If America was founded by Republicans why do we have Democrats?

[NYcarbineer]

Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

No, they created the Constitution as a repudiation of Articles of Confederation, which put too little power in the hands of a central, federal government.

 

[Peach]

Conservatives were loyal to the crown.
Liberals founded America.

Downright radical they were! Thank God.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

You were slapped down on this the last time you tried this crap.

You will be slapped down this time.

You will be slapped down next time.

Why?

Your OP was shown by libs, cons, and centrists as fail.

 

[alan1]

If America was founded by Republicans why do we have Democrats?
Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

I'm pretty sure the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If America was founded by Republicans why do we have Democrats?
Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

I'm pretty sure the two are mutually exclusive.

Of course if you were pretty sure you would not be so afraid to give your best example. What does your fear tell you??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

No, they created the Constitution as a repudiation of Articles of Confederation, which put too little power in the hands of a central, federal government.

But you changed the subject because as a liberal you have a low IQ. The subject was whether the Constitution was designed to make big government liberalism illegal, not whether it was designed to make government bigger than it was under the Articles.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Conservatives were loyal to the crown.
Liberals founded America.

Today's liberals would have informed on the revolutionaries.

yes today's liberals would have found it crazy to seek freedom from a powerful and magical central government.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Then, if Germans in 1930-s were supportive of Hitler -- it was their DEMOCRATIC choice!

yes and our democratic choice was to kill them before they killed us.

And what is "democratic" in unleashing a witch hunt against a political party out of fear of its rising popularity in US? I am talking about communists who were VERY popular in post-war Europe.

dear, since communists are not democratic, it is democratic to eliminate them

 

[midcan5]

The nature of conservatism is reactionary and it has fought every move towards freedom and responsibility since its came to be after the French revolution. The idea that a conservative can or would found any nation, or for that matter anything at all, is completely alien to a political philosophy (PP) that can be summed up in one word: whining. Think about how could a group who worship a past that never existed and at the same time adhere to their present privilege do anything at all? Why they keep making stupid comments on history is hard to say, I guess when your PP has done nothing, saying more nothings doesn't matter.

Lots of information below to counter the absurdity of conservatives founding America - look at them today and clearly they show especially in our House of representatives that they cannot do a damn thing,. not even try. Whine they do splendidly.

'A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress' A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress | Conceptual Guerilla

"Cheap-labor conservatives have gotten into the habit of wrapping themselves in the flag, quoting Jefferson, and holding themselves out as defenders of “American values”. In fact, from the very beginning, cheap-labor forces have opposed and obstructed realization of Jefferson’s dream of equality, democracy and social justice. Here is a short list of examples of cheap-labor conservatives obstructing of those values.

Supported George III in the American Revolution. Fully a third of the population of the colonies didn’t even want independence.
Supported protection for the institution of slavery in the Constitutional convention. This included the bizarre insistence that slaves be counted in determining slave state representation in Congress. Slaves were people according to conservative planters, but only for purposes of counting them. Those same interests also prevented regulation of the importation of slaves prior to 1808.
Opposed tariffs to protect American manufacturing. Reactionary southern planters failed to grasp the need to develop our own industrial base. They preferred to operate a slave labor driven cash crop economy for the simple reason that they – the wealthy planters that is – profited from economic underdevelopment.
Supported “nullification”, which said that states didn’t have to enforce federal laws they didn’t like. This “theory”, such as it was, was in direct contradiction to the provision of the US Constitution that made federal law “the supreme law of the land”.
Supported repeal of the Missouri Compromise so as to allow slavery in places like Nebraska and the deserts of New Mexico." A Short History of Conservative Obstruction to Progress | Conceptual Guerilla


If anyone wants to understand political conservatism, I suggest Albert O. Hirschman's brilliant 'The Rhetoric of Reaction.' "He argues that a triplet of 'rhetorical' criticisms--perversity, futility, and jeopardy--'has been unfailingly leveled' by 'reactionaries' at each major progressive reform of the past 300 years--those T. H. Marshall identified with the advancement of civil, political and social rights of citizenship...Charmingly written, this book can benefit a diverse readership." The Rhetoric of Reaction - Albert O. Hirschman - Harvard University Press.

And check out Corey Robin. "Late in life, William F. Buckley made a confession to Corey Robin. Capitalism is "boring," said the founding father of the American right. "Devoting your life to it," as conservatives do, "is horrifying if only because it's so repetitious. It's like sex." With this unlikely conversation began Robin's decade-long foray into the conservative mind. What is conservatism, and what's truly at stake for its proponents? If capitalism bores them, what excites them?" [ame=http://www.amazon.com/The-Reactionary-Mind-Conservatism-Edmund/dp/0199793743/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8]Amazon.com: The Reactionary Mind: Conservatism from Edmund Burke to Sarah Palin (9780199793747): Corey Robin: Books[/ame]

What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?
The Regressive Antidote - If Conservatism Is The Ideology of Freedom, I'm The Queen of England


http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/219584-the-american-conservative-continuing-series.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/186726-republican-ideology-through-history-7.html#post4251322
http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...es-of-midcans-insights-into-contemporary.html


Think about this premise for a second, no nation was ever founded by a conservative, no conservative has ever been able to answer my simple question naming one accomplishment of a so called conservative that has helped America or the world, none nada never. So where does that leave you? Well the only answer is the obvious one, conservatives exist only to whine. Think about it? No accomplishments. Now look just a bit deeper, Coolidge/Hoover = Great depression; Reagan/Bush = S&L Bailout, It's the economy Stupid!; Bush Jr = Great Recession, an almost complete collapse of the economy, two unnecessary wars, and 911. All created massive deficits, all had negative or marginal job creation. Now tell me how anyone could ever claim to be a conservative?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

no conservative has ever been able to answer my simple question naming one accomplishment of a so called conservative that has helped America or the world [/b]

conservatives, based on their love of limited government, founded America. Thanks to limited government it became the richest country in human history and the world's moral policeman.

Liberals opposed the concept of America and so spied for Stalin, giving him the bomb. BO, our most liberal president by far, had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, and open socialist and hater of freedom from government.

midcan 5, as a liberal, lacks the IQ to make any comments about government.

 

[daveman]

The nature of conservatism is reactionary and it has fought every move towards freedom and responsibility since its came to be after the French revolution.

When you start out with horseshit, everything else can be immediately discarded.

 

[jillian]

The nature of conservatism is reactionary and it has fought every move towards freedom and responsibility since its came to be after the French revolution.

When you start out with horseshit, everything else can be immediately discarded.

Really. That's interesting given that by definition, conservatism is the effort to thwart change.

But feel free to state examples of progress pursued by "conservatives"

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Really. That's interesting given that by definition, conservatism is the effort to thwart change.

To an pure idiot liberal conservatives are against change, to a conservative intellectual conservatives are for limited government which would be a huge change today as it was in 1776!!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Really. That's interesting given that by definition, conservatism is the effort to thwart change.

To an pure idiot liberal conservatives are against change, to a conservative intellectual conservatives are for limited government which would be a huge change today as it was in 1776!!

Washington would have called EB a loyalist conservative, and sent him off to Canada forever.

 

[rightwinger]

America was not founded by Republicans

They did not start messing up the country until the 1860s

 

[regent]

The word Republican can be confusing to some. Does Republican mean a political party, a type of government, something Franklin dreamed up, a liberal, conservative, a union school teacher or what? Sure hard for some to figure out.

 

[uscitizen]

Really. That's interesting given that by definition, conservatism is the effort to thwart change.

To an pure idiot liberal conservatives are against change, to a conservative intellectual conservatives are for limited government which would be a huge change today as it was in 1776!!

"Conservatives" merely say they are for limited government.
Their example is that they keep growing the government.

 

[daveman]

The nature of conservatism is reactionary and it has fought every move towards freedom and responsibility since its came to be after the French revolution.

When you start out with horseshit, everything else can be immediately discarded.

Really. That's interesting given that by definition, conservatism is the effort to thwart change.

But feel free to state examples of progress pursued by "conservatives"

The founding of the United States. Booker T. Washington's and Frederick Douglass' fight against slavery. Rutherford B. Hayes signed a bill which, for the first time, allowed female attorneys to argue cases before the Supreme Court of the United States. Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Union without war.

 

[alan1]

If America was founded by Republicans why do we have Democrats?
Didn't they create the Constitution to, in effect, make big government liberalism illegal?

I'm pretty sure the two are mutually exclusive.

Of course if you were pretty sure you would not be so afraid to give your best example. What does your fear tell you??

My fear is non-existent. Your false assumption about fear makes it almost impossible to deal with you rationally. I've learned to give little credence to false accusations from those that think themselves clever.

Back to your original statement,
I'm pretty sure the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[midcan5]

poor conservatives, you guys are whiners and nothing else - but just to reiterate: nothing was founded by conservatives because by their very nature conservatives only conserve. You'd all still be a cave howling at the moon and conserving your rock if it weren't for others.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/219584-the-american-conservative-continuing-series.html


http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...es-of-midcans-insights-into-contemporary.html


http://www.usmessageboard.com/histo...s-why-do-we-have-democrats-2.html#post5545518