You get that Hoover and Wilson were both Progressives, right?
Ending Individual Liberty
- Thread starter PoliticalChic
- Start date
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
I get that PoliticalChic was either lying or ignorant when she tried to attribute that SCOTUS decision to FDR.
- Thread starter
- #43
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 138,685
- 91,132
- 2,605
Are there any queers in the theater tonight?
Get them up against the wall!
There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me,
Get him up against the wall!
That one looks Jewish!
And that one's a coon!
Who let all of this riff-raff into the room?
There's one smoking a joint,
And another with spots!
If I had my way,
I'd have all of you shot!
Get them up against the wall!
There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me,
Get him up against the wall!
That one looks Jewish!
And that one's a coon!
Who let all of this riff-raff into the room?
There's one smoking a joint,
And another with spots!
If I had my way,
I'd have all of you shot!
francoHFW
Diamond Member
You get that Harding and Coolidge were conservatives and caused or allowed the "deregulation" that caused the great world depression, right?
Contumacious
Radical Freedom
ONE LOW LIFE SCUMBAG BY THE NAME FRANKLIN DEL-ANUS ROOSEVELT.
AFTER FDR ATTEMPTED TO ABOLISH SCOTUS THE JUSTICES THEREAFTER SUCCUMBED TO HIS EVERY WISH - ARTICLE III JUDICIAL REVIEW ENDED.
.
PaintMyHouse
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #47
Future Trump rally...
- Thread starter
- #48
Total nonsense.
1. "BERNANKE: FEDERAL RESERVE CAUSED GREAT DEPRESSION
In “A Monetary History of the United States,” Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman along with coauthor Anna J. Schwartz lay the mega-catastrophe of the Great Depression squarely at the feet of the Federal Reserve."
Read more at Bernanke: Federal Reserve caused Great Depression
a. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.” http://www.aei.org/article/26390
2. This is what Harding and Coolidge caused:
"The Roaring Twenties were the period of sustained economic prosperity with a distinctive cultural edge in New York, Montreal, Chicago, Detroit, Paris, Berlin, London, Los Angeles, and many other major cities during the 1920s in the United States, Canada and Europe. The French called it the "années folles" ("Crazy Years"),[1] emphasizing the era's social, artistic and cultural dynamism. Normalcy returned to politics in the wake of hyper-emotional patriotism after World War I, jazz music blossomed, the flapper redefined modern womanhood and Art Deco peaked. Economically the era saw the large-scale use of automobiles, telephones, motion pictures, electricity, unprecedented industrial growth, accelerated consumer demand and aspirations, plus significant changes in lifestyle and culture. The media focused on celebrities, especially sports heroes and movie stars, as cities rooted for their home teams and filled the new palatial cinemas and gigantic sports stadiums. In most major countries women won the right to vote."
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have yet to find any post of yours either accurate or informed.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #49
Hyperbolic, Frank. We did not sell the Children of Frank into slavery.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #50
Does not matter, hunny bunny. Name the five SCOTUS judges who voted that way and who appointed them.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #51
Coolidge and Harding eachw as an economic conservative, who were unable to deal with world wide economic events because of unwillingness to see the whole picture and the answer to its problems.
What difference would it make as to who the President was. The President nor the federal government was not part of the case. It was a case involving a judgement made by the New Your Milk Control Board which was established as a regulatory agency of the State of New York by the New York legislature. The only federal involvement was that it ended up being heard by the conservative SCOTUS who ruled New York's actions to be constitutional.
ThoughtCrimes
Old Navy Vet
Being not at all a fan of FDR, I am, however, in favor of truth telling! FDR did not try to abolish SCOTUS as you falsely claim. He did try to "STACK THE COURTS" with an attempt [FAILED] at legislation to add six justices to SCOTUS and 44 judges to the appellate courts as I recall the numbers in the bill. That's not quite like abolishing the Supreme Court!
BTW, the title of the failed legislation to stack the Courts fails me at the moment, but I'm sure it can be easily found!
CrusaderFrank
Diamond Member
- May 20, 2009
- 160,267
- 86,692
- 2,645
No, not true AT ALL. Off in the trillion column just like Krugman. The fed chocked the US economy nearly to death
- Thread starter
- #55
5. Individual liberty is the fulfillment of the Founder's promise to build a nation with the 'rules,' the Constitution, slanted toward the individual and with restrictions on what government could do.
Progressive Woodrow Wilson made no secret of his desire to treat the Constitution thus: " stripped off and thrown aside like a garment,..."
Franklin Roosevelt actually did so.
To put that another way, acceptance of Progressive governance makes Democrat voters the "Duh, you always know what's best, boss" voters.
But there is a sense that New Deal Progressives knew there was limit to what Americans would put up with....
...after all, they used the amendment process from article five to institute the income tax....
... and the amendment process gave women the right to vote....and for prohibition.
So....why no amendments to allow government setting up the insurance plan known as Social Security?
Or changing the Contract Clauseappears in the United States Constitution, Article I, section 10, clause 1....?
....or the thousand and one other invasions of government into private lives and the private economy?
"...1937-1942 took the nation on a different route, lifting the requirement that new government powers needed to be constitutionally ratified, and, instead, letting
Congress unilaterally authorize whatever new powers it wanted."
Charles Murray, Op. Cit., p.27.
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington,Paris, May 27, 1788
And so it was.
Why is it so difficult for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats to admit that they accept loss of individual liberty, and that their aim is "an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’" [Goldberg]
After all....anyone with a brain can see it.
Progressive Woodrow Wilson made no secret of his desire to treat the Constitution thus: " stripped off and thrown aside like a garment,..."
Franklin Roosevelt actually did so.
To put that another way, acceptance of Progressive governance makes Democrat voters the "Duh, you always know what's best, boss" voters.
But there is a sense that New Deal Progressives knew there was limit to what Americans would put up with....
...after all, they used the amendment process from article five to institute the income tax....
... and the amendment process gave women the right to vote....and for prohibition.
So....why no amendments to allow government setting up the insurance plan known as Social Security?
Or changing the Contract Clauseappears in the United States Constitution, Article I, section 10, clause 1....?
....or the thousand and one other invasions of government into private lives and the private economy?
"...1937-1942 took the nation on a different route, lifting the requirement that new government powers needed to be constitutionally ratified, and, instead, letting
Congress unilaterally authorize whatever new powers it wanted."
Charles Murray, Op. Cit., p.27.
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington,Paris, May 27, 1788
And so it was.
Why is it so difficult for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats to admit that they accept loss of individual liberty, and that their aim is "an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’" [Goldberg]
After all....anyone with a brain can see it.
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #56
The economic conservatives can't offer any solid evidence for their nonsensical statements.
- Thread starter
- #57
6. Why is it so difficult for Liberals/Progressives/Democrats to admit that they accept...plan on.....said loss of our individual liberty?
The answer is that every totalitarian iteration, communism, socialism, fascism, Progressivism, Liberalism ...all are based on substitution of the material for the traditional values .
"Historical materialism is a methodological approach to the study of human societies and their development over time first articulated by Karl Marx(1818–1883) as the materialist conception of history.." Historical materialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The most direct example of came when Roosevelt promised to end the deprivations of the Depression in exchange for the power to eradicate the restrictions imposed by the Constitution on government.
7. "There is the passage from Genesis 25:29-34, which accurately describes the cultural shifts that took place during the Great Depression. Read this, and replace "Jacob" with "Uncle Sam," "Esau," with "the People," and "birthright," with "freedom."
29 Once when Jacob was cooking some stew,Esau came in from the open country,famished.30 He said to Jacob, “Quick, let me have some of that red stew!I’m famished!”
31 Jacob replied, “First sell me your birthright.”
32 “Look, I am about to die,” Esau said. “What good is the birthright to me?”
33 But Jacob said, “Swearto me first.” So he swore an oath to him, selling his birthrightto Jacob.
34 Then Jacob gave Esau some bread and some lentil stew.He ate and drank, and then got up and left.
So Esau despised his birthright.
So, as a result, corrosive indolence warped a once healthy work ethic, and a new cultural ideal took hold in society. Once the needy got a taste of government handouts, the genie was out of the bottle.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness became the expectation of government obligation to provide happiness to everyone. Dependence begat a lower echelon of faithful voter. Politicians advanced the idea that the alleviation of poverty was the sole responsibility of politicians. What Tocqueville had predicted came to pass."
Star Parker,"Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It."
And so it came about.....
The answer is that every totalitarian iteration, communism, socialism, fascism, Progressivism, Liberalism ...all are based on substitution of the material for the traditional values .
"Historical materialism is a methodological approach to the study of human societies and their development over time first articulated by Karl Marx(1818–1883) as the materialist conception of history.." Historical materialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The most direct example of came when Roosevelt promised to end the deprivations of the Depression in exchange for the power to eradicate the restrictions imposed by the Constitution on government.
7. "There is the passage from Genesis 25:29-34, which accurately describes the cultural shifts that took place during the Great Depression. Read this, and replace "Jacob" with "Uncle Sam," "Esau," with "the People," and "birthright," with "freedom."
29 Once when Jacob was cooking some stew,Esau came in from the open country,famished.30 He said to Jacob, “Quick, let me have some of that red stew!I’m famished!”
31 Jacob replied, “First sell me your birthright.”
32 “Look, I am about to die,” Esau said. “What good is the birthright to me?”
33 But Jacob said, “Swearto me first.” So he swore an oath to him, selling his birthrightto Jacob.
34 Then Jacob gave Esau some bread and some lentil stew.He ate and drank, and then got up and left.
So Esau despised his birthright.
So, as a result, corrosive indolence warped a once healthy work ethic, and a new cultural ideal took hold in society. Once the needy got a taste of government handouts, the genie was out of the bottle.
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness became the expectation of government obligation to provide happiness to everyone. Dependence begat a lower echelon of faithful voter. Politicians advanced the idea that the alleviation of poverty was the sole responsibility of politicians. What Tocqueville had predicted came to pass."
Star Parker,"Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It."
And so it came about.....
JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,540
- 2,165
- Banned
- #58
PaintMyHouse
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #59
Liberty is not anarchy. Moderation, in all things.
- Thread starter
- #60
Soooo......does this mean you've refined your earlier position, and when it comes to those who think and say things you don't agree with.....
...you're no longer threatening to 'bury' them.....just toss a moderate amount of sand at 'em?
Now you're just a 'moderate' fascist?
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Özdemir has won in Ba.Wü, not because he is green, but despite he is green
- Started by Zebra
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
