PDA

View Full Version : Unified government



pjohns
11-10-2016, 10:08 PM
Many on the left have been busily decrying the
(perceived) evils of divided government: It inevitably leads to
"obstructionism." Or so we are lectured.

Well, beginning in January, we
will have a fully unified government: The White House; control of the
Senate; and control of the House, all in the hands of one
party.

Presumably, those on the left should now be deliriously happy with
this result.

But do you suppose that they really will be?

Green Arrow
11-10-2016, 10:11 PM
Of course not, it's not a government that will pass legislation they support. Who in their right mind would support that?

Chris
11-10-2016, 10:38 PM
No, the left, and the right, only want unified government when it goes their way.


I think a government is only as good as its opposition, party v party, branch v branch, and the people v the government.

Crepitus
11-10-2016, 10:41 PM
Yay, we're gonna set the country back 50 years.


I'm so thrilled.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmPhaG1ud38

Axiomatic
11-10-2016, 10:58 PM
If "progress" means government always does more in the future than in the past, how long do progressives think it SHOULD take for yours to look like that of Venezuela?

Scerab
11-11-2016, 12:11 AM
I have had conversations with people who think we are headed for a civil war.
We are far from one.
the politicians only represent the interests of the billionaires who own them. How much did Mitch McConnell take from the Koch brothers to be pro fossils fuel.
And effectivaly the poeple are left to their hopes and dreams, an endless cycle of hope and despair.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:02 AM
Yay, we're gonna set the country back 50 years.


I'm so thrilled....


Where'd this idea of anyone wanting to go backwards come from, other the progressives who think even evolution is moving forward.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:03 AM
Where'd this idea of anyone wanting to go backwards come from, other the progressives who think even evolution is moving forward.

Whut?

del
11-11-2016, 09:27 AM
Whut?

he'll clear it up when the video comes out

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:50 AM
Whut?

Think. It's clear.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:51 AM
he'll clear it up when the video comes out

Post #4.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 11:01 AM
he'll clear it up when the video comes out
I don't need video, just plain English.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 11:04 AM
Think. It's clear.

No, it's not. It's not even grammatical. Just gibberish. Clarify please.

Chris
11-11-2016, 11:10 AM
No, it's not. It's not even grammatical. Just gibberish. Clarify please.

You mean the typo context should ought to clarify? Lordy. Let me fix it for you:

Where'd this idea of anyone wanting to go backwards come from, other than progressives who think even evolution is moving forward.

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 11:12 AM
I'm not terribly crazy about a 'unified' government. There's nobody to keep the party in charge in check.

Docthehun
11-11-2016, 11:20 AM
I'm not terribly crazy about a 'unified' government. There's nobody to keep the party in charge in check.

On the other hand, there'll be no one else to blame. Talk about responsibility! Hope we're ready.

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 11:21 AM
On the other hand, there'll be no one else to blame. Talk about responsibility! Hope we're ready.

Sometimes we have to be protected from ourselves....?

Docthehun
11-11-2016, 11:23 AM
Sometimes we have to be protected from ourselves....?

Yes we do, don't we?

Chris
11-11-2016, 11:25 AM
I'm not terribly crazy about a 'unified' government. There's nobody to keep the party in charge in check.


A government is only good as its opposition. Checks and balances, parties, branches, the people, the Constitution.

MRogersNhood
11-11-2016, 11:25 AM
Yay, we're gonna set the country back 50 years.


I'm so thrilled.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmPhaG1ud38
Middle America was much better off 50 years ago,just sayin'

Federal government was much,much smaller as well.

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 11:26 AM
A government is only good as its opposition. Checks and balances, parties, branches, the people, the Constitution.

..and I want the press to continually force the administration to prove its legitimacy.

Chris
11-11-2016, 12:29 PM
..and I want the press to continually force the administration to prove its legitimacy.

Yes, the press should be in opposition as well, but seems to have become more of the propaganda arm of the duopoly.

Chris
11-11-2016, 12:31 PM
Middle America was much better off 50 years ago,just sayin'

Federal government was much,much smaller as well.


Smaller but just as bad. I was protesting 50 years ago. Chicago.

MRogersNhood
11-11-2016, 12:32 PM
Smaller but just as bad. I was protesting 50 years ago. Chicago.
Civil Rights?

Chris
11-11-2016, 12:34 PM
Civil Rights?

Daly, Nixon, war, and so much more.

MRogersNhood
11-11-2016, 12:35 PM
Daly, Nixon, war, and so much more.

Ah..I'm getting a dirty hippie vibe. :Skeert:

Chris
11-11-2016, 12:50 PM
Ah..I'm getting a dirty hippie vibe. :Skeert:

I guess I was.

Some things I disliked: Too many blamed soldiers, some soldiers were my friends. Too many protest hijackers, lot of them socialists. 4 dead in Ohio. So I bought a van and went to festivals.

Cigar
11-11-2016, 12:55 PM
Many on the left have been busily decrying the
(perceived) evils of divided government: It inevitably leads to
"obstructionism." Or so we are lectured.

Well, beginning in January, we
will have a fully unified government: The White House; control of the
Senate; and control of the House, all in the hands of one
party.

Presumably, those on the left should now be deliriously happy with
this result.

But do you suppose that they really will be?

I didn't hear Jack-Sh!t about Unity on the night President Obama Ingratiation or when invited Senate and House Member to a Unity Movie Watching.

Look, the GOP has a President, Both the House and The Senate and a Supreme Court Selection ... so if yo want to impress me, try Governing for 4 years.

MRogersNhood
11-11-2016, 12:57 PM
I guess I was.

Some things I disliked: Too many blamed soldiers, some soldiers were my friends. Too many protest hijackers, lot of them socialists. 4 dead in Ohio. So I bought a van and went to festivals.
So many blamed soldiers.I had friends that were.Well at least they're not going all Kent State on these recent kids.

There's a lot more of them,too. I think they all should get an I for the semester.

pjohns
11-11-2016, 01:08 PM
..and I want the press to continually force the administration to prove its legitimacy.
Did you say the same thing about the Obama administration?

pjohns
11-11-2016, 01:11 PM
I was protesting 50 years ago. Chicago.


[I protested] Daly, Nixon, war, and so much more.
Fifty years ago, Nixon was not the president; LBJ was.

Chris
11-11-2016, 01:23 PM
Fifty years ago, Nixon was not the president; LBJ was.

Yes, true, he came in 69 after the Chicago DNC Convention. We protested them all! And my memory is getting old.

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 01:37 PM
Yes, true, he came in 69 after the Chicago DNC Convention. We protested them all! And my memory is getting old.
I protested Reagan for my 4 years at Kent State.

resister
11-11-2016, 01:39 PM
I protested Reagan for my 4 years at Kent State.Good thing you were not doin it in the 60's

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 01:41 PM
Good thing you were not doin it in the 60's

You mean May 4, 1970?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRE9vMBBe10

Peter1469
11-11-2016, 02:02 PM
I protested Reagan for my 4 years at Kent State.

4 dead in Ohio....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX95QSKBODo

DGUtley
11-11-2016, 02:04 PM
Unfortunately, yes. For protesting. Incredible. Shot on a college campus for protesting. Just incredible. Allison, Sandra, William and Jeffrey. R.I.P.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 08:07 PM
You mean the typo context should ought to clarify? Lordy. Let me fix it for you:

Where'd this idea of anyone wanting to go backwards come from, other than progressives who think even evolution is moving forward.

You don't think evolution is moving forward?

As far as anyone wanting to move backwards have you missed the conservatives lining for the 60s?

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 08:10 PM
You mean the typo context should ought to clarify? Lordy. Let me fix it for you:

Where'd this idea of anyone wanting to go backwards come from, other than progressives who think even evolution is moving forward.

Here is one that wants to go backwards.


Middle America was much better off 50 years ago,just sayin'

Federal government was much,much smaller as well.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 08:11 PM
Middle America was much better off 50 years ago,just sayin'

Federal government was much,much smaller as well.

Before the mega corps killed the American dream you mean?

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 08:12 PM
Before the mega corps killed the American dream you mean?

I agree with both of you actually.

MRogersNhood
11-11-2016, 08:12 PM
Before the mega corps killed the American dream you mean?
I would say yes.

resister
11-11-2016, 08:18 PM
Unfortunately, yes. For protesting. Incredible. Shot on a college campus for protesting. Just incredible. Allison, Sandra, William and Jeffrey. R.I.P.These numbnuts out in the street tonight stirring up shit need to see this video and realize they could be the next star role

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 08:21 PM
I would say yes.

Alright. Something we can agree on then.

pjohns
11-11-2016, 08:35 PM
As far as anyone wanting to move backwards have you missed the conservatives lining for the 60s?
The very word, conservative," means that one wishes to conserve (i.e. preserve) the current order.

Did you miss that?

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 08:37 PM
The very word, conservative," means that one wishes to conserve (i.e. preserve) the current order.

Did you miss that?

Unfortunately it translates into reality to "conserve for the super wealthy", generally at the expense of the middle class.

Chris
11-11-2016, 08:56 PM
You don't think evolution is moving forward?

As far as anyone wanting to move backwards have you missed the conservatives lining for the 60s?


Evolution is not forward moving.

What does "lining for the 60s" even mean?

Chris
11-11-2016, 08:58 PM
Here is one that wants to go backwards.


No, that does not mean he wants to return to the 50s. He wants to bring the prosperity and probably the values of the 50s back to the future. Going backwards is far too simplistic,

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 08:59 PM
No, that does not mean he wants to return to the 50s. He wants to bring the prosperity and probably the values of the 50s back to the future. Going backwards is far too simplistic,

Depleting resources and hoarded wealth will ensure that never happens.

Chris
11-11-2016, 08:59 PM
Before the mega corps killed the American dream you mean?

And how did they do that but by the power of the government that sold out to it?

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:02 PM
Unfortunately it translates into reality to "conserve for the super wealthy", generally at the expense of the middle class.


Conservatism conserves values, not wealth. Preserving wealth is the job of the political parties, used to be Republicans were pro-business, now, after the 0.1%er Hillary, bought and pad for by corporate America, it's hard to tell the difference.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:04 PM
Depleting resources and hoarded wealth will ensure that never happens.

Sorry, I don't get the relationship between what I posted and what you posted. I was talking about wanting what was good in the past to carry forward to the future. Not sure what that has to do with depleting resources and hoarding wealth.

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 09:06 PM
Conservatism conserves values, not wealth. Preserving wealth is the job of the political parties, used to be Republicans were pro-business, now, after the 0.1%er Hillary, bought and pad for by corporate America, it's hard to tell the difference.

In practice it means both.

But I agree with you on your latter point. Establishment is overlapping conservative/liberal ideology.

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 09:08 PM
Sorry, I don't get the relationship between what I posted and what you posted. I was talking about wanting what was good in the past to carry forward to the future. Not sure what that has to do with depleting resources and hoarding wealth.

Social conservatism is dead. In the long run, it might get an indian summer over the next 4 or 8 years but social winter is guaranteed.

It's a class/wealth struggle in the US now more than a social conservative values struggle.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:10 PM
In practice it means both.

But I agree with you on your latter point. Establishment is overlapping conservative/liberal ideology.


Yes, people use words in different ways. It's a wonder we all communicate, if we do.

Captain Obvious
11-11-2016, 09:12 PM
Yes, people use words in different ways. It's a wonder we all communicate, if we do.

Fair enough and I thought about this point before I'm making it, but was Trump elected because of social issues or economic issues?

Both I'm sure and I wonder what the correlation between both aspects turned out to be.

JDubya
11-11-2016, 09:19 PM
Many on the left have been busily decrying the
(perceived) evils of divided government: It inevitably leads to
"obstructionism." Or so we are lectured.
Well, beginning in January, we
will have a fully unified government: The White House; control of the
Senate; and control of the House, all in the hands of one
party.
Presumably, those on the left should now be deliriously happy with
this result.
But do you suppose that they really will be?
It's going to be fun watching you fucks get 100% of the blame for every single fuckup.

And we're going to be out here shoving it right down your throats.

Green Arrow
11-11-2016, 09:24 PM
The very word, conservative," means that one wishes to conserve (i.e. preserve) the current order.

Did you miss that?

What "current order" do you want to conserve?

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:24 PM
The very word, conservative," means that one wishes to conserve (i.e. preserve) the current order.

Did you miss that?

Then why do they wanna go backwards?

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:25 PM
Fair enough and I thought about this point before I'm making it, but was Trump elected because of social issues or economic issues?

Both I'm sure and I wonder what the correlation between both aspects turned out to be.


Mainly economic issues, but he ran to the left of Clinton, with his mercantilist protectionist policies not altogether different than Sanders's.

Parties are about power and to sustain that they need wealth, and the wealthy need power. It's a great symbiotic relationship. All the while we get screwed.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:26 PM
Evolution is not forward moving.

What does "lining for the 60s" even mean?

Pining for the 60s. Autocorrect got me.

Then what is evolution in your world?

Green Arrow
11-11-2016, 09:27 PM
Evolution is not forward moving.

the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.

the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form.

The very definition of "forward moving."

Mister D
11-11-2016, 09:29 PM
What "current order" do you want to conserve?
I have said many times before that I have no idea what exactly it is American conservatives are trying to conserve at this point.

Mister D
11-11-2016, 09:30 PM
Pining for the 60s. Autocorrect got me.

Then what is evolution in your world?
It's the same as it is in your world. An absolutely meaningless process of change. It's going no where. It has no goal.

Green Arrow
11-11-2016, 09:31 PM
I have said many times before that I have no idea what exactly it is American conservatives are trying to conserve at this point.

I don't think they know, either. I've asked the question many times and the responses are almost always:

1) Ignore
2) "Freedom" and "limited government," two things that are extremely impossible to define
3) Some other buzzword like "freedom"

Mister D
11-11-2016, 09:32 PM
I don't think they know, either. I've asked the question many times and the responses are almost always:

1) Ignore
2) "Freedom" and "limited government," two things that are extremely impossible to define
3) Some other buzzword like "freedom"

Their problem is that they embrace a market system that destroys every way of life. They just don't get that though.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:35 PM
No, that does not mean he wants to return to the 50s. He wants to bring the prosperity and probably the values of the 50s back to the future. Going backwards is far too simplistic,

No, it isn't. Backwards is what they want. Let's look at some of the "values" from the 50s shall we? Someone in another thread told Cigar to "take a seat in the back of the bus". You wanna go back to "no negro's allowed"? How about some good old fashioned "red menace" witch hunts? And don't forget all commie bastards are fags and vice versa. Ladies, ready to go back to "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen"? Better have dinner on the table, a shot of whiskey, and his slippers when he gets home or its "pow! Right in the kisser!" For you! Need I go on?

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:36 PM
And how did they do that but by the power of the government that sold out to it?

Which has nothing to do with my point.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:37 PM
Pining for the 60s. Autocorrect got me.

Then what is evolution in your world?


Right, pining, I don't see that. Again, if I say we should get back to limited government I don't mean we should time travel back to ratification of the Constitution, just that I want to bring the limited government we once had into the future.


Evolution is mutation, selection and inheritance. Those genetic mutations that adapt us to a changing environment are selected for and maintained by inheritance. But there's no design to it, no plan to it, to say we're moving forward.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:38 PM
No, it isn't. Backwards is what they want. Let's look at some of the "values" from the 50s shall we? Someone in another thread told Cigar to "take a seat in the back of the bus". You wanna go back to "no negro's allowed"? How about some good old fashioned "red menace" witch hunts? And don't forget all commie bastards are fags and vice versa. Ladies, ready to go back to "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen"? Better have dinner on the table, a shot of whiskey, and his slippers when he gets home or its "pow! Right in the kisser!" For you! Need I go on?


Well, at this point I'll just let you put words in other people's mouths.

Mister D
11-11-2016, 09:39 PM
Right, pining, I don't see that. Again, if I say we should get back to limited government I don't mean we should time travel back to ratification of the Constitution, just that I want to bring the limited government we once had into the future.


Evolution is mutation, selection and inheritance. Those genetic mutations that adapt us to a changing environment are selected for and maintained by inheritance. But there's no design to it, no plan to it, to say we're moving forward.
You'd think our purported rationalists would know that.

His passion in denouncing the "values of the 50s" is remarkable. It's almost like he actually believes in something lol

Dr. Who
11-11-2016, 09:42 PM
It's going to be fun watching you fucks get 100% of the blame for every single fuckup.

And we're going to be out here shoving it right down your throats.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't see this warning (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/73014-My-thoughts-on-the-2016-race?p=1797263&viewfull=1#post1797263) in another thread. It applies to all threads, so there will be no more gentle warnings.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:43 PM
I have said many times before that I have no idea what exactly it is American conservatives are trying to conserve at this point.


For a conservative who follows someone like Buckley or Kirk I think it means preserve social values found in family, religion, institutions and incentives, process with caution on changing who we are. FOr the more Republican conservative, not sure, too many slogans, like make America great again.

Green Arrow
11-11-2016, 09:45 PM
Right, pining, I don't see that. Again, if I say we should get back to limited government I don't mean we should time travel back to ratification of the Constitution, just that I want to bring the limited government we once had into the future.


Evolution is mutation, selection and inheritance. Those genetic mutations that adapt us to a changing environment are selected for and maintained by inheritance. But there's no design to it, no plan to it, to say we're moving forward.

George Washington mobilized the U.S. army to put down a rebellion over whiskey taxes.

This country has never had objectively "limited" government. The government has continuously expanded because every year presents new challenges that must be met. It only seemed "limited" in the past because the challenges it faced were limited compared to the challenges of today.

Crepitus
11-11-2016, 09:49 PM
George Washington mobilized the U.S. army to put down a rebellion over whiskey taxes.

This country has never had objectively "limited" government. The government has continuously expanded because every year presents new challenges that must be met. It only seemed "limited" in the past because the challenges it faced were limited compared to the challenges of today.

Well put Sir.

Green Arrow
11-11-2016, 09:49 PM
Well put Sir.

Thank you.

Mister D
11-11-2016, 09:50 PM
For a conservative who follows someone like Buckley or Kirk I think it means preserve social values found in family, religion, institutions and incentives, process with caution on changing who we are. FOr the more Republican conservative, not sure, too many slogans, like make America great again.

But that was all slain at the altar of Mammon. Social values have become private ones. You need look no further than the disdain shown toward any sort of social values on this forum by both the right and the left.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:52 PM
You'd think our purported rationalists would know that.

His passion in denouncing the "values of the 50s" is remarkable. It's almost like he actually believes in something lol


I'm reminded again about some talking head on CNN commenting on the Obama/Trump meeting, given how Obama was excoriating Trump stumping for Clinton, and then suddenly turns cordial in the White House meeting. The talking head said he has a political self and a Presidential self, just as Trump...may have, or a Senator might have a political self and a Senatorial self. My point...oh, yeah, I think you can roughly divide people like that, into those who are partisan on one level where it's all about winning elections or just arguments on a forum, and those who are political on another level above the partisan fray, who know some history, some philosophy, some economics, some politics. So, getting back to what conservatives want, well, it depends on if your asking a partisan conservative or a political conservative--ditto liberals/progressives/whatever. --I don't know if that made sense. :)

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:56 PM
But that was all slain at the altar of Mammon. Social values have become private ones. You need look no further than the disdain shown toward any sort of social values on this forum by both the right and the left.

Agree, and was thinking of that earlier in responding to Captain, that it's not just this collusion of big business and big government screwing us, but the altar-of-Mammon consumerism that trades social value for the immediate gratification of things, the latest computer and iphone, and whatever's being advertised today (Google just came out with a new phone :)).

del
11-11-2016, 09:58 PM
I don't need video, just plain English.

well, then, you're fucked.

Chris
11-11-2016, 09:58 PM
Well put Sir.

Right, except...

https://s22.postimg.org/nln2h1s69/Jmx97.gif

Mister D
11-11-2016, 10:00 PM
I'm reminded again about some talking head on CNN commenting on the Obama/Trump meeting, given how Obama was excoriating Trump stumping for Clinton, and then suddenly turns cordial in the White House meeting. The talking head said he has a political self and a Presidential self, just as Trump...may have, or a Senator might have a political self and a Senatorial self. My point...oh, yeah, I think you can roughly divide people like that, into those who are partisan on one level where it's all about winning elections or just arguments on a forum, and those who are political on another level above the partisan fray, who know some history, some philosophy, some economics, some politics. So, getting back to what conservatives want, well, it depends on if your asking a partisan conservative or a political conservative--ditto liberals/progressives/whatever. --I don't know if that made sense. :)

Trueblue's latest stint for Bernie Sanders is by far the most egregious example of the former.

I think there is a major and ultimately fatal contradiction between conservatism (in its proper sense) and liberal capitalism in so far as the needs of the market always come first.

Mister D
11-11-2016, 10:01 PM
Agree, and was thinking of that earlier in responding to Captain, that it's not just this collusion of big business and big government screwing us, but the altar-of-Mammon consumerism that trades social value for the immediate gratification of things, the latest computer and iphone, and whatever's being advertised today (Google just came out with a new phone :)).
Exactly.

And I still have a flip top. I'm a traditionalist! lol

Chris
11-11-2016, 10:03 PM
Exactly.

And I still have a flip top. I'm a traditionalist! lol


I allow myself a few vices in devices, like a good computer for work, and the latest phone.

Chris
11-11-2016, 10:06 PM
Trueblue's latest stint for Bernie Sanders is by far the most egregious example of the former.

I think there is a major and ultimately fatal contradiction between conservatism (in its proper sense) and liberal capitalism in so far as the needs of the market always come first.

That again is, to me, a difference between a conservative and a Republican. A conservative favors the market, sure, as a means of exchange, necessary when work is so divided and specialized, while a Republican favors business, but so does a Democrat, which leads to the collusion of government and business.

pjohns
11-12-2016, 03:46 PM
Unfortunately it translates into reality to "conserve for the super wealthy", generally at the expense of the middle class.
Spoken like a true liberal...

pjohns
11-12-2016, 03:50 PM
Social conservatism is dead.

And your evidence for this is...what, exactly?

pjohns
11-12-2016, 03:55 PM
It's going to be fun watching you fucks get 100% of the blame for every single fuckup.
And we're going to be out here shoving it right down your throats.

Gee, I guess it would be accurate to say that you're not especially happy, huh?

pjohns
11-12-2016, 03:57 PM
Then why do they wanna go backwards?
Actually, we do not (except, of course, from the legacy of Barack Obama).

That is merely the fiction of liberal minds...

pjohns
11-12-2016, 04:01 PM
I don't think they know, either. I've asked the question many times and the responses are almost always:

1) Ignore
2) "Freedom" and "limited government," two things that are extremely impossible to define
3) Some other buzzword like "freedom"
I like #2 a great deal--even if you consider it a too difficult to define...

Green Arrow
11-12-2016, 04:05 PM
I like #2 a great deal--even if you consider it a too difficult to define...

So, define it for me. In detail. What, to you, is freedom? What is limited government? What, specifically, are you as a conservative trying to conserve?

Don't fear long responses, I have plenty of time to read them.

pjohns
11-12-2016, 04:11 PM
So, define it for me. In detail. What, to you, is freedom? What is limited government? What, specifically, are you as a conservative trying to conserve?

I would say that freedom is precisely what the Founders envisioned (although applied to all Americans--not just to white men): It is the freedom to succeed--or to fail; but with no government to be used as a backstop here.

That also defines limited government.

As well as what I wish to conserve.

Chris
11-12-2016, 04:17 PM
I would say that freedom is precisely what the Founders envisioned (although applied to all Americans--not just to white men): It is the freedom to succeed--or to fail; but with no government to be used as a backstop here.

That also defines limited government.

As well as what I wish to conserve.


The pursuit of happiness, as each defines it, to succeed or, as you add, to fail. The "as each defines it" is important. Liberals seek a collective definition.

To define one is to define the other. I think it was Walter Williams said as the government grows, liberty shrinks, and vice versa. Authority + liberty = 1 s.t. increasing one decreases the other.

Green Arrow
11-12-2016, 04:18 PM
I would say that freedom is precisely what the Founders envisioned (although applied to all Americans--not just to white men): It is the freedom to succeed--or to fail; but with no government to be used as a backstop here.

The founders envisioned a lot of things about freedom. John Adams wanted the U.S. government to be run by an aristocracy akin to England. He thought the government had the power to control free speech that was critical of the government, hence the Alien and Sedition Acts. George Washington utilized the U.S. military to put down rebellions over unfair taxes (sound familiar?). Benjamin Rush wanted the Bible taught as a textbook in every school.

What the founders wanted for America, and their views on freedom and liberty, were as varied as they themselves were.

That also defines limited government.
Where are the limits? What does government have the power to do? What can it not do?

Crepitus
11-12-2016, 05:11 PM
Actually, we do not (except, of course, from the legacy of Barack Obama).

That is merely the fiction of liberal minds...

No, it's not. Many is the time I've heard conservatives pining for the 50s.

pjohns
11-12-2016, 05:13 PM
The founders envisioned a lot of things about freedom. John Adams wanted the U.S. government to be run by an aristocracy akin to England.

Link, please?


George Washington utilized the U.S. military to put down rebellions over unfair taxes (sound familiar?).

And what, precisely, is wrong with that?


Benjamin Rush wanted the Bible taught as a textbook in every school.


Do you seriously consider "Benjamin Rush" (whom I had never even heard of previously) to be one of the major Founders?


Where are the limits? What does government have the power to do? What can it not do?

Government has the power given it by the US Constitution--and not one bit more.

del
11-12-2016, 05:13 PM
No, it's not. Many is the time I've heard conservatives pining for the 50s.
yeah, the 1850's

Chris
11-12-2016, 05:15 PM
No, it's not. Many is the time I've heard conservatives pining for the 50s.



You have heard this but you can't find one here who says it the way you hear it.

Chris
11-12-2016, 05:16 PM
yeah, the 1850's

50 a.d.

Crepitus
11-12-2016, 05:18 PM
You have heard this but you can't find one here who says it the way you hear it.

I posted a link the last time we had this discussion.

Mister D
11-12-2016, 05:19 PM
50 a.d.
It's C.E. now, bub!

Chris
11-12-2016, 05:26 PM
It's C.E. now, bub!

:D

Let's got back to using Vulgar Era.

Chris
11-12-2016, 05:27 PM
I posted a link the last time we had this discussion.

Probably to some rightwingnutjob. Doesn't count.

Green Arrow
11-12-2016, 05:41 PM
Link, please?
John Adams: President should be called "His Majesty" or "His Highness" (http://www.history.com/news/10-things-you-may-not-know-about-john-adams)

I can't find the other at the moment, I have it bookmarked somewhere. I'll post it as soon as it is located.

And what, precisely, is wrong with that?
Ignoring the hypocrisy, you mean? We fought our own revolution because of unfair taxation by the British crown, and then turned around and shut down rebellions for the same cause in our own newly formed nation.

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

That's the Declaration of Independence.

Do you seriously consider "Benjamin Rush" (whom I had never even heard of previously) to be one of the major Founders?
I never said he was a major founder, no. He is one of our founding fathers, however.

Government has the power given it by the US Constitution--and not one bit more.
List those powers. Specifically. And please don't start by suggesting I don't know them. I'm very aware of what they are. That's not the point here - I'm seeing if you do.

Crepitus
11-12-2016, 06:12 PM
Probably to some rightwingnutjob. Doesn't count.

You don't think right wing nut jobs are conservatives?

del
11-12-2016, 06:15 PM
Probably to some rightwingnutjob. Doesn't count.


You don't think right wing nut jobs are conservatives?
would now be a bad time for me to bring up the term *poisoning the well*?

:biglaugh:

Crepitus
11-12-2016, 06:16 PM
would now be a bad time for me to bring up the term *poisoning the well*?

:biglaugh:

Actually laughed out loud!��

Chris
11-12-2016, 06:18 PM
You don't think right wing nut jobs are conservatives?

Nor do I think leftwingnutjobs are liberals.

Chris
11-12-2016, 06:18 PM
would now be a bad time for me to bring up the term *poisoning the well*?

:biglaugh:

Wouldn't mean anything in this context but to get a laugh.

del
11-12-2016, 06:20 PM
Actually laughed out loud!��

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv1kApvEPiY

:)

del
11-12-2016, 06:21 PM
Wouldn't mean anything in this context but to get a laugh.
oh, of course

to imply otherwise would be...


















.

Crepitus
11-12-2016, 07:10 PM
Nor do I think leftwingnutjobs are liberals.

News Flash! They are, on both sides.

Chris
11-12-2016, 07:12 PM
News Flash! They are, on both sides.

Well, you asked me what I think and I think not because too many too often define the liberal left and the conservative right by their outliers.

JMHO.

pjohns
11-13-2016, 01:50 PM
John Adams: President should be called "His Majesty" or "His Highness" (http://www.history.com/news/10-things-you-may-not-know-about-john-adams)

I can't find the other at the moment, I have it bookmarked somewhere. I'll post it as soon as it is located.

The link says only that "[t]o many Americans who had just rid themselves of a monarch, the titles were too royal." It says nothing of Adams' wishing to assume a majestic role.


In fact, Wikipedia considers it so insignificant that it does not even mention it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams



Ignoring the hypocrisy, you mean? We fought our own revolution because of unfair taxation by the British crown, and then turned around and shut down rebellions for the same cause in our own newly formed nation.
I really do not see any "hypocrisy" in our putting a stop to anarchy.

And I am quite surprised that you do...

[QUOTE=Green Arrow;1798657]I never said [that Benjamin Rush] was a major founder, no. He is one of our founding fathers, however.
Well, perhaps I was not considering those who played an exceeding minor role in our nation's founding, when I spoke of "the Founders."

Does that seem unreasonable to you?

List those powers. Specifically. And please don't start by suggesting I don't know them. I'm very aware of what they are. That's not the point here - I'm seeing if you do.
Wikipedia lists these, as shown in Article, Section 1 of the US Constitution:

"The Congress shall have Power[:]

To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

"To borrow on the credit of the United States;


"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Native American Tribes; (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_Clause)


"To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;


"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;


"To establish Post Offices and Post Roads; (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_Clause)


"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause)


"To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;


"To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;


"To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Clause)


"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;


"To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(artillery)), Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And


"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_Proper_Clause)"

Tahuyaman
11-13-2016, 04:19 PM
Of course not, it's not a government that will pass legislation they support. Who in their right mind would support that?


I don't know why liberals are so upset. It's not like Donald Trump has been out campaigning on a platform of less government. Trump has floated a lot of big government solutions to many different problems.

Axiomatic
11-13-2016, 04:27 PM
A hole big enough to drive a truck through:


"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Native American Tribes;"

Cornfields, grown by the farmer and for the farmer, to be consumed by the same farmer at his house, have been driven through it in a very literal sense by one of the "checks and balances".

The source of more depressions than a golf ball manufacturer and more inflation than a helium tank:


"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures; To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;"

A hole big enough for the aforementioned "check and balance" to drive Obamacare through:


"To lay and collect Taxes"

Why do people say "checks and balances", anyway? Every time I ask about them, the only one anybody ever tells me about is The Court of Federal Supremacy, which seems to contrive a rubber stamp for everything the president signs.

A hole big enough to drive a space station through?:


"...to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States"

A hole big enough to drive all federal agencies with autonomous power to write law through:


"To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(artillery)), Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_Proper_Clause)"

I wonder which one they'll pick to drive The Great Wall of America through.

Axiomatic
11-13-2016, 04:47 PM
Ever hear of Georgism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism)

Father of the Death Tax, Thomas Pain wanted to tax all land owners (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_Justice) to provide a Basic Income (https://medium.com/basic-income/on-the-record-bernie-sanders-on-basic-income-de9162fb3b5c#.afyhjlwm3) for all non-land-owners.

rembrant
11-14-2016, 01:31 PM
Of course not, it's not a government that will pass legislation they support. Who in their right mind would support that? Right.. and I'd not that Trumpists ain't in tune with the Repubs in Congress... so far.. and nobody KNOWS how they will zig zag. Trump has a Variable/opportunist past. trump is NOT the typical tea bag. Trump is QUITE apt to reverse ANY thing he ever said. Throw a dart or a handful of poo.... don't think you KNOW what's on the horizon.

rembrant
11-14-2016, 03:20 PM
A hole big enough to drive a truck through:



Cornfields, grown by the farmer and for the farmer, to be consumed by the same farmer at his house, have been driven through it in a very literal sense by one of the "checks and balances".

The source of more depressions than a golf ball manufacturer and more inflation than a helium tank:



A hole big enough for the aforementioned "check and balance" to drive Obamacare through:



Why do people say "checks and balances", anyway? Every time I ask about them, the only one anybody ever tells me about is The Court of Federal Supremacy, which seems to contrive a rubber stamp for everything the president signs.

A hole big enough to drive a space station through?:



A hole big enough to drive all federal agencies with autonomous power to write law through:



I wonder which one they'll pick to drive The Great Wall of America through.Okay... Mr Ax seemsa quite confused about how law, in general or the constitution works. He cites fragments then... misses the point . He RESPONDS to..... whatever.. but it's not relevant to passage cited. the CONSTITUTION... is NOT merely a few pages you can learn in an hour.... assuming you (unlike ax) know something of terminology and context. MEANWHILE.....fools fail to GET that the Constitution is built to evolve. The Congress, the courts, states and..... TIME will and did CHANGE much.
In 1800 in many States only White males with PROPERTY could vote. In 1800 there was no USA west of the Mississippi, Most Americans were farmers. News moved at the speed of a man on a horse, most blacks were slaves.
Corporations were virtually unknown. paved roads.. rare.

100 yr later.....Women still could not vote. Blacks dealt with Jim Crow. America was still not 48 States. Things like Cars, electricity, had BARELY begun to happen.Women could not vote. HOWEVER...... by then we'd added LAWS, Court Cases. Another 100 years? We're a global power, big time infrastructure, Corporations a BIG deal, lots of tech. By NOW....The FUNCTIONAL Constitution has GROWN big. Now.. all things considered a full library of Constitutional law could probably fill an Econoline.

ANYHOW...... if you THINK the US Constitution was FROZEN in place 250 yr ago...... Ax's odd comments still miss the boat.

rembrant
11-14-2016, 03:39 PM
Ever hear of Georgism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism)

Father of the Death Tax, Thomas Pain wanted to tax all land owners (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_Justice) to provide a Basic Income (https://medium.com/basic-income/on-the-record-bernie-sanders-on-basic-income-de9162fb3b5c#.afyhjlwm3) for all non-land-owners.PAINE... was a firebrand important in the REVOLUTION but of no import in the Constitution process. We HAVE.. now.. property tax, but also several OTHER forms of tax. the georgist term.. you really don't hear much and.. NO.. it's not the same as inheritance tax.