What is there to learn from history?

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Simple, that history changed after millions of years when Jefferson discovered that freedom from liberal government was the missing element that had held humanity back for millions of years!!

Too stupid and 100% CON$ervoFascist. What does your fear tell you?

OF course if it was stupid why be so afraid to say why?? What does your fear tell us about the liberal character and IQ ??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Hitler was no liberal, gheesh, rewriting history as you go?

how can you say Hitler Stalin and Mao were not liberals?? Do you know why the liberals spied for Stalin rather than Hitler??

Hitler was a National Socialist!! What more do you want? Barry had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, an open socialist.

Hitler Stalin and Mao FDR LBJ were the great 20th Century liberals who got their way. So far Barry is not getting his way but we know his record and we know the government is never big enough for him


“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” ~ Adolf Hitler, May 1st, 1927

On one occassion during WW2 Hitler even declared" basicially National Socialism and Marxism are the same" - Page 220 "Property and Freedom",Richard Pipes,Harvard University

 

[JakeStarkey]

l'il eddy already lost this bet twice and ran away.

\

Simple, that history changed after millions of years when Jefferson discovered that freedom from liberal government was the missing element that had held humanity back for millions of years!!

Jefferson was one of our best Democratic Presidents

If you have evidence that his party was the Democratic Party , not the Republican Party, I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away again with your liberal tail between your legs.

 

[regent]

The beauty of history on these boards is that history can be what ever posters want it to be. If a poster wants Jefferson to be a conservative, bingo, Jefferson is a conservative,.

was there a human being on earth who was more in support of freedom from liberal government?? Why be so afraid to say??

Well Jefferson was indeed a liberal and had some fear of the types of governments that liberals had experienced to the Revolution. But it seems that Jefferson's fear of the government begin to change when he was the president, Jefferson used his presidency to buy Lousiana with borrowed money and most people would understand that doubling the size of the USA meant bigger government. It meant more states entering the union and,,,, well you can see that can't you?

 

[gipper]

Democracy with minority protection. You ignored that second part. No, the republic of our Founders was so impaired concerning human rights that it had to be amended. So it was in both politics and war. We are not going back.

Gipper, all of that is true.

However, democracy with an enforcement of minority rights, remains the best form of government.

This talk of communism or libertarianism in America would only bring even more suffering.

Democracy you say? I do not want democracy in its most pure form. That is mob rule.

I prefer a representative republic with many checks and balances...sort of like the one our Founders designed.

So, a democracy that protects minorities is NOT mob rule? I think not. The majority will still vote themselves whatever it is they want. Is that not mob rule?

A constitutional representative republic is far better than a democracy with minority protections.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are not a 14 year-old girl, so stop with the silly questions.

Democracy is not mob rule. Your statement by itself does not make it so.

You are entitled to your unsupported belief.

 

[gipper]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

You stated you want a democracy with minority rights protected. This is foolishness.

First, I do not want special rights for minorities or anyone. You may see society along the lines of race, gender, etc....I do not. All Americans should have the SAME rights no matter their race, gender, etc. In a properly constructed representative constitutional republic, as is the one I proclaim, all are protected and ALL have the SAME rights.

In your silly governmental structure, if the majority (including minorities) want something, they will get it because a democracy grants the wishes of the majority...see how foolish your thinking is? In a democracy, even one with minority protections, the majority rules as long as those special protections granted minorities is not infringed. Not a good way to run a government.

 

[JakeStarkey]

My thoughtful ncomments were consistent in correcting your online behavior.

Your statement above is inaccurate. We are a democratic constitutional republic in which its constitution protects minority rights.

You have offered nothing to contradict the above.

We are not going back to pre-1861, gipper.

 

[Moonglow]

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

You stated you want a democracy with minority rights protected. This is foolishness.

First, I do not want special rights for minorities or anyone. You may see society along the lines of race, gender, etc....I do not. All Americans should have the SAME rights no matter their race, gender, etc. In a properly constructed representative constitutional republic, as is the one I proclaim, all are protected and ALL have the SAME rights.

In your silly governmental structure, if the majority (including minorities) want something, they will get it because a democracy grants the wishes of the majority...see how foolish your thinking is? In a democracy, even one with minority protections, the majority rules as long as those special protections granted minorities is not infringed. Not a good way to run a government.

like the right to vote before minorities had special rights, or say a job, or say an education, or say the right to be where the majority dines, or not to be enslaved?

 

[Moonglow]

Hitler was no liberal, gheesh, rewriting history as you go?

how can you say Hitler Stalin and Mao were not liberals?? Do you know why the liberals spied for Stalin rather than Hitler??

Hitler was a National Socialist!! What more do you want? Barry had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, an open socialist.

Hitler Stalin and Mao FDR LBJ were the great 20th Century liberals who got their way. So far Barry is not getting his way but we know his record and we know the government is never big enough for him


“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” ~ Adolf Hitler, May 1st, 1927

On one occassion during WW2 Hitler even declared" basicially National Socialism and Marxism are the same" - Page 220 "Property and Freedom",Richard Pipes,Harvard University

Hitler had the church, and had a religion, he also had private business compared to a socialists nationalization of industry, bankers financed the war and the build up. How was he a socialist? And as far as Moa and Stalin, I never stated that they were never communist, which is not a socialists.

 

[gipper]

My thoughtful ncomments were consistent in correcting your online behavior.

Your statement above is inaccurate. We are a democratic constitutional republic in which its constitution protects minority rights.

You have offered nothing to contradict the above.

We are not going back to pre-1861, gipper.

I thought this was a debate. You have offered nothing to dispute my position regarding your silly belief in democracy with minority protections.

I have not advocated a return to pre-1861. You claiming I have is an absurd strawman tactic. And, you claim America is a democratic constitutional republic. I disagree, but what does your opinion of the American system of government have to do with our debating your belief that a democracy with minority protections is the best system of government?

You are for mob rule and I am for liberty for all. Right?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where is this a debate? I corrected the misuse of terms and definitions. My concept of democracy with minority protections dominates any suggestion of yours.

gipper, it is what is.

My thoughtful ncomments were consistent in correcting your online behavior.

Your statement above is inaccurate. We are a democratic constitutional republic in which its constitution protects minority rights.

You have offered nothing to contradict the above.

We are not going back to pre-1861, gipper.

I thought this was a debate. You have offered nothing to dispute my position regarding your silly belief in democracy with minority protections.

I have not advocated a return to pre-1861. You claiming I have is an absurd strawman tactic. And, you claim America is a democratic constitutional republic. I disagree, but what does your opinion of the American system of government have to do with our debating your belief that a democracy with minority protections is the best system of government?

You are for mob rule and I am for liberty for all. Right?

 

[regent]

Was Hitler that good a speaker and liar that he can still convince conservative Americans that he was a socialist? Can we blame the German people for falling for Hitler's words when some Americans are still using his words to prove a point? Is it possible that Hitler was a liar and used words to mislead?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Any American who believes Hitler was a socialist is either mentally feeble, woefully ignorant, malignantly motivated, or any or all three.

 

[gipper]

To those who foolishly think democracy effective, Ron Paul destroys you in his column today.

Please read and learn from your mistakes.

A Republic, Not a Democracy
By Ron Paul
Last week marked the conclusion of the grand taxpayer funded spectacles known as the national party conventions. It is perhaps very telling that while $18 million in tax dollars was granted to each party for these lavish ordeals, an additional $50 million each was needed for security in anticipation of the inevitable protests at each event. This amounts to a total of $136 million in taxpayer funds for strictly partisan activities – a drop in the bucket relative to our disastrous fiscal situation, but disgraceful nonetheless. Parties should fund their own parties, not the taxpayer.

At these conventions, leaders determined, or pretended to determine, who they wished to govern the nation for the next four years amidst inevitable, endless exaltations of democracy. Yet we are not a democracy. In fact, the founding fathers found the concept of democracy very dangerous.

Democracy is majority rule at the expense of the minority. Our system has certain democratic elements, but the founders never mentioned democracy in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence. In fact, our most important protections are decidedly undemocratic. For example, the First Amendment protects free speech. It doesn't – or shouldn't – matter if that speech is abhorrent to 51% or even 99% of the people. Speech is not subject to majority approval. Under our republican form of government, the individual, the smallest of minorities, is protected from the mob.

Sadly, the constitution and its protections are respected less and less as we have quietly allowed our constitutional republic to devolve into a militarist, corporatist social democracy. Laws are broken, quietly changed and ignored when inconvenient to those in power, while others in positions to check and balance do nothing. The protections the founders put in place are more and more just an illusion.

This is why increasing importance is placed on the beliefs and views of the president. The very narrow limitations on government power are clearly laid out in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Nowhere is there any reference to being able to force Americans to buy health insurance or face a tax/penalty, for example. Yet this power has been claimed by the executive and astonishingly affirmed by Congress and the Supreme Court. Because we are a constitutional republic, the mere popularity of a policy should not matter. If it is in clear violation of the limits of government and the people still want it, a Constitutional amendment is the only appropriate way to proceed. However, rather than going through this arduous process, the Constitution was in effect, ignored and the insurance mandate was allowed anyway.

This demonstrates how there is now a great deal of unhindered flexibility in the Oval Office to impose personal views and preferences on the country, so long as 51% of the people can be convinced to vote a certain way. The other 49% on the other hand have much to be angry about and protest under this system.

We should not tolerate the fact that we have become a nation ruled by men, their whims and the mood of the day, and not laws. It cannot be emphasized enough that we are a republic, not a democracy and, as such, we should insist that the framework of the Constitution be respected and boundaries set by law are not crossed by our leaders. These legal limitations on government assure that other men do not impose their will over the individual, rather, the individual is able to govern himself. When government is restrained, liberty thrives.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Democracy, with minority protections, is the best of all poor human governments.

Tis what tis.

 

[gipper]

Democracy, with minority protections, is the best of all poor human governments.

Tis what tis.

You have the ostrich effect. Too bad...for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Too bad . . . for you. Libertarianism is nothing more than flip side of communism, and will be as evil.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Any American who believes Hitler was a socialist is either mentally feeble, woefully ignorant, malignantly motivated, or any or all three.

actually, dear, Hitler was a National Socialist!!!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

Hitler was a National Socialist!! What more do you want? Barry had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, an open socialist.

Hitler Stalin Mao and to a lessor extent FDR LBJ were the great 20th Century liberals who got their way. So far Barry is not getting his way but we know his record and we know the government is never big enough for him.


“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” ~ Adolf Hitler, May 1st, 1927

On one occassion during WW2 Hitler even declared" basicially National Socialism and Marxism are the same" - Page 220 "Property and Freedom",Richard Pipes,Harvard University

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, Adolph, who used everybody, including Edward, never used the socialists in the party. Edward, you fucked up on Jefferson, you fucked up on conservatism, you accepted the ten thousand dollar bets and lost and welshed, and little one, you fucked up on this.

One, Hitler had the socialist leadership, which was homosexual, like you, murdered in the Night of Long Knives, almost two thousand dead. End fo the socialists in the party.

Two, Hitler killed and or interned socialists and communists, every one he could find.

Three, Hiter kissed capitalist ass, and the capitalists and corporatist supported him big time.

Four, Hitler nationalized NO industry in Germany.

Conclusions: (1) you are an idiot, (2) Hitler used the socialist and then killed them, and (3) you can go ahead and send your $10,000 to me via the Board management.

Any American who believes Hitler was a socialist is either mentally feeble, woefully ignorant, malignantly motivated, or any or all three.

actually, dear, Hitler was a National Socialist!!!!

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

Hitler was a National Socialist!! What more do you want? Barry had two communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, an open socialist.

Hitler Stalin Mao and to a lessor extent FDR LBJ were the great 20th Century liberals who got their way. So far Barry is not getting his way but we know his record and we know the government is never big enough for him.


“We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.” ~ Adolf Hitler, May 1st, 1927

On one occassion during WW2 Hitler even declared" basicially National Socialism and Marxism are the same" - Page 220 "Property and Freedom",Richard Pipes,Harvard University