Ben Franklin's misunderstood quote.

[Votto]

Can’t fix stupid

Then you can't be fixed.

Sorry

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The common misconception is it has to do with sacrificing some freedoms for being protected from harm.

SIEGEL: What's the exact quotation?

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.


Put in contemporary context, the misconception could be interpreted to mean people who would give their government the right to deny habeas corpus in order to have accused (BUT NOT CONVICTED) men illegally deported to a foreign gulag deserve neither the right to habeas or temporary safety.

Put in contemporary context, the misconception could be interpreted to mean people who would give their government the right to deny habeas corpus in order to have accused (BUT NOT CONVICTED) men illegally deported to a foreign gulag deserve neither the right to habeas or temporary safety.

Wow!
Deep.
Do you miss all the illegal aliens Trump has deported?
Are you sad?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Make a compelling argument on the subject of your choosing. Not one based on lies. Let's see who has an open mind.

how about this one....your threads dont have the impact you think they do...not one righty here can give a flying fuck about them...your serve....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Can’t fix stupid

if you cant fix it....why the daily threads trying to....so that makes berg look pretty stupid too...

 

[22lcidw]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The common misconception is it has to do with sacrificing some freedoms for being protected from harm.

SIEGEL: What's the exact quotation?

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.


Put in contemporary context, the misconception could be interpreted to mean people who would give their government the right to deny habeas corpus in order to have accused (BUT NOT CONVICTED) men illegally deported to a foreign gulag deserve neither the right to habeas or temporary safety.

You surmise this and yet every word Trump says is venom to you. Trump is in a groove at this point. And he will be given some time to get everything done.

 

[Billiejeens]

so berg how many righties minds have your threads changed?.....

It's a negative number, for sure.
Ole Bergy was the single best advocate for the re-election of President Trump on the board.

 

[Billiejeens]

It's funny (sad) how MAGA has all of a sudden decided to trust the government no matter what it does.

Well, that is false
You know that it's false.

 

[Billiejeens]

Make a compelling argument on the subject of your choosing. Not one based on lies. Let's see who has an open mind.

Everything that Bergy disagrees with, he labels a lie - that's the point.

 

[struth]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The common misconception is it has to do with sacrificing some freedoms for being protected from harm.

SIEGEL: What's the exact quotation?

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.


Put in contemporary context, the misconception could be interpreted to mean people who would give their government the right to deny habeas corpus in order to have accused (BUT NOT CONVICTED) men illegally deported to a foreign gulag deserve neither the right to habeas or temporary safety.

illegals detained by the Govt can file a HC petition. Doesn't mean it has to be heard before they are released. In fact it makes the petetion moot once they are out of US custody.

 

[Independent thinker]

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The common misconception is it has to do with sacrificing some freedoms for being protected from harm.

SIEGEL: What's the exact quotation?

WITTES: The exact quotation, which is from a letter that Franklin is believed to have written on behalf of the Pennsylvania General Assembly, reads, those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

SIEGEL: And what was the context of this remark?

WITTES: He was writing about a tax dispute between the Pennsylvania General Assembly and the family of the Penns, the proprietary family of the Pennsylvania colony who ruled it from afar. And the legislature was trying to tax the Penn family lands to pay for frontier defense during the French and Indian War. And the Penn family kept instructing the governor to veto. Franklin felt that this was a great affront to the ability of the legislature to govern. And so he actually meant purchase a little temporary safety very literally. The Penn family was trying to give a lump sum of money in exchange for the General Assembly's acknowledging that it did not have the authority to tax it.


Put in contemporary context, the misconception could be interpreted to mean people who would give their government the right to deny habeas corpus in order to have accused (BUT NOT CONVICTED) men illegally deported to a foreign gulag deserve neither the right to habeas or temporary safety.

No doubt Franklin would have had a lot to say about democrats abusing their power and weaponizing the government in order to go after a political opponent.

A CNN poll after the election showed that out of the people whose number one reason for voting was to "save democracy", 58% of those people voted for Trump.

 

[MarcATL]

how about this one....your threads dont have the impact you think they do...not one righty here can give a flying fuck about them...your serve....

This is coming straight from the mouth of USMB's biggest Republican OP, so it's gospel!

 

[pknopp]

Well, that is false
You know that it's false.

Sadly I do not.

 

[Billiejeens]

Sadly I do not.

That is sad.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

It's funny (sad) how MAGA has all of a sudden decided to trust the government no matter what it does.

Well yeah, there are those that will always love big govt. Didn't libs run into the loving arms of orange mans operation warp speed? Loving them some govt, screeching at orange man but clamoring all over themselves to take the snake juice? Lol.

 

[Zincwarrior]

So it wasn't "chicka chicka bow wow?"

 

[pknopp]

Well yeah, there are those that will always love big govt. Didn't libs run into the loving arms of orange mans operation warp speed? Loving them some govt, screeching at orange man but clamoring all over themselves to take the snake juice? Lol.

I didnt.

 

[martybegan]

It's funny (sad) how MAGA has all of a sudden decided to trust the government no matter what it does.

We don't have to "Trust" anything. Everything being done by Trump is out in the open.

He gets until November 2026 to be proven right or wrong on his path.

 

[pknopp]

We don't have to "Trust" anything. Everything being done by Trump is out in the open.

He gets until November 2026 to be proven right or wrong on his path.

9-0

 

[martybegan]

9-0

on a TRO, nothing on the merits at all yet. and even then the SC just punted.

 

[pknopp]

on a TRO, nothing on the merits at all yet. and even then the SC just punted.

7-2. He's been losing nearly every court case.