Our founding fathers were not conservative

[Tom Clancy]

They were Classic Liberals. Well, most of them.

But, I don't think they'd belong to any party in today's world.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Idiot you don't know the difference between cite and site.

You clearly don't. Go back and read. Remember I was the one who had to teach you how to use charts and graphs.

M14 called you on it.

Still waiting for the constitutional cites that negate my position.

One, you don't have a constitutional site that supports your point.

Two, the father of the Constitution disagrees with you.

Refute those two with evidence.

I called you, bigreb, and I schooled M14 shooter.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Federalist #46 was Written by Madison and the Principle is General. Madison did not suffer Tyrants well. Do do realize that he was the Author of the Virginia Resolution. Would you like me to Post that as well?

You do realize that he was the designer of the original constitutional plan, the writer of the Virginia Resolution, and wrote particularly to the South Carolina secession crisis. He stated clearly that South Carolina had no cause to secede. I have already posted his letter, which gives clear guidance on everything he wrote before this letter.

Produce Jeffersons words.
There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

You did not cite the source, and the comment does not address secession, only about dictators.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Any state secede at any time. It is prohibited by the Constitution..

-Still- waiting for you to cite the text of the Constitution that supports this.

The Constitution does not permit secession (show me where it does). Before you answer, I suggest gently you go check SCOTUS decisions on the issue.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You do realize that he was the designer of the original constitutional plan, the writer of the Virginia Resolution, and wrote particularly to the South Carolina secession crisis. He stated clearly that South Carolina had no cause to secede. I have already posted his letter, which gives clear guidance on everything he wrote before this letter.

Produce Jeffersons words.
There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

You did not cite the source, and the comment does not address secession, only about dictators.

I asked you to produce
Madisons words that said South Carolina could not secede.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Any state secede at any time. It is prohibited by the Constitution..

-Still- waiting for you to cite the text of the Constitution that supports this.

The Constitution does not permit secession (show me where it does). Before you answer, I suggest gently you go check SCOTUS decisions on the issue.

Maybe you have heard of these words

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Again

There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

I really wished people would stop using modern terms to say what the founders were.
They were not in today's political spectrum liberal nor were they conservative. They are equal to the modern day Libertrian.
The founders fought for freedomn from big government liberals want big government

 

[BlackAsCoal]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

I really wished people would stop using modern terms to say what the founders were.
They were not in today's political spectrum liberal nor were they conservative. They are equal to the modern day Libertrian.
The founders fought for freedomn from big government liberals want big government

Ridiculous on so many levels.

Republicans CLAIM they want a lot of shit .. but once in office, all bets are out the window and they spend as fast as democrats.

If memory serves, the last balanced budget was under a democrat .. who also left a huge surplus .. which republicans then ran and spent .. and then some.

They were decidely NOT libertarian.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

I really wished people would stop using modern terms to say what the founders were.
They were not in today's political spectrum liberal nor were they conservative. They are equal to the modern day Libertrian.
The founders fought for freedomn from big government liberals want big government

Ridiculous on so many levels.

Republicans CLAIM they want a lot of shit .. but once in office, all bets are out the window and they spend as fast as democrats.

If memory serves, the last balanced budget was under a democrat .. who also left a huge surplus .. which republicans then ran and spent .. and then some.

They were decidely NOT libertarian.

Do you even know what a libertrian is? I really don't think so.

Modern conservative and liberal parties are having nothing to do with conservatism and liberalism as with traditional or classical social philosophies – there is very little, almost negligible difference between them and between socialist parties (which is absolutely straightforward since they cannot propose anything else except for the very same coercive socialist redistribution of income). Both political conservatism and political liberalism simply sold themselves in exchange for material benefits of these parties’ members. All the so called “conservative” and so called “liberal” policies are built on the vast coercion coming from perverse levels of property (income) redistribution in our society, which are leading to permanent acceleration of the state domination and to considerable downgrading of personal freedom.

Liberal, Conservative and Libertarian Principles

 

[Intense]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

The only thing proven is that you don't know the meaning of Conservatism. Conservatism has much more in common with Personal Responsibility and Limited Government as opposed to Statist Government control over every aspect of our lives, Totalitarianism. You need to deprogram and get educated. The only thing Living in the Constitution is the Amendment process, through due process. Manipulating the lives of others to suit anyone's whim, is not what the Constitutional Convention met to determine.

 

[Sallow]

-Still- waiting for you to cite the text of the Constitution that supports this.

The Constitution does not permit secession (show me where it does). Before you answer, I suggest gently you go check SCOTUS decisions on the issue.

Maybe you have heard of these words

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Again

There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

Read the whole document:

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

That's one of the things I think is wrong with the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The people were meant to be the standing army. That's why they have the right to bear arms.

And this in no way advocates for rebellion.

 

[Intense]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

I really wished people would stop using modern terms to say what the founders were.
They were not in today's political spectrum liberal nor were they conservative. They are equal to the modern day Libertrian.
The founders fought for freedomn from big government liberals want big government

Ridiculous on so many levels.

Republicans CLAIM they want a lot of shit .. but once in office, all bets are out the window and they spend as fast as democrats.

If memory serves, the last balanced budget was under a democrat .. who also left a huge surplus .. which republicans then ran and spent .. and then some.

They were decidely NOT libertarian.

That was called the contract with America, led by Newt Gingrich. Good job there.

 

[Intense]

The Constitution does not permit secession (show me where it does). Before you answer, I suggest gently you go check SCOTUS decisions on the issue.

Maybe you have heard of these words

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Again

There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

Read the whole document:

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

That's one of the things I think is wrong with the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The people were meant to be the standing army. That's why they have the right to bear arms.

And this in no way advocates for rebellion.

Tyranny justifies rebellion, that and refusal to address injustice by the powers that be. Armed Citizenry command respect, no getting around that Sallow. Stop thinking like a City Boy Man, an own up.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

The only thing proven is that you don't know the meaning of Conservatism. Conservatism has much more in common with Personal Responsibility and Limited Government as opposed to Statist Government control over every aspect of our lives, Totalitarianism. You need to deprogram and get educated. The only thing Living in the Constitution is the Amendment process, through due process. Manipulating the lives of others to suit anyone's whim, is not what the Constitutional Convention met to determine.

Bet I'm every bit educated as you are .. at the very least.

I understand what conservatism is in theory and in real terms .. and I understand the Constitution .. a living document .. seemingly better than you do.

Jefferson didn't attend the Convention because he was in France, but he could have made allowances to attend.

The amendment process MAKES it a living document.

Perhaps you could use a bit of education on what a living document is ..

•A living document or dynamic document is a document which may be continually edited and updated by either a limited or unrestricted group.

 

[Sallow]

Maybe you have heard of these words

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Again

There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

Read the whole document:

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

That's one of the things I think is wrong with the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The people were meant to be the standing army. That's why they have the right to bear arms.

And this in no way advocates for rebellion.

Tyranny justifies rebellion, that and refusal to address injustice by the powers that be. Armed Citizenry command respect, no getting around that Sallow. Stop thinking like a City Boy Man, an own up.

Wolverines!

In serveral clauses the Constitution speaks forcefully against insurrection and rebellion. It simply does not advocate for that sort of behavior.

In any case..rebels haven't and wouldn't be defending the Constitution..now have/would they?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The Constitution does not permit secession (show me where it does). Before you answer, I suggest gently you go check SCOTUS decisions on the issue.

Maybe you have heard of these words

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


Again

There is no way the founding fathers would have made such a biding agreement that would allow a dictator to take control of this country, and there is no way that any agreement would force the citizens to allow it to happen.

Read the whole document:

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

That's one of the things I think is wrong with the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The people were meant to be the standing army. That's why they have the right to bear arms.

And this in no way advocates for rebellion.

You don't like the Second Amendment? That is our protection against an over bearing federal government, or any oustside power.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Read the whole document:



That's one of the things I think is wrong with the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment. The people were meant to be the standing army. That's why they have the right to bear arms.

And this in no way advocates for rebellion.

Tyranny justifies rebellion, that and refusal to address injustice by the powers that be. Armed Citizenry command respect, no getting around that Sallow. Stop thinking like a City Boy Man, an own up.

Wolverines!

In serveral clauses the Constitution speaks forcefully against insurrection and rebellion. It simply does not advocate for that sort of behavior.

In any case..rebels haven't and wouldn't be defending the Constitution..now have/would they?

Hillbilly

In any case..rebels haven't and wouldn't be defending the Constitution

Nor is the current administration protecting the constitution or the current elected officials.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The beauty of the wisdom of the Founders can be found in what they did not do. They did not presume themselves to know all or what is best for all future American society .. and that reality can be found in what they did not address even though it was their reality .. like slavery.

They knew it would be a living document.

Thomas Jefferson, who along with James Madison were the most liberal of the bunch, knew the Constitution was an incomplete document and required an additional document, the Bill of Rights, before he agreed to ratify the Constitution. He wouldn't even attend the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."

Madison sought protection against an oppressive majority over the minority .. proving he was no conservative.

The very fact that the Founders did not presume to know all and made room for an evolving society demonstrates that they were not conservative.

The only thing proven is that you don't know the meaning of Conservatism. Conservatism has much more in common with Personal Responsibility and Limited Government as opposed to Statist Government control over every aspect of our lives, Totalitarianism. You need to deprogram and get educated. The only thing Living in the Constitution is the Amendment process, through due process. Manipulating the lives of others to suit anyone's whim, is not what the Constitutional Convention met to determine.

Bet I'm every bit educated as you are .. at the very least.

I understand what conservatism is in theory and in real terms .. and I understand the Constitution .. a living document .. seemingly better than you do.

Jefferson didn't attend the Convention because he was in France, but he could have made allowances to attend.

The amendment process MAKES it a living document.

Perhaps you could use a bit of education on what a living document is ..

•A living document or dynamic document is a document which may be continually edited and updated by either a limited or unrestricted group.

Educated? The constitution is not a living breathing document.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

I really wished people would stop using modern terms to say what the founders were.
They were not in today's political spectrum liberal nor were they conservative. They are equal to the modern day Libertrian.
The founders fought for freedomn from big government liberals want big government

Ridiculous on so many levels.

Republicans CLAIM they want a lot of shit .. but once in office, all bets are out the window and they spend as fast as democrats.

If memory serves, the last balanced budget was under a democrat .. who also left a huge surplus .. which republicans then ran and spent .. and then some.

They were decidely NOT libertarian.

That was called the contract with America, led by Newt Gingrich. Good job there.

BAM

Post of the day