On this 4th of July........Don’t forget to thank a Liberal

[AquaAthena]

To think of comparing and judging the Founders with today's conservatives and liberals is just silly.

However, today's far right and alt right Americans are, in fact, politically anti-freedom.

Proof: just read USMB daily.

They were the liberals of their time
Just like today’s liberals are the liberals of our time

In other words, their beliefs were totally different from yours.

The phrase "liberals of their time" is utterly meaningless since you allow the term "liberal" to mean virtually anything. All you're proving is what huge weasel you are.

Liberalism is an evolving mindset

To say that because you don’t have the exact same beliefs as someone in 1775 you can’t be liberal is ridiculous

How much have the beliefs of the Republican Party changed since 1860? Does anyone say that because you do not believe exactly what Lincoln believed you can’t be a Republican?

You lefties evolve faster that anyone... right now, your right in between socialists and communists.

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

So do you, sweetheart.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

No, it does not, TK.

What ?

 

[AquaAthena]

Conservatives are the only liberals remaining. Everyone else is a moonbat.

Erm, no. Republicans are in there, too.

Me? I'm a Registered Independent! ( who has to log off now )

 

[percysunshine]

Conservatives are the only liberals remaining. Everyone else is a moonbat.

Erm, no. Republicans are in there, too.

Me? I'm a Registered Independent! ( who has to log off now )

Are you entj, or intj?

Can't make up your mind?

 

[mikegriffith1]

Yes, it was humorous to see rightwinger pretend that all of the founding fathers' conservative views were merely the result of "an 18th-century mindset," as if modern American liberalism's positions are all of modern origin. What a hoot. This is the kind of silliness that you get from people who've read little or no history.

Heck, a whole bunch of liberal domestic policies were adopted by the Roman Empire over the centuries, and scholars have identified many of them as major causes of Rome's decline and eventual collapse. Some examples include the following: allowing large numbers of immigrants to settle in the country without insisting that they assimilate and respect your culture, debasing the currency, vastly expanding the size of the central government, handing out huge amounts of taxpayer money to curry favor with certain segments of the population, rejecting the importance of the traditional family unit, widespread acceptance of homosexuality and other forms of deviancy, legalized abortion, the policy that the government had the right to regulate any business to any degree the government deemed necessary, a disregard for the right of private property, the policy that the government had the right to control or outlaw religious groups for "offensive" teachings even if the teachings did *not* involve advocating insurrection against the government, allowing increasingly immoral and even pornographic "entertainment," the policy that the government had the right to impose whatever level of taxation it deemed necessary, etc., etc.

 

[rightwinger]

They were the liberals of their time
Just like today’s liberals are the liberals of our time

In other words, their beliefs were totally different from yours.

The phrase "liberals of their time" is utterly meaningless since you allow the term "liberal" to mean virtually anything. All you're proving is what huge weasel you are.

Liberalism is an evolving mindset

To say that because you don’t have the exact same beliefs as someone in 1775 you can’t be liberal is ridiculous

How much have the beliefs of the Republican Party changed since 1860? Does anyone say that because you do not believe exactly what Lincoln believed you can’t be a Republican?

You lefties evolve faster that anyone... right now, your right in between socialists and communists.

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, it was humorous to see rightwinger pretend that all of the founding fathers' conservative views were merely the result of "an 18th-century mindset," as if modern American liberalism's positions are all of modern origin. What a hoot. This is the kind of silliness that you get from people who've read little or no history.

Heck, a whole bunch of liberal domestic policies were adopted by the Roman Empire over the centuries, and scholars have identified many of them as major causes of Rome's decline and eventual collapse. Some examples include the following: allowing large numbers of immigrants to settle in the country without insisting that they assimilate and respect your culture, debasing the currency, vastly expanding the size of the central government, handing out huge amounts of taxpayer money to curry favor with certain segments of the population, rejecting the importance of the traditional family unit, widespread acceptance of homosexuality and other forms of deviancy, legalized abortion, the policy that the government had the right to regulate any business to any degree the government deemed necessary, a disregard for the right of private property, the policy that the government had the right to control or outlaw religious groups for "offensive" teachings even if the teachings did *not* involve advocating insurrection against the government, allowing increasingly immoral and even pornographic "entertainment," the policy that the government had the right to impose whatever level of taxation it deemed necessary, etc., etc.

Their “conservative principles” were just the way things were done in 1775. Being liberal does not mean you change everything

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mike is a follower culturally of Cleon Skousen, Dan Peterson, Mises, and the John Birch Society.

He writes fairly well, imo, with the zeal of a convert.

He reminds me of Glenn Beck in several ways.

The philosophy of he and his buddies when it goes loopy is tipped off by references to Rousseau or Jacobins, or he starts talking about 'now' and 'then' without recognizing what he is applying to his opponents must be applied to himself.

 

[Ame®icano]

In other words, their beliefs were totally different from yours.

The phrase "liberals of their time" is utterly meaningless since you allow the term "liberal" to mean virtually anything. All you're proving is what huge weasel you are.

Liberalism is an evolving mindset

To say that because you don’t have the exact same beliefs as someone in 1775 you can’t be liberal is ridiculous

How much have the beliefs of the Republican Party changed since 1860? Does anyone say that because you do not believe exactly what Lincoln believed you can’t be a Republican?

You lefties evolve faster that anyone... right now, your right in between socialists and communists.

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

DNC chair Tom Perez, for start, reported by all major outlets.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Mike is a follower culturally of Cleon Skousen, Dan Peterson, Mises, and the John Birch Society.

He writes fairly well, imo, with the zeal of a convert.

He reminds me of Glenn Beck in several ways.

The philosophy of he and his buddies when it goes loopy is tipped off by references to Rousseau or Jacobins, or he starts talking about 'now' and 'then' without recognizing what he is applying to his opponents must be applied to himself.

IOW, you have no answer for my arguments, so you resort to painting a distorted picture of my views. I notice you said nothing about the liberal policies that were adopted by the Roman Empire.

And, umm, perhaps you could explain why it's "loopy" to talk about the Jacobins of the French Revolution, since even Lenin identified the Jacobins as one of his ideological ancestors, and since modern socialists praise the Jacobins for their "progressive" ideas regarding social welfare and making the rich "pay their fair share"? Just in a few sentences, explain why it is "loopy" to note the parallels between modern American liberalism and Jacobinism.

Here's a hint for you: Washington, Adams, Hamilton, etc., regarded Jacobinism as dangerous and dictatorial.

 

[rightwinger]

Liberalism is an evolving mindset

To say that because you don’t have the exact same beliefs as someone in 1775 you can’t be liberal is ridiculous

How much have the beliefs of the Republican Party changed since 1860? Does anyone say that because you do not believe exactly what Lincoln believed you can’t be a Republican?

You lefties evolve faster that anyone... right now, your right in between socialists and communists.

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

DNC chair Tom Perez, for start, reported by all major outlets.

Who was elected?
Elections occur in November

 

[mikegriffith1]

Look, you and Jake Starkey can duck and dance all day. Nothing will change the fact that you have proven yourselves to be supremely uninformed on American history by suggesting that the founding fathers were similar to modern American liberals. They would have considered your views to be radical, immoral, and erroneous.

Your only answer is to assume that by now the founders would have "outgrown" all of their basic principles and would have embraced views that directly contradict the views they expressed.

 

[Ame®icano]

You lefties evolve faster that anyone... right now, your right in between socialists and communists.

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

DNC chair Tom Perez, for start, reported by all major outlets.

Who was elected?
Elections occur in November

Primaries?

Acting dumb? Oh sorry, you don't act.

 

[rightwinger]

Look, you and Jake Starkey can duck and dance all day. Nothing will change the fact that you have proven yourselves to be supremely uninformed on American history by suggesting that the founding fathers were similar to modern American liberals. They would have considered your views to be radical, immoral, and erroneous.

Your only answer is to assume that by now the founders would have "outgrown" all of their basic principles and would have embraced views that directly contradict the views they expressed.

Come on Mikey

Your 21st century view of 18th century America is better suited for a child or extreme rightwing conservative

You don’t get to mix and match

BTW....our founding fathers would tar and feather today’s conservatives. Just like they did in their day

 

[rightwinger]

You need to listen to more Rush Limbaugh

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

DNC chair Tom Perez, for start, reported by all major outlets.

Who was elected?
Elections occur in November

Primaries?

Acting dumb? Oh sorry, you don't act.

You can’t tell the difference between a primary and an election?

 

[Ame®icano]

I don't have to. You just elected self declared socialist in New York and even calling her "future of Democrat party".

Really? Who?

DNC chair Tom Perez, for start, reported by all major outlets.

Who was elected?
Elections occur in November

Primaries?

Acting dumb? Oh sorry, you don't act.

You can’t tell the difference between a primary and an election?

What, primaries are not elections?

Where socialist just kicked out ass of the 4th ranking Democrat in Congress?

And you lefties are calling it "the future of Democrat party".

Difference I don't see is between Democrats and Socialists. They're the same.