke is the intent of the Founding Fathers and the dynamic, “living document” nature of the Constitution.
One of Clinton’s little acolytes, Lani Guinier, riffed on the “Tyranny of the Majority” criticism in a book carrying the same title and you now catch that same stench emanating from the Left under Obama.
The Founding Fathers were as anti-authority, anti-monarchy, and anti-tax/anti-confiscation as it got. That thread runs through nearly all of the contemporaneous writings, as well as documents such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Am I opposed to radicals and reactionaries? Nope, far from it. What I am opposed to are those individuals that favor confiscatory and redistributive government, under the rubric of a “social” society.
The Left is now reduced to pathetically calling those Americans with the temerity to protest, “racists” and “extremists” and “un-Americans”. You have useful idiots like former President Carter and Keith Olbermann and Joe Klein prevaricating about racism and bigotry, simply because these buffoons (Olbermann), anti-Semites (Carter) and elitists (Klein) are stunned that average Americans are now rousing themselves from their debt-addled stupor and acting.
All of this, however, does not constitute legitimacy of the GOP. They are as complicit as the Left in this fucking mess and their current answers are really no better.
What is needed is a return to core American values, these being self-reliance, self-autonomy, frugality, humility and the civil use of free expression.[/quote]
/Sarcasm On
Useful idiots on the right:
Bush, Glenn, LimbaughThat about equals out the balance so that now America is not tilted to the right or left.
About self-reliance, self-… That’s all good.
Let’s kill Social Security and Medicare and let everyone plan/pay for their own retirement and health insurance after turning 65. Too bad the old folks will have to worry about getting their private health insurance dropped by the insurance companies just when they need it the most.
Free enterprise = insurance company is free to do what ever it thinks is necessary to earn a buck or two.
/Sarcasm OffSeptember 17, 2009 at 2:06 PM #458815Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]Felix: I think what gets lost in all this smoke is the intent of the Founding Fathers and the dynamic, “living document” nature of the Constitution.
One of Clinton’s little acolytes, Lani Guinier, riffed on the “Tyranny of the Majority” criticism in a book carrying the same title and you now catch that same stench emanating from the Left under Obama.
The Founding Fathers were as anti-authority, anti-monarchy, and anti-tax/anti-confiscation as it got. That thread runs through nearly all of the contemporaneous writings, as well as documents such as the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Am I opposed to radicals and reactionaries? Nope, far from it. What I am opposed to are those individuals that favor confiscatory and redistributive government, under the rubric of a “social” society.
The Left is now reduced to pathetically calling those Americans with the temerity to protest, “racists” and “extremists” and “un-Americans”. You have useful idiots like former President Carter and Keith Olbermann and Joe Klein prevaricating about racism and bigotry, simply because these buffoons (Olbermann), anti-Semites (Carter) and elitists (Klein) are stunned that average Americans are now rousing themselves from their debt-addled stupor and acting.
All of this, however, does not constitute legitimacy of the GOP. They are as complicit as the Left in this fucking mess and their current answers are really no better.
What is needed is a return to core American values, these being self-reliance, self-autonomy, frugality, humility and the civil use of free expression.[/quote]
/Sarcasm On
Useful idiots on the right:
Bush, Glenn, LimbaughThat about equals out the balance so that now America is not tilted to the right or left.
About self-reliance, self-… That’s all good.
Let’s kill Social Security and Medicare and let everyone plan/pay for their own retirement and health insurance after turning 65. Too bad the old folks will have to worry about getting their private health insurance dropped by the insurance companies just when they need it the most.
Free enterprise = insurance company is free to do what ever it thinks is necessary to earn a buck or two.
/Sarcasm OffSeptember 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM #458053sdgrrl
Participant[quote=felix]
I see your point. Radicalism may very well depend on who is asked. However, with reference to the changes liberals seem to want for this country, imo, there is no question whose ideas are more in step with the founding ideals of this country.
The civil rights movement was supported by many Republicans in the conservative bible belt. In fact, I believe it was many southern Dems that didn’t support JFK on this including Al Gore’s Dad.
Imo the current Republican ideas of today are closer to the ideas of JFK than are the ideas of current Dems.
MLK wanted folks judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. I fully support this view and thus want the end to affirmative action. His views were moral and religious and found much support again from conservative church goers.
FDR was indeed radical. He changed this country with his vast social programs. While some programs like the TVA appear to have been helpful, others, like, the Ponzi scheme, social security, have done damage, or worse, become an albatross that no politician can touch.
The point I’m making is that some folks are trying to change the country to what they believe is better. Other folks are just trying to live within a country that they believed to have a constitution and bill of rights allowing them, historically, to pray in schools, outlaw homosexuality and even teach what they believed in schools.
I may have differing opinions on all three of the above but the folks who want to continue living in a country that has existed for over two hundreds with these as basic beliefs are not advocating radical change. They are advocating the status quo.
These folks have and will continue to live with changes that occur. They will continue to do so without violence or rioting. They just ask, I ask fairly imo, that changes happen do so within the appropriate process. They don’t want a government of either judicial or administrative fiat. They are not advocates of the “Rules for Radicals” as are many in the current administration.[/quote]
I can partly understand your views, though I believe outlawing the actual being of homosexuality is wrong- and no I am not a lesbian, but I have many friends that gay.
By you or others outlawing them- you mentally and sometimes physically invade their home and life- in my opinion doing exactly what you fear is being done to you- not sure if you really meant to outlaw it or just outlaw marriage.
I strongly believe in separation of church and state and I grew up praying around flag poles and before football games.
In the public arena, religion should be omitted, but in the private home please do what ever you want as long as children are not abused.
If you want your children taught specifically in a way you want there is always home school and private- meaning a Christian based way.
Also, when you speak of the status quo from two hundred years ago- its seems like you want to cherry pick what you want. Slavery no. Prayer in school yes. Chinese Exclusion Act- maybe a no, don’t know you. Traditional marriage yes.
Times have changed- sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. I personally love the melting pot of this country and I guess the… whats the word loosening of Christian based morals. As long as things are between consenting adults I have no problem in people’s pursuit of happiness.
Thank you for your reply and post Felix.
September 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM #458243Participant[quote=felix]
I see your point. Radicalism may very well depend on who is asked. However, with reference to the changes liberals seem to want for this country, imo, there is no question whose ideas are more in step with the founding ideals of this country.
The civil rights movement was supported by many Republicans in the conservative bible belt. In fact, I believe it was many southern Dems that didn’t support JFK on this including Al Gore’s Dad.
Imo the current Republican ideas of today are closer to the ideas of JFK than are the ideas of current Dems.
MLK wanted folks judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. I fully support this view and thus want the end to affirmative action. His views were moral and religious and found much support again from conservative church goers.
FDR was indeed radical. He changed this country with his vast social programs. While some programs like the TVA appear to have been helpful, others, like, the Ponzi scheme, social security, have done damage, or worse, become an albatross that no politician can touch.
The point I’m making is that some folks are trying to change the country to what they believe is better. Other folks are just trying to live within a country that they believed to have a constitution and bill of rights allowing them, historically, to pray in schools, outlaw homosexuality and even teach what they believed in schools.
I may have differing opinions on all three of the above but the folks who want to continue living in a country that has existed for over two hundreds with these as basic beliefs are not advocating radical change. They are advocating the status quo.
These folks have and will continue to live with changes that occur. They will continue to do so without violence or rioting. They just ask, I ask fairly imo, that changes happen do so within the appropriate process. They don’t want a government of either judicial or administrative fiat. They are not advocates of the “Rules for Radicals” as are many in the current administration.[/quote]
I can partly understand your views, though I believe outlawing the actual being of homosexuality is wrong- and no I am not a lesbian, but I have many friends that gay.
By you or others outlawing them- you mentally and sometimes physically invade their home and life- in my opinion doing exactly what you fear is being done to you- not sure if you really meant to outlaw it or just outlaw marriage.
I strongly believe in separation of church and state and I grew up praying around flag poles and before football games.
In the public arena, religion should be omitted, but in the private home please do what ever you want as long as children are not abused.
If you want your children taught specifically in a way you want there is always home school and private- meaning a Christian based way.
Also, when you speak of the status quo from two hundred years ago- its seems like you want to cherry pick what you want. Slavery no. Prayer in school yes. Chinese Exclusion Act- maybe a no, don’t know you. Traditional marriage yes.
Times have changed- sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. I personally love the melting pot of this country and I guess the… whats the word loosening of Christian based morals. As long as things are between consenting adults I have no problem in people’s pursuit of happiness.
Thank you for your reply and post Felix.
September 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM #458577Participant[quote=felix]
I see your point. Radicalism may very well depend on who is asked. However, with reference to the changes liberals seem to want for this country, imo, there is no question whose ideas are more in step with the founding ideals of this country.
The civil rights movement was supported by many Republicans in the conservative bible belt. In fact, I believe it was many southern Dems that didn’t support JFK on this including Al Gore’s Dad.
Imo the current Republican ideas of today are closer to the ideas of JFK than are the ideas of current Dems.
MLK wanted folks judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. I fully support this view and thus want the end to affirmative action. His views were moral and religious and found much support again from conservative church goers.
FDR was indeed radical. He changed this country with his vast social programs. While some programs like the TVA appear to have been helpful, others, like, the Ponzi scheme, social security, have done damage, or worse, become an albatross that no politician can touch.
The point I’m making is that some folks are trying to change the country to what they believe is better. Other folks are just trying to live within a country that they believed to have a constitution and bill of rights allowing them, historically, to pray in schools, outlaw homosexuality and even teach what they believed in schools.
I may have differing opinions on all three of the above but the folks who want to continue living in a country that has existed for over two hundreds with these as basic beliefs are not advocating radical change. They are advocating the status quo.
These folks have and will continue to live with changes that occur. They will continue to do so without violence or rioting. They just ask, I ask fairly imo, that changes happen do so within the appropriate process. They don’t want a government of either judicial or administrative fiat. They are not advocates of the “Rules for Radicals” as are many in the current administration.[/quote]
I can partly understand your views, though I believe outlawing the actual being of homosexuality is wrong- and no I am not a lesbian, but I have many friends that gay.
By you or others outlawing them- you mentally and sometimes physically invade their home and life- in my opinion doing exactly what you fear is being done to you- not sure if you really meant to outlaw it or just outlaw marriage.
I strongly believe in separation of church and state and I grew up praying around flag poles and before football games.
In the public arena, religion should be omitted, but in the private home please do what ever you want as long as children are not abused.
If you want your children taught specifically in a way you want there is always home school and private- meaning a Christian based way.
Also, when you speak of the status quo from two hundred years ago- its seems like you want to cherry pick what you want. Slavery no. Prayer in school yes. Chinese Exclusion Act- maybe a no, don’t know you. Traditional marriage yes.
Times have changed- sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. I personally love the melting pot of this country and I guess the… whats the word loosening of Christian based morals. As long as things are between consenting adults I have no problem in people’s pursuit of happiness.
Thank you for your reply and post Felix.
September 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM #458648Participant[quote=felix]
I see your point. Radicalism may very well depend on who is asked. However, with reference to the changes liberals seem to want for this country, imo, there is no question whose ideas are more in step with the founding ideals of this country.
The civil rights movement was supported by many Republicans in the conservative bible belt. In fact, I believe it was many southern Dems that didn’t support JFK on this including Al Gore’s Dad.
Imo the current Republican ideas of today are closer to the ideas of JFK than are the ideas of current Dems.
MLK wanted folks judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. I fully support this view and thus want the end to affirmative action. His views were moral and religious and found much support again from conservative church goers.
FDR was indeed radical. He changed this country with his vast social programs. While some programs like the TVA appear to have been helpful, others, like, the Ponzi scheme, social security, have done damage, or worse, become an albatross that no politician can touch.
The point I’m making is that some folks are trying to change the country to what they believe is better. Other folks are just trying to live within a country that they believed to have a constitution and bill of rights allowing them, historically, to pray in schools, outlaw homosexuality and even teach what they believed in schools.
I may have differing opinions on all three of the above but the folks who want to continue living in a country that has existed for over two hundreds with these as basic beliefs are not advocating radical change. They are advocating the status quo.
These folks have and will continue to live with changes that occur. They will continue to do so without violence or rioting. They just ask, I ask fairly imo, that changes happen do so within the appropriate process. They don’t want a government of either judicial or administrative fiat. They are not advocates of the “Rules for Radicals” as are many in the current administration.[/quote]
I can partly understand your views, though I believe outlawing the actual being of homosexuality is wrong- and no I am not a lesbian, but I have many friends that gay.
By you or others outlawing them- you mentally and sometimes physically invade their home and life- in my opinion doing exactly what you fear is being done to you- not sure if you really meant to outlaw it or just outlaw marriage.
I strongly believe in separation of church and state and I grew up praying around flag poles and before football games.
In the public arena, religion should be omitted, but in the private home please do what ever you want as long as children are not abused.
If you want your children taught specifically in a way you want there is always home school and private- meaning a Christian based way.
Also, when you speak of the status quo from two hundred years ago- its seems like you want to cherry pick what you want. Slavery no. Prayer in school yes. Chinese Exclusion Act- maybe a no, don’t know you. Traditional marriage yes.
Times have changed- sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. I personally love the melting pot of this country and I guess the… whats the word loosening of Christian based morals. As long as things are between consenting adults I have no problem in people’s pursuit of happiness.
Thank you for your reply and post Felix.
September 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM #458839Participant[quote=felix]
I see your point. Radicalism may very well depend on who is asked. However, with reference to the changes liberals seem to want for this country, imo, there is no question whose ideas are more in step with the founding ideals of this country.
The civil rights movement was supported by many Republicans in the conservative bible belt. In fact, I believe it was many southern Dems that didn’t support JFK on this including Al Gore’s Dad.
Imo the current Republican ideas of today are closer to the ideas of JFK than are the ideas of current Dems.
MLK wanted folks judged not by the color of their skin but the content of their character. I fully support this view and thus want the end to affirmative action. His views were moral and religious and found much support again from conservative church goers.
FDR was indeed radical. He changed this country with his vast social programs. While some programs like the TVA appear to have been helpful, others, like, the Ponzi scheme, social security, have done damage, or worse, become an albatross that no politician can touch.
The point I’m making is that some folks are trying to change the country to what they believe is better. Other folks are just trying to live within a country that they believed to have a constitution and bill of rights allowing them, historically, to pray in schools, outlaw homosexuality and even teach what they believed in schools.
I may have differing opinions on all three of the above but the folks who want to continue living in a country that has existed for over two hundreds with these as basic beliefs are not advocating radical change. They are advocating the status quo.
These folks have and will continue to live with changes that occur. They will continue to do so without violence or rioting. They just ask, I ask fairly imo, that changes happen do so within the appropriate process. They don’t want a government of either judicial or administrative fiat. They are not advocates of the “Rules for Radicals” as are many in the current administration.[/quote]
I can partly understand your views, though I believe outlawing the actual being of homosexuality is wrong- and no I am not a lesbian, but I have many friends that gay.
By you or others outlawing them- you mentally and sometimes physically invade their home and life- in my opinion doing exactly what you fear is being done to you- not sure if you really meant to outlaw it or just outlaw marriage.
I strongly believe in separation of church and state and I grew up praying around flag poles and before football games.
In the public arena, religion should be omitted, but in the private home please do what ever you want as long as children are not abused.
If you want your children taught specifically in a way you want there is always home school and private- meaning a Christian based way.
Also, when you speak of the status quo from two hundred years ago- its seems like you want to cherry pick what you want. Slavery no. Prayer in school yes. Chinese Exclusion Act- maybe a no, don’t know you. Traditional marriage yes.
Times have changed- sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. I personally love the melting pot of this country and I guess the… whats the word loosening of Christian based morals. As long as things are between consenting adults I have no problem in people’s pursuit of happiness.
Thank you for your reply and post Felix.
September 17, 2009 at 2:25 PM #458063Participant[quote=sdgrrl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdgrrl]Yes, I am the wingnut.[/quote]
Sdgrrl: Truthfully, I’ve always thought of you as more of a bolt and washer kind of gal.(quote]
Allan, I am going to daydream that your words were the sweetest compliment. lol.[/quote]
Ok- i just got it! Only took me a few minutes.
September 17, 2009 at 2:25 PM #458253Participant[quote=sdgrrl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdgrrl]Yes, I am the wingnut.[/quote]
Sdgrrl: Truthfully, I’ve always thought of you as more of a bolt and washer kind of gal.(quote]
Allan, I am going to daydream that your words were the sweetest compliment. lol.[/quote]
Ok- i just got it! Only took me a few minutes.
September 17, 2009 at 2:25 PM #458587Participant[quote=sdgrrl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdgrrl]Yes, I am the wingnut.[/quote]
Sdgrrl: Truthfully, I’ve always thought of you as more of a bolt and washer kind of gal.(quote]
Allan, I am going to daydream that your words were the sweetest compliment. lol.[/quote]
Ok- i just got it! Only took me a few minutes.
September 17, 2009 at 2:25 PM #458658Participant[quote=sdgrrl][quote=Allan from Fallbrook][quote=sdgrrl]Yes, I am the wingnut.[/quote]
Sdgrrl: Truthfully, I’ve always thought of you as more of a bolt and washer kind of gal.(quote]
Allan, I am going to daydream that your words were the sweetest compliment. lol.[/quote]
Ok- i just got it! Only took me a few minutes.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.