Emmett
Active Member
I think we have all became selfish in the sense that we have become very close minded politically. Reading through the items today the bickering jumps out! True indeed is the fact that there will always be differences of opinion however I see the problems in DC reflective here on our pages of debate as well. Where is our common ground? Should we not begin there from time to time so thst we can reaffirm the fact that we are on the same team?
What if we were attacked by an alien nation from another universe? How long would it take for us to put down our greivances and defend our earth, TOGETHER? Would we be prepared?
In the early years of our nation and before it's inception a small few visionaries also held regular arguments of debate about how to accomplish the same objective. Ironically after independence from England our unity was soon split into "parties". The Fedarlists (today's Dem's) led by John Adams were at odds with Thomas Jefferson (formerly JA's best friend) and the Jeffersonians (Republicans). John Adams against even his own party members refused to go to war against france as TJ would have preferred. As we all know it cost JA his re-election and therefore led to TJ becoming the third Pres. They had once been the best of friends, they served together in France as diplomats and were partners in the early years willing to defy the Brits together with other early year heros and risk the gallos to accomplish their objective. They had common ground and common goals. It was not until the disagreement over foriegn policy that seperated them later that the relationship began to falter. What if they could have remained united?
It is true irony indeed that both men died on the very same day years later. Even more ironic was the fact that they died on July 4 exactly 50 years after the date of the Declaration of Independance signing. A few days earlier TJ had penned the document at the instruction of JA who deferred to him because of TJ's superior skills which JA admitted to him as he instruted him to write it.
As we all remember TJ was victorious over JA preventing him from a second term. He also lived to apologize to JA and admit to him he was wrong in his philosophy about France and the war. JA suffered political demise in holding steadfast to his non war beliefs and even failed to gain support from within his own party. Like that group of men who shaped your life in that little room in Philidelphia he held his guns even when it meant unpopularity.
In their later years JA and TJ wrote to one another and became friends again through correspondance. JA's last words as he died that afternoon was TJ still lives. You see JA had become fond of many of the items on TJ's platform by which he initially thopught were wrong and TJ admittedly had done the same.
What if they somehow could have tried a little harder while they were both able and influencial to find Common Ground in their beliefs?
Both sides certainly cannot be right all the time! How do we find the strength to compromise when it is required and the fortitude to know it is the right thing to do at the time.
You may note that in my small contribution to this thing I do at times act a horses ass. I make fun of Teddy, I cuss too much and I do tend to lean right but I NEVER namecall my fellow visitors to the site. I do not argue, I debate!
It would be nice to see some of you folks do the same? :usa:
What if we were attacked by an alien nation from another universe? How long would it take for us to put down our greivances and defend our earth, TOGETHER? Would we be prepared?
In the early years of our nation and before it's inception a small few visionaries also held regular arguments of debate about how to accomplish the same objective. Ironically after independence from England our unity was soon split into "parties". The Fedarlists (today's Dem's) led by John Adams were at odds with Thomas Jefferson (formerly JA's best friend) and the Jeffersonians (Republicans). John Adams against even his own party members refused to go to war against france as TJ would have preferred. As we all know it cost JA his re-election and therefore led to TJ becoming the third Pres. They had once been the best of friends, they served together in France as diplomats and were partners in the early years willing to defy the Brits together with other early year heros and risk the gallos to accomplish their objective. They had common ground and common goals. It was not until the disagreement over foriegn policy that seperated them later that the relationship began to falter. What if they could have remained united?
It is true irony indeed that both men died on the very same day years later. Even more ironic was the fact that they died on July 4 exactly 50 years after the date of the Declaration of Independance signing. A few days earlier TJ had penned the document at the instruction of JA who deferred to him because of TJ's superior skills which JA admitted to him as he instruted him to write it.
As we all remember TJ was victorious over JA preventing him from a second term. He also lived to apologize to JA and admit to him he was wrong in his philosophy about France and the war. JA suffered political demise in holding steadfast to his non war beliefs and even failed to gain support from within his own party. Like that group of men who shaped your life in that little room in Philidelphia he held his guns even when it meant unpopularity.
In their later years JA and TJ wrote to one another and became friends again through correspondance. JA's last words as he died that afternoon was TJ still lives. You see JA had become fond of many of the items on TJ's platform by which he initially thopught were wrong and TJ admittedly had done the same.
What if they somehow could have tried a little harder while they were both able and influencial to find Common Ground in their beliefs?
Both sides certainly cannot be right all the time! How do we find the strength to compromise when it is required and the fortitude to know it is the right thing to do at the time.
You may note that in my small contribution to this thing I do at times act a horses ass. I make fun of Teddy, I cuss too much and I do tend to lean right but I NEVER namecall my fellow visitors to the site. I do not argue, I debate!
It would be nice to see some of you folks do the same? :usa:
:shocked: So it seems here, I've had some great pm's and late night posting back and forth with liberals, but for some reason, perhaps the numbers of conservative? It becomes nasty at times. This seems one of those days.
