Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

[deanrd]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

 

[Auld Phart]

Amish, possibly Mennonites

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

You write the funniest crap.

Yes, the Founders were wealthy, educated, and proponents of liberalism, the classical form of which has no relation to the misnamed version forwarded by the neo-Communists of today.

The Founders would have had you people shot along with the British.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

The Jews. My people. Intellectuals, doctors, lawyers, bankers.

And this is how your retarded party treats my people.

 

[S.J.]

Freedom Caucus.

 

[JGalt]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

Let's see how well modern-day American liberals take up single-shot black powder muskets and fend off an attack of British Redcoats.

They'd more likely throw down their weapons and run off screaming like little girls.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

Let's see how well modern-day American liberals take up single-shot black powder muskets and fend off an attack of British Redcoats.

They'd more likely throw down their weapons and run off screaming like little girls.

How dare you assumer their genders?!?!?!?

 

[Pogo]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

Actually they were called Liberals then. Still are.
That was the whole point.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The Welsh. We invented the US once and could do it again.

 

[ozro]

todays liberals would be torys.

 

[JGalt]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

Actually they were called Liberals then. Still are.
That was the whole point.

Modern-day American "liberals" have absolutely nothing in common with classic liberals. Even less than modern-day American "Nazis" have in common with 1930's German Nazis.

 

[miketx]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

These guys.

 

[JGalt]

The Welsh. We invented the US once and could do it again.

No and no. The Welsh fought under General Thomas Gage during the Revolutionary War. They were lobsterbacks.

Revolutionary War - Welsh Fusiliers

 

[Pogo]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

You write the funniest crap.

Yes, the Founders were wealthy, educated, and proponents of liberalism, the classical form of which has no relation to the misnamed version forwarded by the neo-Communists of today.

The Founders would have had you people shot along with the British.

There is no "separate" "classical" "form" of Liberalism. That's an oxymoron made up by morons like Jonah Goldberg who can't face the fact that what they oppose is that golden Liberal document, the Constitution.

Why don't you show us who actually "forwarded" this misdefinition.

I'll give you a head start: begin in the 1940s with Joe McCarthy and his ilk, butthurt Republicans who had been out of the Presidency since 1933, looking for a 'hook', who deliberately started conflating "Liberal" with "left" (which it is not) in hopes of trying to paint their opponents who kept them out of the White House five straight elections as akin to the "Reds", the Emmanuel Goldstein of the time. And give dishonorable mention to H.W. forty years later who, following the edict of his campaign manager Lee Atwater, revived the same bullshit, sneering "Liberal" at his opponent as if it were an insult. And maybe to the likes of Bush and Atwater, it was.

You remember Lee Atwater, right?

"You start out in 1954 by saying, ''******, ******, ******.' By 1968 you can't say '******' — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this', is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than '******, ******'".
​

Yeah, that guy. To paraphrase you start out saying "commie commie commie". By 1948 it's too direct, so you go abstract and -say stuff like "Liberal Liberal Liberal". In spite of the fact that you're trying to sell a term as its own opposite --- because no matter how absurd, if you keep hammering the same mantra over and over and over and over, the rabble will eventually come to believe it, and forget the original meaning. As you just did.

So that's what it's about --- dishonesty. There is no virtue in dishonesty, anywhere. NONE. ZERO.

Go ahead now and redefine the word dishonesty now and make it into a virtue. Oughta be a hoot.

Once you get past that, essplain to the class who "you people" are. Oughta be a second hoot.

 

[Indeependent]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

Bullshit...The FFs were appalled by excess legislation.

 

[Pogo]

todays liberals would be torys.

See what I mean about trying to turn definitions inside out into their own opposites?

The Torys (conservatives) were the loyalists who wanted to stay a colony under the rule of the king. In other words, the authoritarians, the opposite of the Liberals.

You can sit on the internet and point at a rocking chair and call it a Steinway grand piano all you like --- it's still a rocking chair.

 

[JGalt]

The term "liberal" is an over-used descriptor. I prefer to call them Neo-Marxists, leftists, or secular-progressive communists.

 

[Pogo]

The term "liberal" is an over-used descriptor. I prefer to call them Neo-Marxists, leftists, or secular-progressive communists.

And that's at least four different things, probably five.

Words have meanings and meanings are not negotiable. PICK one.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Which group of people today would be most like our forefathers?

I know Republicans of today just assume it would be white farmers and white coal miners and white laborers and those are the people that started this country.

But if you actually go through the people involved at the time, you would find them to be what passed as the wealthy, the elite, scientists, and so on.

No farmer today could actually write the Declaration of Independence or the Bill of Rights or the Constitution or any of the documents this country is founded on.

Those had to be written by seasoned and professional lawyers and intellectuals.

Today, what we call “liberals”.

You write the funniest crap.

Yes, the Founders were wealthy, educated, and proponents of liberalism, the classical form of which has no relation to the misnamed version forwarded by the neo-Communists of today.

The Founders would have had you people shot along with the British.

There is no "separate" "classical" "form" of Liberalism. That's an oxymoron made up by morons like Jonah Goldberg who can't face the fact that what they oppose is that golden Liberal document, the Constitution.

Why don't you show us who actually "forwarded" this misdefinition.

I'll give you a head start: begin in the 1940s with Joe McCarthy and his ilk, butthurt Republicans who had been out of the Presidency since 1933, looking for a 'hook', who deliberately started conflating "Liberal" with "left" (which it is not) in hopes of trying to paint their opponents who kept them out of the White House five straight elections as akin to the "Reds", the Emmanuel Goldstein of the time. And give dishonorable mention to H.W. forty years later who, following the edict of his campaign manager Lee Atwater, revived the same bullshit, sneering "Liberal" at his opponent as if it were an insult. And maybe to the likes of Bush and Atwater, it was.

You remember Lee Atwater, right?

"You start out in 1954 by saying, ''******, ******, ******.' By 1968 you can't say '******' — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this', is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than '******, ******'".
​

Yeah, that guy. To paraphrase you start out saying "commie commie commie". By 1948 it's too direct, so you go abstract and -say stuff like "Liberal Liberal Liberal". In spite of the fact that you're trying to sell a term as its own opposite --- because no matter how absurd, if you keep hammering the same mantra over and over and over and over, the rabble will eventually come to believe it, and forget the original meaning. As you just did.

So that's what it's about --- dishonesty. There is no virtue in dishonesty, anywhere. NONE. ZERO.

Go ahead now and redefine the word dishonesty now and make it into a virtue. Oughta be a hoot.

Once you get past that, essplain to the class who "you people" are. Oughta be a second hoot.

I don't believe in rechewing used food. There is no relation between liberalism and the Democrat nonsense that requisitioned the title early in the 20th Century beyond what they use for propaganda purposes.

Even they know it, which is why they've moved to replace the title with the requisitioned "Progressive".

 

[JGalt]

The term "liberal" is an over-used descriptor. I prefer to call them Neo-Marxists, leftists, or secular-progressive communists.

And that's at least four different things, probably five.

Words have meanings and meanings are not negotiable. PICK one.

A commie by any other name is still a commie. Even a "Democratic Socialist."