If you could go back in time and stop one historical event, what would it be?

[jtpr312]

You're a pastor? Sure thing there Nancy, unless you're calling your devil worshiping pastoring. I see that being a Marine didn't help you either, too bad. Dishonorable discharge?
As for bloviating you have that down pat as your cherry picking of historical fact and responses to me shows.
NYC? Even worse......
Not neo or KKK..... Okay, so National Alliance it is. Good to know.
I guess one could describe pimping and drug dealing as a small business.

Well sweetness, the fact that I called myself a former Marine and not an ex-Marine it would be obvious to anyone who had any knowledge on the subject that I was honorably discharged, as an NCO as a matter of fact. Now you claim I cherry pick historical fact. Well sweetness, I stated facts, the onus is now on you to disprove the facts I gave or to give facts that would show mine to be wrong, you cannot do this of course or you already would have, so once again I say you pull crap from your rear end. Not even sure what the National Alliance was had to look it up, but I find it funny that YOU seem to be up on all the psycho groups out there right down to having pics on your computer of your favorites in drag. Now we get to pimping and dope dealing, lol. You're on dangerous ground here punk. Slander and libel come to mind. Might be a good idea to not let your eagle mouth write checks your little sparrow ass can't cash.

Yo, numb nuts, it's a message board, you know opinions. Good luck with a law suit, even if some lawyer is dumb enough or desperate enough to take it any judge would toss it out when it is submitted.
I've met posers who claim to be "former Marines", notice I capitalized Marines, I did that for a reason, back in the 70s my Marines called me Doc. and we didn't tolerate racist pukes.
You obviously don't know how debate works, I don't have to prove your "facts", you do.
As for being up on nut job groups, already told you I was in Law Enforcement.
But everything you post shows that our wittle wasist is but hurt, but then you should be used to that.
MD does allow same sex marriage so I guess calling yourself a family man is correct.

I'll give you one thing, you are entertaining........

Well if you really were a Corpsman I thank you for that. At least it would show you were not a total waste of air all your life. As for proving my facts, I did, now the onus is on you to disprove them or to provide facts to support your position, are YOU familiar with how a debate works? As for your contention that you were "in" Law Enforcement and therefore up on nut job groups, I find that quite laughable. See I am from a family of Police Officers. I have family, my dad and uncles, and family member from my wife's side, that are active or retired from Departments in many different jurisdictions, from the NYPD, to The Capitol Police, to the Petersburg Va. PD, to Md.s PG County PD and have been surrounded by them all my life, and never have I heard any discussions from them about these types of groups you have so much knowledge on. See they don't really interact with those types, they interact with criminals, no need nor time to study up on these types of nut job groups. Your contention that you're "in" Law Enforcement and then go on to show such a intense knowledge of these groups makes me think you might have been in Corrections not Law Enforcement. Is that what it is sweetness? You a jail/prison guard at one time? Lol, that's not Law Enforcement dude, that's being a guard. I can understand you wanting people to think you were a cop and not just a guard though. What's the matter dude? Couldn't pass the tests to become a real Police Officer?

 

[jtpr312]

I would love to be a fly on the wall in that Sunday School class. I wonder. . . .Westboro Baptist?. . . .naw, it couldn't be.

Nope, regular ole Southern Baptist church. I'd be more than happy to educate you on any topic involving Christianity, the Lord, or the history of the Christian faith one on one no need to be a fly on the wall.

I'm sure you could. And though you are no different than a lot of our USMBers and probably an okay guy, the way you express yourself to others isn't exactly what I look for in a church. I'll stick to my own version of Christianity, but thanks for the invitation. Southern Baptists in southern Maryland sure are different than the Southern Baptists around here.

Well I don't know where "around here" is, but I've preached Revivals, or as a guest speaker in Southern Baptist Churches from Smyrna TN to Newark and Jersey City NJ and most states in-between.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Id have the Gnostic Christians come out the winners after the Fall of Rome

 

[Toro]

I'd have the Minnesota Vikings win the last 45 Super Bowls.

 

[Ringel05]

Well sweetness, the fact that I called myself a former Marine and not an ex-Marine it would be obvious to anyone who had any knowledge on the subject that I was honorably discharged, as an NCO as a matter of fact. Now you claim I cherry pick historical fact. Well sweetness, I stated facts, the onus is now on you to disprove the facts I gave or to give facts that would show mine to be wrong, you cannot do this of course or you already would have, so once again I say you pull crap from your rear end. Not even sure what the National Alliance was had to look it up, but I find it funny that YOU seem to be up on all the psycho groups out there right down to having pics on your computer of your favorites in drag. Now we get to pimping and dope dealing, lol. You're on dangerous ground here punk. Slander and libel come to mind. Might be a good idea to not let your eagle mouth write checks your little sparrow ass can't cash.

Yo, numb nuts, it's a message board, you know opinions. Good luck with a law suit, even if some lawyer is dumb enough or desperate enough to take it any judge would toss it out when it is submitted.
I've met posers who claim to be "former Marines", notice I capitalized Marines, I did that for a reason, back in the 70s my Marines called me Doc. and we didn't tolerate racist pukes.
You obviously don't know how debate works, I don't have to prove your "facts", you do.
As for being up on nut job groups, already told you I was in Law Enforcement.
But everything you post shows that our wittle wasist is but hurt, but then you should be used to that.
MD does allow same sex marriage so I guess calling yourself a family man is correct.

I'll give you one thing, you are entertaining........

Well if you really were a Corpsman I thank you for that. At least it would show you were not a total waste of air all your life. As for proving my facts, I did, now the onus is on you to disprove them or to provide facts to support your position, are YOU familiar with how a debate works? As for your contention that you were "in" Law Enforcement and therefore up on nut job groups, I find that quite laughable. See I am from a family of Police Officers. I have family, my dad and uncles, and family member from my wife's side, that are active or retired from Departments in many different jurisdictions, from the NYPD, to The Capitol Police, to the Petersburg Va. PD, to Md.s PG County PD and have been surrounded by them all my life, and never have I heard any discussions from them about these types of groups you have so much knowledge on. See they don't really interact with those types, they interact with criminals, no need nor time to study up on these types of nut job groups. Your contention that you're "in" Law Enforcement and then go on to show such a intense knowledge of these groups makes me think you might have been in Corrections not Law Enforcement. Is that what it is sweetness? You a jail/prison guard at one time? Lol, that's not Law Enforcement dude, that's being a guard. I can understand you wanting people to think you were a cop and not just a guard though. What's the matter dude? Couldn't pass the tests to become a real Police Officer?

Uuummmmm, Federal Law Enforcement. Ask the Capital PD one, he should know about these groups, if he's not just a beat cop. But keep trying to justify your impression of me, it's rather funny to watch. And no, ya didn't prove your facts, you simply threw then out in hopes they'd stick with some gullible, angry fool who's looking to blame someone else for his problems.

 

[jon_berzerk]

travel back to 1872

prevent the birth of carl magee

for obvious reasons

 

[freedombecki]

If I could go back in time with an outline of today's problems, I'd go back to about 1910 and explain to the States that if they passed the 17th Amendment rather than remedy the criminality that taking advantage of it required, I'd plead with them not to crater to doing it with all my heart and soul's passion, as it has changed America from being a republic to being a defacto democracy without the majority of Senators being decent, hard-nosed people to stop stupidity in its tracks, keeping America on the good side of life.

Passing it undermined the founder's balance to keeping unity. Its passage was done because it was deemed the easy way out of depraved human behaviors by a minority of Senators. The right thing to have done would have been to punish the abusers in some way that would deprive them of holding any public office for life. That's why we have people in Congress who have been convicted of high crimes while in office getting re-elected based on their criminality and ease of control by negative forces with a lot of money to re-elect an incorrigible.

Without decent men and/or women of sterling moral character representing their state, the nation has suffered to become what it is now--a governing body of extremists trying to beat back other extremists, with a minority of nice guys doing the harder and harder job of managing 325,000,000 Americans in a moral manner.

The only way that may happen is if rigidly honorable people win militarily against very deleterious entities cramming their lies down America's craw.

Yea, we really don't want We, the People to have much say in who our representatives are. It is better left to government pols, party bosses and bureaucrats.

I love how easy it is to exposes how much you right wing authoritarians hate We, the people and are always trying to create some form of an aristocracy with the least amount of people having a say. It IS the very core of conservatism.

Q: What is conservatism?
A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.

Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.

We've always had conservatives and liberals in American Bgfrn. The only thing incompatible with conservatives is Marxism. And it is poison to the republic and its advocates should be taught a lesson not to mess with free people.

 

[numan]

'
One can certainly tell the people who were brainwashed in the 50s and 60s, and whose brains have been petrified ever since then.

They have the delusion that "Marxism" is still an important factor in the modern world.

.

 

[S.J.]

'
One can certainly tell the people who were brainwashed in the 50s and 60s, and whose brains have been petrified ever since then.

They have the delusion that "Marxism" is still an important factor in the modern world.

.

Seems to be an important factor to our president, who has been forcing it on us for 5 years now.

 

[Toro]

I'd go back in time and film Obama being born in Kenya, and stop his parents from planting false birth notices in the Honolulu newspaper.

 

[Bfgrn]

If I could go back in time with an outline of today's problems, I'd go back to about 1910 and explain to the States that if they passed the 17th Amendment rather than remedy the criminality that taking advantage of it required, I'd plead with them not to crater to doing it with all my heart and soul's passion, as it has changed America from being a republic to being a defacto democracy without the majority of Senators being decent, hard-nosed people to stop stupidity in its tracks, keeping America on the good side of life.

Passing it undermined the founder's balance to keeping unity. Its passage was done because it was deemed the easy way out of depraved human behaviors by a minority of Senators. The right thing to have done would have been to punish the abusers in some way that would deprive them of holding any public office for life. That's why we have people in Congress who have been convicted of high crimes while in office getting re-elected based on their criminality and ease of control by negative forces with a lot of money to re-elect an incorrigible.

Without decent men and/or women of sterling moral character representing their state, the nation has suffered to become what it is now--a governing body of extremists trying to beat back other extremists, with a minority of nice guys doing the harder and harder job of managing 325,000,000 Americans in a moral manner.

The only way that may happen is if rigidly honorable people win militarily against very deleterious entities cramming their lies down America's craw.

Yea, we really don't want We, the People to have much say in who our representatives are. It is better left to government pols, party bosses and bureaucrats.

I love how easy it is to exposes how much you right wing authoritarians hate We, the people and are always trying to create some form of an aristocracy with the least amount of people having a say. It IS the very core of conservatism.

Q: What is conservatism?
A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.

Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.

We've always had conservatives and liberals in American Bgfrn. The only thing incompatible with conservatives is Marxism. And it is poison to the republic and its advocates should be taught a lesson not to mess with free people.

Yea, and the most liberal men of their day created this nation, and conservatives in 1776 were called redcoats, lobsterbacks, tories and new Canadians.

I've been a liberal for over 6 decades, and I have yet to read ONE word of Marx. You right wing turds are so far to the right you have lost any decency or humanism. You are the modern day Pharisees.

 

[jtpr312]

Yo, numb nuts, it's a message board, you know opinions. Good luck with a law suit, even if some lawyer is dumb enough or desperate enough to take it any judge would toss it out when it is submitted.
I've met posers who claim to be "former Marines", notice I capitalized Marines, I did that for a reason, back in the 70s my Marines called me Doc. and we didn't tolerate racist pukes.
You obviously don't know how debate works, I don't have to prove your "facts", you do.
As for being up on nut job groups, already told you I was in Law Enforcement.
But everything you post shows that our wittle wasist is but hurt, but then you should be used to that.
MD does allow same sex marriage so I guess calling yourself a family man is correct.

I'll give you one thing, you are entertaining........

Well if you really were a Corpsman I thank you for that. At least it would show you were not a total waste of air all your life. As for proving my facts, I did, now the onus is on you to disprove them or to provide facts to support your position, are YOU familiar with how a debate works? As for your contention that you were "in" Law Enforcement and therefore up on nut job groups, I find that quite laughable. See I am from a family of Police Officers. I have family, my dad and uncles, and family member from my wife's side, that are active or retired from Departments in many different jurisdictions, from the NYPD, to The Capitol Police, to the Petersburg Va. PD, to Md.s PG County PD and have been surrounded by them all my life, and never have I heard any discussions from them about these types of groups you have so much knowledge on. See they don't really interact with those types, they interact with criminals, no need nor time to study up on these types of nut job groups. Your contention that you're "in" Law Enforcement and then go on to show such a intense knowledge of these groups makes me think you might have been in Corrections not Law Enforcement. Is that what it is sweetness? You a jail/prison guard at one time? Lol, that's not Law Enforcement dude, that's being a guard. I can understand you wanting people to think you were a cop and not just a guard though. What's the matter dude? Couldn't pass the tests to become a real Police Officer?

Uuummmmm, Federal Law Enforcement. Ask the Capital PD one, he should know about these groups, if he's not just a beat cop. But keep trying to justify your impression of me, it's rather funny to watch. And no, ya didn't prove your facts, you simply threw then out in hopes they'd stick with some gullible, angry fool who's looking to blame someone else for his problems.

Done dude. You have failed to use facts to support your position and you have failed to provide any sources to disprove my facts.

 

[Ringel05]

Well if you really were a Corpsman I thank you for that. At least it would show you were not a total waste of air all your life. As for proving my facts, I did, now the onus is on you to disprove them or to provide facts to support your position, are YOU familiar with how a debate works? As for your contention that you were "in" Law Enforcement and therefore up on nut job groups, I find that quite laughable. See I am from a family of Police Officers. I have family, my dad and uncles, and family member from my wife's side, that are active or retired from Departments in many different jurisdictions, from the NYPD, to The Capitol Police, to the Petersburg Va. PD, to Md.s PG County PD and have been surrounded by them all my life, and never have I heard any discussions from them about these types of groups you have so much knowledge on. See they don't really interact with those types, they interact with criminals, no need nor time to study up on these types of nut job groups. Your contention that you're "in" Law Enforcement and then go on to show such a intense knowledge of these groups makes me think you might have been in Corrections not Law Enforcement. Is that what it is sweetness? You a jail/prison guard at one time? Lol, that's not Law Enforcement dude, that's being a guard. I can understand you wanting people to think you were a cop and not just a guard though. What's the matter dude? Couldn't pass the tests to become a real Police Officer?

Uuummmmm, Federal Law Enforcement. Ask the Capital PD one, he should know about these groups, if he's not just a beat cop. But keep trying to justify your impression of me, it's rather funny to watch. And no, ya didn't prove your facts, you simply threw then out in hopes they'd stick with some gullible, angry fool who's looking to blame someone else for his problems.

Done dude. You have failed to use facts to support your position and you have failed to provide any sources to disprove my facts.

I don't argue with fools, looker-ons can't tell the difference so there is no need to refute that which has already been dis-proven by legitimate science. I will however continue to **** with ignorant racist scumbags at my heart's content. Aren't you lucky.

 

[freedombecki]

Yea, we really don't want We, the People to have much say in who our representatives are. It is better left to government pols, party bosses and bureaucrats.

I love how easy it is to exposes how much you right wing authoritarians hate We, the people and are always trying to create some form of an aristocracy with the least amount of people having a say. It IS the very core of conservatism.

Q: What is conservatism?
A: Conservatism is the domination of society by an aristocracy.

Q: What is wrong with conservatism?
A: Conservatism is incompatible with democracy, prosperity, and civilization in general. It is a destructive system of inequality and prejudice that is founded on deception and has no place in the modern world.

We've always had conservatives and liberals in American Bgfrn. The only thing incompatible with conservatives is Marxism. And it is poison to the republic and its advocates should be taught a lesson not to mess with free people.

Yea, and the most liberal men of their day created this nation, and conservatives in 1776 were called redcoats, lobsterbacks, tories and new Canadians.

I've been a liberal for over 6 decades, and I have yet to read ONE word of Marx. You right wing turds are so far to the right you have lost any decency or humanism. You are the modern day Pharisees.

You're a liberal and don't know what a conservative hates? Conservatives hated the big government snub of King George of England, and they hated the tax on tea in Boston and decided to start the Tea Party that angered Georgie Porgie puddin' and pie even more. It takes a conservative to notice the national deficit, and the truth was, the taxes charged on tea didn't add up to the failure of George to listen to the people on this continent with sympathy or anything else his subjects the Colonists had to say, when we were bringing him far more wealth than some of his friends who were well-represented in his court. King George pissed off the conservative colonists so badly over failure to hear them in his courts so badly, they collaborated to dismiss his bloodsucking tax situation permanently.

Americans really were more about a government that would help them survive on this continent than they were about constant subservience required to satisfy George's entitlements for his insider friends he was able to perpetuate by snubbing taxpayers in the New World of which he hadn't the vaguest idea.

 

[Foxfyre]

We've always had conservatives and liberals in American Bgfrn. The only thing incompatible with conservatives is Marxism. And it is poison to the republic and its advocates should be taught a lesson not to mess with free people.

Yea, and the most liberal men of their day created this nation, and conservatives in 1776 were called redcoats, lobsterbacks, tories and new Canadians.

I've been a liberal for over 6 decades, and I have yet to read ONE word of Marx. You right wing turds are so far to the right you have lost any decency or humanism. You are the modern day Pharisees.

You're a liberal and don't know what a conservative hates? Conservatives hated the big government snub of King George of England, and they hated the tax on tea in Boston and decided to start the Tea Party that angered Georgie Porgie puddin' and pie even more. It takes a conservative to notice the national deficit, and the truth was, the taxes charged on tea didn't add up to the failure of George to listen to the people on this continent with sympathy or anything else his subjects the Colonists had to say, when we were bringing him far more wealth than some of his friends who were well-represented in his court. King George pissed off the conservative colonists so badly over failure to hear them in his courts so badly, they collaborated to dismiss his bloodsucking tax situation permanently.

Americans really were more about a government that would help them survive on this continent than they were about constant subservience required to satisfy George's entitlements for his insider friends he was able to perpetuate by snubbing taxpayers in the New World of which he hadn't the vaguest idea.

Bfgn is correct that the men who forged the Constitution were the liberals, i.e. anti big government, of their day. He does not, however, seem to understand that their beliefs were the antithesis of what he describes as his own, because over the more than 200 years since, the definitions have changed. The modern American conservatives of today--the Tea Partiers, the 9/12ers, the tax reformers, etc.--share the basic principles and convictions of the Founders. Knowing this, that is why most historians now use the term 'classical liberal' or 'libertarian' (little "L") to designate them. Modern American liberals share almost nothing of the beliefs of the Founders.

The American people forged a great nation under the classical liberal principles of the Founders, and every American president and Congress respected those principles written into the Constitution.

Until Teddy Roosevelt. He stood the Constitution on its head and started the snowball rolling to dismantle a government by people and reinstante authoritarian government. The very thing the Constitution was intended to free us from.

That snowball has been gaining mass and speed ever since until now it steamrollers over everything. It has overwhelmed our liberties, swallowed our economy, and controls almost every aspect of our lives.

And THAT is why that would be the one thing I would change from history if I had the chance. Teddy Roosevelt would not have been allowed to change the intent of the Constitution.

 

[Bfgrn]

We've always had conservatives and liberals in American Bgfrn. The only thing incompatible with conservatives is Marxism. And it is poison to the republic and its advocates should be taught a lesson not to mess with free people.

Yea, and the most liberal men of their day created this nation, and conservatives in 1776 were called redcoats, lobsterbacks, tories and new Canadians.

I've been a liberal for over 6 decades, and I have yet to read ONE word of Marx. You right wing turds are so far to the right you have lost any decency or humanism. You are the modern day Pharisees.

You're a liberal and don't know what a conservative hates? Conservatives hated the big government snub of King George of England, and they hated the tax on tea in Boston and decided to start the Tea Party that angered Georgie Porgie puddin' and pie even more. It takes a conservative to notice the national deficit, and the truth was, the taxes charged on tea didn't add up to the failure of George to listen to the people on this continent with sympathy or anything else his subjects the Colonists had to say, when we were bringing him far more wealth than some of his friends who were well-represented in his court. King George pissed off the conservative colonists so badly over failure to hear them in his courts so badly, they collaborated to dismiss his bloodsucking tax situation permanently.

Americans really were more about a government that would help them survive on this continent than they were about constant subservience required to satisfy George's entitlements for his insider friends he was able to perpetuate by snubbing taxpayers in the New World of which he hadn't the vaguest idea.

I see you have the 'taxation without representation' fairy tale down pat. In my over 6 decades I have learned to decipher truth from myth. It is something conservatives are unable to do...parrots don't think, they mimic.

The real Boston Tea Party was a protest against huge corporate tax cuts for the British East India Company, the largest trans-national corporation then in existence. This corporate tax cut threatened to decimate small Colonial businesses by helping the British East India Company pull a Wal-Mart against small entrepreneurial tea shops, and individuals began a revolt that kicked-off a series of events that ended in the creation of The United States of America.

"It takes a conservative to notice the national deficit"...REALLY??? Why didn't any of you 'conservatives' notice the national deficit until Obama was sworn in?

As the liberal era that began with the New Deal came to an end with the splintering of the Democratic Party brought about by assassination of Presidents and future Presidents, the Vietnam War fiasco and conservative money creating 'think tanks', JFK and LBJ, the last two Presidents of that era faced the awful specter how to deal with revenue SURPLUSES. Public debt was not even part of our lexicon...

Enter Reagan, the welfare queen. Put everything on the Beijing credit card and dump the bill on our children, grandchildren and their children and grandchildren.

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt.


"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

"Grover Norquist has no plan to pay this debt down. His plan says you continue to add to the debt..."
Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)

“Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not.” Reagan was an ideological inflection point, ending a 50-year liberal ascendancy and beginning a 30-year conservative ascendancy.
Charles Krauthammer

 

[Darkwind]

'
One can certainly tell the people who were brainwashed in the 50s and 60s, and whose brains have been petrified ever since then.

They have the delusion that "Marxism" is still an important factor in the modern world.

.

You mean the flower children who had demonstrations against overbearing, authoritarian government; who are no the ones in charge promoting overbearing, authoritarian government?

But that's okay. Keep the backpedal going. Denying Marxism has a role in the world is a positive step in the right direction.

 

[Foxfyre]

'
One can certainly tell the people who were brainwashed in the 50s and 60s, and whose brains have been petrified ever since then.

They have the delusion that "Marxism" is still an important factor in the modern world.

.

You mean the flower children who had demonstrations against overbearing, authoritarian government; who are no the ones in charge promoting overbearing, authoritarian government?

But that's okay. Keep the backpedal going. Denying Marxism has a role in the world is a positive step in the right direction.

You notice the USMB 'liberals' mostly don't address the question asked in the OP but rather continue to dredge up and report the 'sins' of Republicans and conservatives. Why? Because to them nothing is good other than vague 'feel good' platitudes but their whole philosophy and M.O. is focused on blaming or accusing somebody else. Which of course is the legacy of the flower children--the establishment is evil and their fuzzy notions of light and justice and peace, achieved sometimes by violence of course, and a more virtuous world that would result by dumping all the trappings of the past and looking forward to a world of rainbows and unicorns.

And yes, some of our more conservative friends do that too, but at least most will state what they do believe and want to happen in more concrete terms.. And what they want is to allow society to better itself rather than some fuzzy notion of government engineered 'equality' or 'fairness' or control of the social order.

But again, if what we now refer to as liberalism or progressivism or leftism was not allowedf to gain a foothold around the turn of the century, those flower children would never have had so much success in dismantling a lot of American culture and installing something that has been mostly detrimental in its place.

The OP asks a provocative and interesting question. Most who have made a serious effort to address it have been quickly attacked with some version of a somebody done somebody wrong song.

 

[Bfgrn]

Yea, and the most liberal men of their day created this nation, and conservatives in 1776 were called redcoats, lobsterbacks, tories and new Canadians.

I've been a liberal for over 6 decades, and I have yet to read ONE word of Marx. You right wing turds are so far to the right you have lost any decency or humanism. You are the modern day Pharisees.

You're a liberal and don't know what a conservative hates? Conservatives hated the big government snub of King George of England, and they hated the tax on tea in Boston and decided to start the Tea Party that angered Georgie Porgie puddin' and pie even more. It takes a conservative to notice the national deficit, and the truth was, the taxes charged on tea didn't add up to the failure of George to listen to the people on this continent with sympathy or anything else his subjects the Colonists had to say, when we were bringing him far more wealth than some of his friends who were well-represented in his court. King George pissed off the conservative colonists so badly over failure to hear them in his courts so badly, they collaborated to dismiss his bloodsucking tax situation permanently.

Americans really were more about a government that would help them survive on this continent than they were about constant subservience required to satisfy George's entitlements for his insider friends he was able to perpetuate by snubbing taxpayers in the New World of which he hadn't the vaguest idea.

Bfgn is correct that the men who forged the Constitution were the liberals, i.e. anti big government, of their day. He does not, however, seem to understand that their beliefs were the antithesis of what he describes as his own, because over the more than 200 years since, the definitions have changed. The modern American conservatives of today--the Tea Partiers, the 9/12ers, the tax reformers, etc.--share the basic principles and convictions of the Founders. Knowing this, that is why most historians now use the term 'classical liberal' or 'libertarian' (little "L") to designate them. Modern American liberals share almost nothing of the beliefs of the Founders.

The American people forged a great nation under the classical liberal principles of the Founders, and every American president and Congress respected those principles written into the Constitution.

Until Teddy Roosevelt. He stood the Constitution on its head and started the snowball rolling to dismantle a government by people and reinstante authoritarian government. The very thing the Constitution was intended to free us from.

That snowball has been gaining mass and speed ever since until now it steamrollers over everything. It has overwhelmed our liberties, swallowed our economy, and controls almost every aspect of our lives.

And THAT is why that would be the one thing I would change from history if I had the chance. Teddy Roosevelt would not have been allowed to change the intent of the Constitution.

The antithesis of the founding fathers, the Federalists, were the ANTI-federalists.

The modern American conservatives of today--the Tea Partiers, the 9/12ers, the tax reformers, etc.--share the basic principles and convictions of the ANTI-federalists, the antithesis of our founders.

 

[Derideo_Te]

'
One can certainly tell the people who were brainwashed in the 50s and 60s, and whose brains have been petrified ever since then.

They have the delusion that "Marxism" is still an important factor in the modern world.

.

You mean the flower children who had demonstrations against overbearing, authoritarian government; who are no the ones in charge promoting overbearing, authoritarian government?

But that's okay. Keep the backpedal going. Denying Marxism has a role in the world is a positive step in the right direction.

You notice the USMB 'liberals' mostly don't address the question asked in the OP but rather continue to dredge up and report the 'sins' of Republicans and conservatives. Why? Because to them nothing is good other than vague 'feel good' platitudes but their whole philosophy and M.O. is focused on blaming or accusing somebody else. Which of course is the legacy of the flower children--the establishment is evil and their fuzzy notions of light and justice and peace, achieved sometimes by violence of course, and a more virtuous world that would result by dumping all the trappings of the past and looking forward to a world of rainbows and unicorns.

And yes, some of our more conservative friends do that too, but at least most will state what they do believe and want to happen in more concrete terms.. And what they want is to allow society to better itself rather than some fuzzy notion of government engineered 'equality' or 'fairness' or control of the social order.

But again, if what we now refer to as liberalism or progressivism or leftism was not allowedf to gain a foothold around the turn of the century, those flower children would never have had so much success in dismantling a lot of American culture and installing something that has been mostly detrimental in its place.

The OP asks a provocative and interesting question. Most who have made a serious effort to address it have been quickly attacked with some version of a somebody done somebody wrong song.

The question in the OP is entirely generic and has no partisan intent, Foxy. There have been partisan responses from both sides of the aisle to the OP. As far as "fuzzy notions of government" are concerned they are also found on both sides. Does anyone seriously believe that illegal aliens will "self deport" and that "taxcuts pay for themselves"? Not even a stoned flower child is going to come up with that kind of "fuzzy" thinking.

No, the OP is about which single historical event in the history of the planet would you stop if you could. By far the best answer I have read was to stop the burning of the Library of Alexandria. The only thing that might come close to that would be to ensure that the teachings of Galen were not lost for centuries to the western world. (We can thank Islam for preserving them and reintroducing them to the west 500 years later.)

The knowledge we have is the legacy that we pass on to our children and grandchildren. The Founding Fathers started public libraries in this nation because they knew the value of knowledge in the hands of the common people. Ultimately that knowledge is what actually preserves our freedom in my opinion.