Founding Fathers against Obama

[rightwinger]

It won't, and we will be stuck with it. I, as you, will vote for him, and I will continue working with my allies here to limit the far right and libertarian influence in our county and regional party committees.

Libertarians are the answer. I don't care if you call them far right or whatever. Dems and Republicans have been walking lock-step on the plank.

No country on earth is run on a Libertarian model

Libertarian principles are ridiculed wherever they are proposed

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama telephoning Romney: I have good and bad news.
Romney: What's the good news?
Obama: I have decided it is time to have a Mormon president.
Romney: What is the bad news?
Obama: My baptism is on Saturday.

 

[Listening]

Obama telephoning Romney: I have good and bad news.
Romney: What's the good news?
Obama: I have decided it is time to have a Mormon president.
Romney: What is the bad news?
Obama: My baptism is on Saturday.

Articles of Faith | Mormon.org

We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul-We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

************************

I doubt that.

 

[Listening]

It won't, and we will be stuck with it. I, as you, will vote for him, and I will continue working with my allies here to limit the far right and libertarian influence in our county and regional party committees.

Libertarians are the answer. I don't care if you call them far right or whatever. Dems and Republicans have been walking lock-step on the plank.

No country on earth is run on a Libertarian model

Libertarian principles are ridiculed wherever they are proposed

So was Columbus.

What was your point ?

 

[JakeStarkey]

False analogy anybody?

The overwhelming majority is not going to accept a government by elitist individuals in a 'society of equals.' We do not want to be sheep led by wolves.

 

[EriktheRed]

False analogy anybody?

The overwhelming majority is not going to accept a government by elitist individuals in a 'society of equals.' We do not want to be sheep led by wolves.

There are many who would argue we already are.

 

[Greenbeard]

FED has ZERO business in this. It is a Government PLAN. It is by Government DESIGN.

In other words, you haven't opened up the link to the legislation he offered you to figure out what you don't like about it. Same old shit.

No, "Obamacare" doesn't give "The Government" control over what will be covered and what won't - your health insurance company will make those decisions.

Oh yes it does, in Medicare and Medicaid.

The Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, is a fifteen-member United States Government agency created in 2010 by sections 3403 and 10320 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

The IPAB isn't empowered to make coverage decisions for Medicare.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The founders were brave men but they also knew that things change over time. If they didn't believe that, then they would have finalized the constitution instead of allowing future governments to add amendments to it. Things change over time and that's something they understood but it doesn't seem like Republicans understands that today.

And if the founders were "perfect" then they wouldn't have left the issue of slavery to somebody else in the future. They would have dealt with it in the beginning.

1) Who ever said they were perfect?

2) It's easy to sit here from the vantage point of the work already having been done for you and bloviate on how the people who actually did it didn't accomplish it fast enough to suit you.

He implied that they were pretty close to perfect I would say. Just re-read his post.

No, you inferred it, because you are offended by the idea of anyone DARING to praise or admire our Founding Fathers for anything, since you in your no-doubt infinite wisdom have decided that they don't measure up to your standards. (I am quite sure that, had you been raised in that time and society, you would have done much better. Or, at least, you believe you would have.)

I admitted that the founders were great men but they did not have an answer for everything. They had good foresight but they could not have foreseen some of the issues this country has gone though and they knew that would happen.

No, you said they were "brave", and then immediately went on to criticize them for not being wise and moral enough to handle the issue of slavery the way you, in the arrogance of hindsight masquerading as wisdom, believe they should have.

Again, no one but you has even suggested they were "perfect" or "had an answer for everything". These are just straw men you're setting up in order to allow you to condescend about men whose boots YOU aren't fit to wipe. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been believed to be evil for a century-and-a-half requires no great moral stature. It doesn't really require much morality at all. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been accepted as the norm for centuries requires incredible moral stature, and don't delude yourself that you would have been among the few who did so.

And yes it is easy to look back but slavery becoming an issue should have been obvious to them. They chose to ignore it and created a problem that wasn't resolved for almost 200 years.

See, there you go. "I know it because I was raised knowing it, so it should have been obvious to people who lived in a different world and were taught completely different values. I'm brilliant and morally superior, rather than just incredibly fucking lucky in the time and place I happened to be born."

Get over yourself. You're a moral pigmy who thinks an accident of birth equals quality of character.

And while your'e at it, pick up a history book, because your ignorance on the subject is rapidly becoming too offensive for decent people to be expected to tolerate.

 

[Greenbeard]

These are just straw men you're setting up in order to allow you to condescend about men whose boots YOU aren't fit to wipe. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been believed to be evil for a century-and-a-half requires no great moral stature. It doesn't really require much morality at all. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been accepted as the norm for centuries requires incredible moral stature, and don't delude yourself that you would have been among the few who did so.

Interesting territory. I've not generally known folks on the right to be moral relativists, so I have to ask:

Was slavery evil in 1787 or is evil/moral truth a matter of social norms, as you seem to be suggesting here?

Or, if you prefer: were the Framers objectively evil men, or does moral truth evolve as societies evolve?

 

[Cecilie1200]

These are just straw men you're setting up in order to allow you to condescend about men whose boots YOU aren't fit to wipe. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been believed to be evil for a century-and-a-half requires no great moral stature. It doesn't really require much morality at all. Recognizing that slavery is evil when you've been raised in a world where slavery has been accepted as the norm for centuries requires incredible moral stature, and don't delude yourself that you would have been among the few who did so.

Interesting territory. I've not generally known folks on the right to be moral relativists, so I have to ask:

Was slavery evil in 1787 or is evil/moral truth a matter of social norms, as you seem to be suggesting here?

Or, if you prefer: were the Framers objectively evil men, or does moral truth evolve as societies evolve?

If you "have to ask", you must be struggling with logic AND morality.

The moral relativist isn't the person who recognizes that humanity's ability to perceive right and wrong grows and evolves. It's the person who thinks right and wrong grow and evolve according to human perception.

Strap on a thinking cap and see if you can figure out what was obvious to everyone else without "having to ask".

 

[The T]

Libertarians are the answer. I don't care if you call them far right or whatever. Dems and Republicans have been walking lock-step on the plank.

No country on earth is run on a Libertarian model

Libertarian principles are ridiculed wherever they are proposed

So was Columbus.

What was your point ?

Columbus was laughed at by the Elitists...

Conservatives are the same fashion.

Columbus was correct.

~Go Figure

 

[Greenbeard]

The moral relativist isn't the person who recognizes that humanity's ability to perceive right and wrong grows and evolves. It's the person who thinks right and wrong grow and evolve according to human perception.

Indeed. So I ask again: does that mean you believe that, by the presumably objective moral truths of the universe that we today have come to better, ah, "perceive," that the Framers were evil? Or, if you prefer to soften it, were they products of an objectively evil society?

You clearly believe it's appropriate to understand them as products of their time, as do I, and thus to some degree that mitigates the evil they propagated. I'm just curious how you get there.

 

[francoHFW]

The FFs DID have an answer for everything. The Constitution. And filibusters aren't in it. Especially without actual filibustering. And that's how we got "un-American" (TIME) GOP a-holes. They didn't imagine no fairness propaganda and hordes of brainwashed dupes either...or corrupt Big business Pub depressions, or this mess...

 

[rightwinger]

No country on earth is run on a Libertarian model

Libertarian principles are ridiculed wherever they are proposed

So was Columbus.

What was your point ?

Columbus was laughed at by the Elitists...

Conservatives are the same fashion.

Columbus was correct.

~Go Figure

Columbus was not ridiculed. Anyone with any intelligence in 1492 knew the world was round. It was the Conservatives of the day who insisted the earth was flat

 

[USMCSergeant]

The FF's never thought progressive liberals would involve the federal government in retirement, healthcare, education, safety nets, bail-outs, and every other aspect of your life. Because then, it's the same type of government they rebelled from.

Liberals and Republicans are both responsible. Not one single ideology. We've pit eachother against ourselves to the point rational discussion is impossible, compromise is impossible.

 

[Greenbeard]

The moral relativist isn't the person who recognizes that humanity's ability to perceive right and wrong grows and evolves. It's the person who thinks right and wrong grow and evolve according to human perception.

Indeed. So I ask again: does that mean you believe that, by the presumably objective moral truths of the universe that we today have come to better, ah, "perceive," that the Framers were evil? Or, if you prefer to soften it, were they products of an objectively evil society?

You clearly believe it's appropriate to understand them as products of their time, as do I, and thus to some degree that mitigates the evil they propagated. I'm just curious how you get there.

I realize I should probably just make my point more simply and directly for you.

By my (and your, I assume) standards, holding slaves is evil and wrong. By theirs (again, I assume), it was not. Can I judge the Framers by my standards and thus conclude that they are evil? Or must I instead judge them, not by my own standards, but by their own?

If the answer is the latter, then I'm a relativist. So what I'm asking you is: are you a relativist? And if you're not and you believe their actions can be excused because these men were products of their time or some equivalent sentiment, how do you get to a relativist position like that without being on some level a relativist?

 

[EriktheRed]

The FF's never thought progressive liberals would involve the federal government in retirement, healthcare, education, safety nets, bail-outs, and every other aspect of your life. Because then, it's the same type of government they rebelled from.
Liberals and Republicans are both responsible. Not one single ideology. We've pit each other against ourselves to the point rational discussion is impossible, compromise is impossible.

Are you saying the Crown was Liberal/Progressive???

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The FF's never thought progressive liberals would involve the federal government in retirement, healthcare, education, safety nets, bail-outs, and every other aspect of your life. Because then, it's the same type of government they rebelled from.

Liberals and Republicans are both responsible. Not one single ideology. We've pit eachother against ourselves to the point rational discussion is impossible, compromise is impossible.

You should read Thomas Paine's Agrarian Justice.

 

[The T]

So was Columbus.

What was your point ?

Columbus was laughed at by the Elitists...

Conservatives are the same fashion.

Columbus was correct.

~Go Figure

Columbus was not ridiculed. Anyone with any intelligence in 1492 knew the world was round. It was the Conservatives of the day who insisted the earth was flat

Is that WHY he had to go to SPAIN because Italy, Portugal, MOST of the EU...and the Flat Earhter Elitists wouldn't listen to his ideas?

Conservatives have IDEAS...

These people he fought were the LIBERALS of thier time...Statists.

Guess what RW?

YOU FAIL HISTORY AGAIN.

Great Form asswipe!

Is your next dive gonna be a high dive with two twists and a snap up?

 

[USMCSergeant]

The FF's never thought progressive liberals would involve the federal government in retirement, healthcare, education, safety nets, bail-outs, and every other aspect of your life. Because then, it's the same type of government they rebelled from.
Liberals and Republicans are both responsible. Not one single ideology. We've pit each other against ourselves to the point rational discussion is impossible, compromise is impossible.

Are you saying the Crown was Liberal/Progressive???

No I'm not identifying the type of government in England at the time. I'm simply calling them overly oppressive, and I think we're approaching that term. I think both parties are responsible, both parties promise transparent administrations and we get the opposite. Our ideology is so far apart, the venom we have for one another is quite obvious.