Your Choice: Liberalism or the Constitution

[PoliticalChic]

5. While those Classical Liberals who wrote the Constitution memorialized the ideas of private property, individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government, the 'Liberals/Progressives' had very different plans for America.


These usurpers differed dramatically from earlier views in that, for the first time they professed open and direct criticism of the Constitution. This separation from earliest traditions was the backbone of the Progressive movement.

a. The Constitution was ‘old,’ and not equipped to deal with ‘new social ills.’

b. Not limited government, but expansive government was necessary.

c. The outdated concepts of checks and balances were obstacles for the Progressives’ agenda.

d. ‘Social Justice’ requires the redistribution of private property, and the Constitution stood in the way.

e. The new view attacked the social compact and natural rights of citizens theory embodied by the Constitution.

f. The rights of the collective, the state, surpass those of the individual.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yawn, another specious Liberals are Fascists synopsis.

 

[Moonglow]

Am I the only person who can't read PC's long, drawn out posts that are full of red herrings and sophomoric arguments?

Do what I do - read them backwards. They make more sense that way.

It's the logic whey....

Curdn't have said it better myself.

When I had a logic course at Okie University, all I wanted to do was stand up and sing the philosophers song by Monty Python, my instructor was not pleased...

 

[Moonglow]

5. While those Classical Liberals who wrote the Constitution memorialized the ideas of private property, individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government, the 'Liberals/Progressives' had very different plans for America.


These usurpers differed dramatically from earlier views in that, for the first time they professed open and direct criticism of the Constitution. This separation from earliest traditions was the backbone of the Progressive movement.

a. The Constitution was ‘old,’ and not equipped to deal with ‘new social ills.’

b. Not limited government, but expansive government was necessary.

c. The outdated concepts of checks and balances were obstacles for the Progressives’ agenda.

d. ‘Social Justice’ requires the redistribution of private property, and the Constitution stood in the way.

e. The new view attacked the social compact and natural rights of citizens theory embodied by the Constitution.

f. The rights of the collective, the state, surpass those of the individual.

Is that why the FF's included eminent or imminent domain in the 5th amendment?

 

[Moonglow]

Yawn, another specious Liberals are Fascists synopsis.

From the ever loving Heritage Foundation

In December 2012, an announcement was made that Senator Jim DeMint would resign from the Senate to head the Heritage Foundation.[16] Pundits have predicted his tenure may mark a sharper edge for the Foundation.[17] On May 10, 2013, Jason Richwine, who co-authored the think tank's controversial report on the costs of amnesty, resigned his position following intensive media attention on his Harvard PhD thesis from 2009 and comments he made at 2008 American Enterprise Institute forum. In both Richwine argued that Hispanics and blacks are intellectually inferior to whites and have trouble assimilating because of a supposed genetic predisposition to lower IQ.[18][19]

In July 2013, following disputes over the farm bill, the Republican Study Committee of 172 conservative U.S. House members reversed a decades-old tradition of access by barring Heritage Foundation employees from attending its weekly meeting in the Capitol, but continues cooperation through "regular joint events and briefings".

The Heritage Foundation - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

These people are pessimistic Darwin socialist...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yawn, another specious Liberals are Fascists synopsis.

Ooooo......kinda sensitive to the comparison, huh?

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

That's just the opinion of one RWnut, and you're entitled to it.

 

[Moonglow]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

You don't have the power to make this decision...

 

[hunarcy]

5. While those Classical Liberals who wrote the Constitution memorialized the ideas of private property, individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government, the 'Liberals/Progressives' had very different plans for America.


These usurpers differed dramatically from earlier views in that, for the first time they professed open and direct criticism of the Constitution. This separation from earliest traditions was the backbone of the Progressive movement.

a. The Constitution was ‘old,’ and not equipped to deal with ‘new social ills.’

b. Not limited government, but expansive government was necessary.

c. The outdated concepts of checks and balances were obstacles for the Progressives’ agenda.

d. ‘Social Justice’ requires the redistribution of private property, and the Constitution stood in the way.

e. The new view attacked the social compact and natural rights of citizens theory embodied by the Constitution.

f. The rights of the collective, the state, surpass those of the individual.

Is that why the FF's included eminent or imminent domain in the 5th amendment?

There was an acknowledgement of the needs of society, but the property must be paid for, not confiscated.

 

[hunarcy]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

That's just the opinion of one RWnut, and you're entitled to it.

Seeing you call someone a nut has a delicious irony to it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent. Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke).


2. Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the ‘evils’ that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. For Classical Liberals, known today as conservatives, there should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see ‘progress’ as some mythical direction for society.


3. The Founders, Classical Liberals, operated under the view that government is a necessary evil, simply a benign but voluntary social contract for free men to enter into willingly, and incorporated principles based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

a. Classical liberalism, the optimistic doctrine that gave us liberty, democracy, progress, was a moral project. It held that human society could always better itself by encouraging the good and diminishing the bad. It rested, therefore, on a very clear understanding that there was a higher cause than self-realization: that there were such things as right and wrong and that the former should be preferred over the latter. But the belief that autonomous individuals had the right to make subjective judgment about what was right for them in pursuit of their unchallengeable entitlement to happiness destroyed that understanding. Progressives interpreted liberty as license, thus destroying the moral rules that make freedom a virtue.
“The World Turned Upside Down,” by Melanie Phillips. p.284





4. There are several incorrigible liars who insist that the Founders were of the same mentality as those we call 'liberals.'
Nothing could be further from the truth.
To see how this pertains to the title of the thread, "Your Choice: Liberalism or the Constitution," notice that those known as Liberals today, actually the group called Socialists until communist John Dewey had them steal the name 'Liberal,' work for the very opposite: collectivism, socialist economic dominance, and unlimited, overreaching government.


a. “Finally, Dewey arguably did more than any other reformer to repackage progressive social theory in a way that obscured just how radically its principles departed from those of the American founding. Like Ely and many of his fellow progressive academics, Dewey initially embraced the term "socialism" to describe his social theory. Only after realizing how damaging the name was to the socialist cause did he, like other progressives, begin to avoid it. In the early 1930s, accordingly, Dewey begged the Socialist party, of which he was a longtime member, to change its name. "The greatest handicap from which special measures favored by the Socialists suffer," Dewey declared, "is that they are advanced by the Socialist party as Socialism.”
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=OTY0MjA1YzVjNjVkOTViMzM5M2Q5M2Y0ODk0ODc0MmM=


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” Taking liberties - LA Times

Progress is a mythical direction for society?

lol, that should be tattooed on every conservatives' forehead.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

That's just the opinion of one RWnut, and you're entitled to it.

Seeing you call someone a nut has a delicious irony to it.

Still smarting I see. lol, thinskinned pussy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace."

Does that include the tradition of denying women the vote?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

1. Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent. Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. The species is wiser than the individual (Burke).


2. Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the ‘evils’ that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. For Classical Liberals, known today as conservatives, there should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see ‘progress’ as some mythical direction for society.


3. The Founders, Classical Liberals, operated under the view that government is a necessary evil, simply a benign but voluntary social contract for free men to enter into willingly, and incorporated principles based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

a. Classical liberalism, the optimistic doctrine that gave us liberty, democracy, progress, was a moral project. It held that human society could always better itself by encouraging the good and diminishing the bad. It rested, therefore, on a very clear understanding that there was a higher cause than self-realization: that there were such things as right and wrong and that the former should be preferred over the latter. But the belief that autonomous individuals had the right to make subjective judgment about what was right for them in pursuit of their unchallengeable entitlement to happiness destroyed that understanding. Progressives interpreted liberty as license, thus destroying the moral rules that make freedom a virtue.
“The World Turned Upside Down,” by Melanie Phillips. p.284





4. There are several incorrigible liars who insist that the Founders were of the same mentality as those we call 'liberals.'
Nothing could be further from the truth.
To see how this pertains to the title of the thread, "Your Choice: Liberalism or the Constitution," notice that those known as Liberals today, actually the group called Socialists until communist John Dewey had them steal the name 'Liberal,' work for the very opposite: collectivism, socialist economic dominance, and unlimited, overreaching government.


a. “Finally, Dewey arguably did more than any other reformer to repackage progressive social theory in a way that obscured just how radically its principles departed from those of the American founding. Like Ely and many of his fellow progressive academics, Dewey initially embraced the term "socialism" to describe his social theory. Only after realizing how damaging the name was to the socialist cause did he, like other progressives, begin to avoid it. In the early 1930s, accordingly, Dewey begged the Socialist party, of which he was a longtime member, to change its name. "The greatest handicap from which special measures favored by the Socialists suffer," Dewey declared, "is that they are advanced by the Socialist party as Socialism.”
http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=OTY0MjA1YzVjNjVkOTViMzM5M2Q5M2Y0ODk0ODc0MmM=


b. Dewey reveled in the thought that the war might force Americans to “give up much of our economic freedom…we shall have to lay by our good natured individualism and march in step.” Taking liberties - LA Times

Yet another thread DOA. We wrote the Constitution, it's my country not yours, a Liberal Nation founded upon the ideals of Liberalism. If you don't like it Korean Girl, then hit the road. You aren't needed or wanted here.

 

[NYcarbineer]

"To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old."

Well then, how do you explain the Revolution, the armed rebellion that led to the founding of this country,

a founding you claim was the work of Conservatives?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

"To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old."

Well then, how do you explain the Revolution, the armed rebellion that led to the founding of this country,

a founding you claim was the work of Conservatives?

They love to credit for what happened, while they were hiding out in Canada hoping the Crown would win.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yawn, another specious Liberals are Fascists synopsis.

Ooooo......kinda sensitive to the comparison, huh?

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Coming from you? Hardly! SOS.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives are not the authority that interprets the Constitution.

Liberalism or the Constitution....not both.

You don't have the power to make this decision...

I do have the power to make an unassailable argument that liberalism is inconsistent with the Constitution, and with the aims of the Founders.

And you recognize that, don't you.