What beliefs define a 21st Century American conservative?

[Wry Catcher]

Thank God the Founders and the minority that supported them. They would have run the likes of Santorum and the Moral Police out of the country.
If they were lucky. Give me liberty or give me death in those days applied as much to freedom from religious influences in government than anything else.

wow are you mistaken!! Yes, our founders did not want the religious wars of Europe to visit out shores but they were very very happy with moral behavior of individuals as promoted primarily by the church. They did not believe moral behavior
grew out of the dirt like a tree.

Now that the church is dead and without influence I'm sure our Founders would support Constitutional provisions to encourage moral behavior to fill the vacuum. Do you want the Girl Scouts to perform this function?

The founders were for the most part Deists.

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus."

"Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Thank God the Founders and the minority that supported them. They would have run the likes of Santorum and the Moral Police out of the country.
If they were lucky. Give me liberty or give me death in those days applied as much to freedom from religious influences in government than anything else.

wow are you mistaken!! Yes, our founders did not want the religious wars of Europe to visit out shores but they were very very happy with moral behavior of individuals as promoted primarily by the church. They did not believe moral behavior
grew out of the dirt like a tree.

Now that the church is dead and without influence I'm sure our Founders would support Constitutional provisions to encourage moral behavior to fill the vacuum. Do you want the Girl Scouts to perform this function?

The founders were for the most part Deists.

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus."

"Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

Most importantly they were, socially, very very conservative. Had they know that religion would die, had they not taken a high degree of moral behavior for granted, they would have supported using the Federal Government to encourage morality.

 

[Wry Catcher]

wow are you mistaken!! Yes, our founders did not want the religious wars of Europe to visit out shores but they were very very happy with moral behavior of individuals as promoted primarily by the church. They did not believe moral behavior
grew out of the dirt like a tree.

Now that the church is dead and without influence I'm sure our Founders would support Constitutional provisions to encourage moral behavior to fill the vacuum. Do you want the Girl Scouts to perform this function?

The founders were for the most part Deists.

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus."

"Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

Most importantly they were, socially, very very conservative. Had they know that religion would die, had they not taken a high degree of moral behavior for granted, they would have supported using the Federal Government to encourage morality.

Really, well, thanks for sharing your personal knowledge of what the founders would do.

In fact, government in general encourages us to obey the law and punishes those who violate the law. Morality is a different beast than the rule of law, so help us understand how morales can be encouraged and 'immorals' punished by a government.

Of course some nations do enforce a moral code, stoned to death are those who violate such codes. A consequence not advocated by our founders, one which might have been acceptable in Salem circa 1692.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Really, well, thanks for sharing your personal knowledge of what the founders would do.

they were men of great personal morality, character, and integrity so its not hard to figure that they respected that. Think!!

In fact, government in general encourages us to obey the law and punishes those who violate the law.

is there one person on earth who disagrees? You got the strawman good didn't you?

Morality is a different beast than the rule of law, so help us understand how morales can be encouraged and 'immorals' punished by a government.

a government will usually punish murder, for example, and so will religions; as a matter of morality!!

Of course some nations do enforce a moral code, stoned to death are those who violate such codes. A consequence not advocated by our founders, one which might have been acceptable in Salem circa 1692.

no idea why on earth you are talking about stoning?? Do you have any idea why you are talking about it?? Do you really want to be a liberal all your life?

 

[g5000]

HOOOOOLLLLLY SHIT! WE ARE LIVING THE FOUNDERS' DREAM! Progressive taxes, poor people paying no taxes, welfare, social security, it's all there!

Cute to take Jefferson out of context. Jefferson said many things at many times but it is very clear why he founded the Republican party in 1791 and what measures he proposed while President!! Sorry

I did not take Jefferson out of context. I provided the link to his letter as well as the link to Paine's Agrarian Justice. Did you bother to read any of them, or were you afraid to?

I find your statement the epitome of irony as it is then followed by a shitload of out of context quotes.

While in France, Jefferson saw firsthand the results of government which prevented honest people from earning an honest dollar and which kept wealth concentrated in the hands of a few good-for-nothings. This injustice was seared into him, and as a result it was his goal to ensure that if you worked hard, you were rewarded and did not accumulate wealth solely because of a lucky accident of birth.

Just as legislation can cause money to be taken from a high income person who worked for it and given to a lower income person who didn't, does not mean you can't have legislation which accomplishes the vice versa.

Today, we do have that vice versa. Wealth is being stolen from everyone who is not already fabulously rich. Including you. You are being robbed and don't even know it. Oh, I know you think you are being robbed to give money to the poor, but quite the opposite is occuring. You are being robbed by the rich even more.

You are being robbed by proxy. Your insurance company was ass-raped by Wall Street and so you pay higher insurance premiums. Your 401K manager was ass-raped by Wall Street and so you get pathetic returns on your investments. You probably think you are winning but that is only because you don't have a clue how much you should really be getting. Your state employee's pension fund was ass-raped by Wall Street and so your taxes go up.

Oh, the insurance companies and 401k managers and pensions funds are all suing to get your money back, but they will get pennies on the dollar at best.

Millions of people were thrown out of work because of Wall Street's fraud, and so your taxes go up. And here you are, bitching about those people who were thrown out of work as if they are the ones sucking you dry!

There are a number of people on Wall Street who broke the law and stole billions and billions and billions of dollars from investors. That's you. We even know their names, and we have their emails. All of their crimes have been thoroughly documented but they walk free.

And you know, in light of the deregulation that made all this possible, it is really hard to break the law since most thievery is legal now, but they STILL managed to find a few remaining laws to break in their maddening greed to steal you blind.

But go ahead and convince yourself that the trillions and trillions of wealth that evaporated didn't come out of your pocket and the pockets of everyone around you and that somehow it is some imaginary massive pool of lazy poor who don't want to work who are ripping you off.

 

[Gadawg73]

Thank God the Founders and the minority that supported them. They would have run the likes of Santorum and the Moral Police out of the country.
If they were lucky. Give me liberty or give me death in those days applied as much to freedom from religious influences in government than anything else.

wow are you mistaken!! Yes, our founders did not want the religious wars of Europe to visit out shores but they were very very happy with moral behavior of individuals as promoted primarily by the church. They did not believe moral behavior
grew out of the dirt like a tree.

Now that the church is dead and without influence I'm sure our Founders would support Constitutional provisions to encourage moral behavior to fill the vacuum. Do you want the Girl Scouts to perform this function?

No, I do not want you to perform that function.
One has only to look at the behavior of most of the Founders to know that morality was never considered before their practices.
I know the facts do not jive with your religous bias and ideology but history shows the truth.
I suppose you also deny that the crown monarch that had the hammer over the colonies had no religous influences whatsoever, did not draw their power FROM the religous influences in the colonies and were defeated by our revolution because of the abuses of those religous influences and powers.
ALL the decisions concerning the colonies from A-Z had to be made with the approval of the Anglican church FIRST. Without them, please think real hard and make up some other fables here and tell us where the English crown drew their support in their oppresion our Founders fought.
After the revolution over 100,000 former colonists here fled to Candada and other places. They were the supporters of the Torries and they had the FULL SUPPORT of the Anglican church before and almost all of the revolution.
Why? Because the religous folk of the day then believed, as they had for centuries, that God gave the monarchies divine right to rule.
We beat their asses and they ran like the chicken shits they were. Accordingly, the Constitution does not mention the word God and has NO religous test whatsoever in it.
Oh, your side fought the good fight at the convention as they wanted to have Christianity as the national religion and lobbied hard for government funds to go to church schools.
But just like your side got their ass kicked in the revolution, we kicked it again at the convention.
Be a Torrie all you want. True patriots ran off the religous influences in government and why?
Because that way they could practice their religion in any way they wanted to WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INFLUENCE.

 

[g5000]

On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. My desire to discover the causes of this phenomenon increased from day to day. In order to satisfy it I questioned the members of all the different sects; I sought especially the society of the clergy, who are the depositaries of the different creeds and are especially interested in their duration. As a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I was more particularly brought into contact with several of its priests, with whom I became intimately acquainted. To each of these men I expressed my astonishment and explained my doubts. I found that they differed upon matters of detail alone, and that they all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country mainly to the separation of church and state. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America I did not meet a single individual, of the clergy or the laity, who was not of the same opinion on this point.

The unbelievers of Europe attack the Christians as their political opponents rather than as their religious adversaries; they hate the Christian religion as the opinion of a party much more than as an error of belief; and they reject the clergy less because they are the representatives of the Deity than because they are the allies of government.

In Europe, Christianity has been intimately united to the powers of the earth. Those powers are now in decay, and it is, as it were, buried under their ruins. The living body of religion has been bound down to the dead corpse of superannuated polity; cut but the bonds that restrain it, and it will rise once more.

PRINCIPAL CAUSES WHICH RENDER RELIGION POWERFUL IN AMERICA

 

[Gadawg73]

Really, well, thanks for sharing your personal knowledge of what the founders would do.

they were men of great personal morality, character, and integrity so its not hard to figure that they respected that. Think!!

In fact, government in general encourages us to obey the law and punishes those who violate the law.

is there one person on earth who disagrees? You got the strawman good didn't you?

Morality is a different beast than the rule of law, so help us understand how morales can be encouraged and 'immorals' punished by a government.

a government will usually punish murder, for example, and so will religions; as a matter of morality!!

Of course some nations do enforce a moral code, stoned to death are those who violate such codes. A consequence not advocated by our founders, one which might have been acceptable in Salem circa 1692.

no idea why on earth you are talking about stoning?? Do you have any idea why you are talking about it?? Do you really want to be a liberal all your life?

The Founders were great men.
They had hookers on the side, owned breweries and distilleries, they were smugglers, they bred with their own slaves, they disobeyed about every law they could that the crown put on them. They refused to pay taxes and ran up massive debt.
The norm in those days was a large catch for a wife was one that was either divorced or widowed that had a bucket full of cash.
Do you want me to make you look foolish and give you the names of the Founders that cashed in like that?
Not saying that is something wrong but claiming the Founders were men of the upmost and highest morals is laughable. You watch too many reality shows.

 

[g5000]

When you bring your religion into government, you bring government into your religion.

And religion loses, every time.

Just ask the Iranians. Or Pakistanis. Or the Puritans.

 

[Gadawg73]

On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. My desire to discover the causes of this phenomenon increased from day to day. In order to satisfy it I questioned the members of all the different sects; I sought especially the society of the clergy, who are the depositaries of the different creeds and are especially interested in their duration. As a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I was more particularly brought into contact with several of its priests, with whom I became intimately acquainted. To each of these men I expressed my astonishment and explained my doubts. I found that they differed upon matters of detail alone, and that they all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country mainly to the separation of church and state. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America I did not meet a single individual, of the clergy or the laity, who was not of the same opinion on this point.

The unbelievers of Europe attack the Christians as their political opponents rather than as their religious adversaries; they hate the Christian religion as the opinion of a party much more than as an error of belief; and they reject the clergy less because they are the representatives of the Deity than because they are the allies of government.

In Europe, Christianity has been intimately united to the powers of the earth. Those powers are now in decay, and it is, as it were, buried under their ruins. The living body of religion has been bound down to the dead corpse of superannuated polity; cut but the bonds that restrain it, and it will rise once more.

PRINCIPAL CAUSES WHICH RENDER RELIGION POWERFUL IN AMERICA

I really enjoy his writings, especially on the American experiment where he predicts exactly what is happening today with our moocher class voting themselves government $$ stolen from us producers by the thieves in government.
However, these writing were SIXTY YEARS AFTER the revolution and a new set of clergy had settled in America. A clergy that DID NOT have to answer to the crown for their marching orders.
Freedom will do that to you. Different culture altogether here 60 years after the destruction of the monarchy and it's influences here through the church.
And England WAS NOT under papal control, they were under the control of the Anglican church, a church the Founders held in low regard once the revolution began.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I did not take Jefferson out of context. I provided the link to his letter as well as the link to Paine's Agrarian Justice. Did you bother to read any of them, or were you afraid to?

dear, a random letter is not in context!!!!! What is the context??? A random letter?????????

I find your statement the epitome of irony as it is then followed by a shitload of out of context quotes.

dear, I gave you the exact context. Those quotes fit perfectly within the context of his founding of the Republican Party, his presidential administration, and the political philosophy he held his entire life!!!

Just as legislation can cause money to be taken from a high income person who worked for it and given to a lower income person who didn't, does not mean you can't have legislation which accomplishes the vice versa.

You are talking about violent liberal theft by government. Jefferson believed in private property. Private property is that which you obtain in peaceful voluntary relationships. Violent liberal theft is the exact opposite. It is merely using democracy as a vehicle for liberal theft. It has no end but perpetual civil war.

Today, we do have that vice versa. Wealth is being stolen from everyone who is not already fabulously rich. Including you. You are being robbed and don't even know it. Oh, I know you think you are being robbed to give money to the poor, but quite the opposite is occuring. You are being robbed by the rich even more.

You are being robbed by proxy.

of course if that was true you would not be so afraid to provide your best example for the whole world to see. What does your fear tell you??

Your insurance company was ass-raped by Wall Street and so you pay higher insurance premiums. Your 401K manager was ass-raped by Wall Street and so you get pathetic returns on your investments. You probably think you are winning but that is only because you don't have a clue how much you should really be getting. Your state employee's pension fund was ass-raped by Wall Street and so your taxes go up.

dear, thats just plain goofy and idiotic. Most of Wall Street went bankrupt. Those that survive, like Citibank, BoA will be lucky to survive. Ever heard of Lehman Brothers, Bear Sterns, Merryl Lynch? Where is Wall Street?

All intellectuals agree the crisis was caused by liberal government interference with the free market. Every heard of Fanny, Freddie, CRA, FHA?????????????

Millions of people were thrown out of work because of Wall Street's fraud, and so your taxes go up. And here you are, bitching about those people who were thrown out of work as if they are the ones sucking you dry!

There are a number of people on Wall Street who broke the law and stole billions and billions and billions of dollars from investors. That's you. We even know their names, and we have their emails. All of their crimes have been thoroughly documented but they walk free.

of course you are little more than a liar, which explains why you are so afraid to provide your best example. What do you think your fear tells us?

And you know, in light of the deregulation that made all this possible,

actually Fanny Freddie CRA FHA all exist to regulate the market. Now even you can see the results. Why do you think Red China deregulated and saw their economy boom after centuries of deadly liberal communist regulation??

it is really hard to break the law since most thievery is legal now, but they STILL managed to find a few remaining laws to break in their maddening greed to steal you blind.

empty lies typical of a brainwashed fool; I'm so sorry.

But go ahead and convince yourself that the trillions and trillions of wealth that evaporated didn't come out of your pocket and the pockets of everyone around you and that somehow it is some imaginary massive pool of lazy poor who don't want to work who are ripping you off.

dear, it started as a liberal housing crisis. Most of the liberal federal government was organized to get people into homes that the free market said they could not afford! Do you understand now?? Ask yourself why liberal Fanny was sued??

 

[g5000]

I really enjoy his writings, especially on the American experiment where he predicts exactly what is happening today with our moocher class voting themselves government $$ stolen from us producers by the thieves in government.

Jesus, you sound like a Rand-bot.

Tocqueville also wrote about the mechanisms which mitigate this "moocher" effect.

Democracy in America is so prescient and so relevant to today that I used to post as Alexis de Tocqueville on another forum using nothing but quotes from his book in conversations about today's political landscape.

However, these writing were SIXTY YEARS AFTER the revolution and a new set of clergy had settled in America. A clergy that DID NOT have to answer to the crown for their marching orders.

He came to America a little over 40 years after the ratification of the Constitution to examine our penal system. He ended being so impressed with our country that he wrote about our entire political system.

40 years in his time is not the same as 40 years in our time. He was seeing the first blossoms of the American experiment. And the prevailing attitude of separation of Church and State was not something new that had sprung up.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The Founders were great men.
They had hookers on the side, owned breweries and distilleries, they were smugglers, they bred with their own slaves, they disobeyed about every law they could that the crown put on them. They refused to pay taxes and ran up massive debt.
The norm in those days was a large catch for a wife was one that was either divorced or widowed that had a bucket full of cash.
Do you want me to make you look foolish and give you the names of the Founders that cashed in like that?

actually people always try to marry well and have always tried to marry well. Even birds do it. I'm shocked its a surprise to you? So is your brilliant point that the founders were immoral so we need not worry about morality??

Not saying that is something wrong but claiming the Founders were men of the upmost and highest morals is laughable. You watch too many reality shows.

got it! The Founders were pigs according to you and so we don't need to worry about morality!!

Why so very afraid to address the issue? Where does morality come from ?? Is it the Girl Scouts or the Constitution?

 

[g5000]

CRA

Always a dead giveaway the speaker has no clue. It's a giant IGNORAMUS sticker on their forehead.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

CRA

Always a dead giveaway the speaker has no clue.

why be so afraid to say no clue about what exactly??

 

[g5000]

CRA

Always a dead giveaway the speaker has no clue.

why be so afraid to say no clue about what exactly??

The CRA meme. It was invented by partisan simpletons who don't know how modern financial markets work and parroted by people like you.

The CRA meme is like Whack-A-Mole. When you completely destroy it, someone else comes along to repeat it.

I don't bother any more. I can't help partisan simpletons or parrots.

 

[g5000]

Ignorance really is bliss for some people. They make their two or three percent returns, in a good year, on their 401k and think they are part of the winners circle.

I make more than that with the same amount of money on a single trade.

So I don't care if you think I don't know what I am talkiing about.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Always a dead giveaway the speaker has no clue.

why be so afraid to say no clue about what exactly??

The CRA meme. It was invented by partisan simpletons who don't know how modern financial markets work and parroted by people like you.

The CRA meme is like Whack-A-Mole. When you completely destroy it, someone else comes along to repeat it.

I don't bother any more. I can't help partisan simpletons or parrots.

CRA was one in a long list of liberal programs and regulations that collapsed the housing market. No one can say with a straight face that liberal government designed to get folks into housing the Republican free market said they could not afford was not responsible.

If you want the whole story in 400 pages read Reckless Endangerment or consider what the great economists and Newspapers on left and right said:


"First consider the once controversial view that the crisis was largely caused by the Fed's holding interest rates too low for too long after the 2001 recession. This view is now so widely held that the editorial pages of both the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal agree on its validity!"...John B. Taylor( arch conservative, author of the Taylor Rule)


" The Federal reserve having done so much to create the problems in which the economy is now mired, having mistakenly thought that even after the housing bubble burst the problems were contained, and having underestimated the severity of the crisis, now wants to make a contribution to preventing the economy from sinking into a Japanese Style malaise....... - "Joseph Stiglitz"






Rep. Frank: I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . .



Do you feel like a brainwashed liberal now?

 

[Gadawg73]

The Founders were great men.
They had hookers on the side, owned breweries and distilleries, they were smugglers, they bred with their own slaves, they disobeyed about every law they could that the crown put on them. They refused to pay taxes and ran up massive debt.
The norm in those days was a large catch for a wife was one that was either divorced or widowed that had a bucket full of cash.
Do you want me to make you look foolish and give you the names of the Founders that cashed in like that?

actually people always try to marry well and have always tried to marry well. Even birds do it. I'm shocked its a surprise to you? So is your brilliant point that the founders were immoral so we need not worry about morality??

Not saying that is something wrong but claiming the Founders were men of the upmost and highest morals is laughable. You watch too many reality shows.

got it! The Founders were pigs according to you and so we don't need to worry about morality!!

Why so very afraid to address the issue? Where does morality come from ?? Is it the Girl Scouts or the Constitution?

Where did I state they were immoral Moe?
You may want government to teach morals to your kids and family but as a strict conservative for 57 years I DO NOT.
That is not and has never been the role of government.
We are a nation of LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind opinions on morality and religion.

 

[Gadawg73]

why be so afraid to say no clue about what exactly??

The CRA meme. It was invented by partisan simpletons who don't know how modern financial markets work and parroted by people like you.

The CRA meme is like Whack-A-Mole. When you completely destroy it, someone else comes along to repeat it.

I don't bother any more. I can't help partisan simpletons or parrots.

CRA was one in a long list of liberal programs and regulations that collapsed the housing market. No one can say with a straight face that liberal government designed to get folks into housing the Republican free market said they could not afford was not responsible.

If you want the whole story in 400 pages read Reckless Endangerment or consider what the great economists and Newspapers on left and right said:


"First consider the once controversial view that the crisis was largely caused by the Fed's holding interest rates too low for too long after the 2001 recession. This view is now so widely held that the editorial pages of both the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal agree on its validity!"...John B. Taylor( arch conservative, author of the Taylor Rule)


" The Federal reserve having done so much to create the problems in which the economy is now mired, having mistakenly thought that even after the housing bubble burst the problems were contained, and having underestimated the severity of the crisis, now wants to make a contribution to preventing the economy from sinking into a Japanese Style malaise....... - "Joseph Stiglitz"






Rep. Frank: I do think I do not want the same kind of focus on safety and soundness that we have in OCC [Office of the Comptroller of the Currency] and OTS [Office of Thrift Supervision]. I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation towards subsidized housing. . .



Do you feel like a brainwashed liberal now?

As a bank consultant doing investigative work for them for the last 5 years I can tell you without any doubt the CRA did have an affect on the housing collapse.
About maybe 2-3% of it.
You see, the CRA loans represented maybe 11-13% of the total number of loans made in the United States. And the average dollar amount of those loans were just under 200K nationwide.
Now take a look at the average loan of ALL loans made including CRA loans: Over 460K.
And what was the % of CRA loans that went bad? And what was the total NET effect of those bad loans versus the total amount of dollars outstanding in the mortgage market.
2-3%.
Are you claiming that 3% of the entire mortgage dollars spent had MUCH IF ANY AN affect on the market?
CRA was a bad program that had little or no effect on the collapse.
It needs to be done away with as it is a moocher program but this one had nothing to do with the collapse. The LARGE loans did us in as they were bundled and sold as commodities.