# Who was first Republican President; first Democrat president?



## Brutus

Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.

So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.

The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).

Do you agree?


----------



## Polk

No. Parties are what they are.

The modern Republican Party originated in mid-1850s and Lincoln was the first Republican elected to the presidency.

The modern Democratic Party can be traced back to supporters of Andrew Jackson.

I would say the Jacksonian spirit (focused on the interests of the common man) is definitely still the driving force of the Democratic Party.


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.
> 
> So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.
> 
> The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
> communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).
> 
> Do you agree?



Sorry, but no.  Thomas Jefferson, according to the White House website among other sources, was the leader of the Democratic-Republican Party, which was a completely different organization from the modern-day Republican Party.  They DID oppose the Federalist Party, that much is true.

Thomas Jefferson | The White House

The modern-day Republican Party began as a protest against the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854.  When the Whig Party died out, the Republican Party essentially took their place on the national stage.  The first candidate from the Republican Party to be elected to the Presidency was Abraham Lincoln in 1860, which is the reason that many in the Republican Party still refer to it as "the party of Lincoln".

Republican Presidents of the U.S.
Republican Party - Conservapedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)

(Yes, I know, I don't normally accept Wikipedia as a source on this board, but this isn't a controversial question or a hot-button topic.)

George Washington didn't really have a political party affiliation, because he despised the entire idea of parties.  And the Democrat Party didn't exist back then.  It arose in the 1830s out of the split in and death of the original Democrat-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson, and the first President to be elected from the newly-formed Democrat Party was Andrew Jackson.

Democratic Party: West's Encyclopedia of American Law (Full Article) from Answers.com


----------



## Brutus

Cecilie: Sorry, but no. Thomas Jefferson, according to the White House website among other sources, was the leader of the Democratic-Republican Party, which was a completely different organization from the modern-day Republican Party. They DID oppose the Federalist Party, that much is true.

Brutus: of course that is the point. The liberals are hiding the truth from you. If you look at newspapers, speeches, letters, and the Congressional Record  from the period you will be amazed to discover that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 and the term Democratic -Republican was never used. And, just like modern Republicans, the entire purpose of Jefferson's new Party was to promote freedom by diminishing government. Welcome to your first lesson in American History. 

Cecilie: Thomas Jefferson | The White House

The modern-day Republican Party began as a protest against the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854. When the Whig Party died out, the Republican Party essentially took their place on the national stage. The first candidate from the Republican Party to be elected to the Presidency was Abraham Lincoln in 1860, which is the reason that many in the Republican Party still refer to it as "the party of Lincoln".

Brutus: notice the way they say, modern Republican, to ignore the original Republican Party that Jefferson founded. Liberals or Democrats love to use the term: Democratic-Republican because it implies they have a connection to the founding and American principles, when really they don't and so belong in Cuba. 

Cecelie: Republican Presidents of the U.S.
Republican Party - Conservapedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...(United_States)
(Yes, I know, I don't normally accept Wikipedia as a source on this board, but this isn't a controversial question or a hot-button topic.)

Brutus: and now that you've had your first real lesson in American History you know better. It is my honor to serve you.

Cecelie: George Washington didn't really have a political party affiliation, because he despised the entire idea of parties. 

Brutus: OMG!! GW and Hamilton were Federalists down to their shorts. GW was  happy to see Republicans imprisioned under the Alien and Sedition Acts.

Cecilie: And the Democrat Party didn't exist back then. It arose in the 1830s out of the split in and death of the original Democrat-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson, and the first President to be elected from the newly-formed Democrat Party was Andrew Jackson.

Brutus: in terms of philosophy the Federalist Party of Washington, Hamilton and Adams was Democratic in that it stood for government and against freedom.


----------



## Brutus

Please see my response to Cecilie for your first lesson in American History. It is my honor to help a liberal.


----------



## bodecea

Brutus said:


> Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.
> 
> So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.
> 
> The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
> communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).
> 
> Do you agree?



Actually, Jefferson's Party was the Democrat-Republicans...shortened for a while to Republicans then to Democrats and completely revamped under Jackson.   The Federalists were the Conservatives under Hamilton and the Democrat-Republicans were the Liberals under Jefferson.


----------



## rightwinger

Brutus said:


> Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.
> 
> So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.
> 
> The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
> communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).
> 
> Do you agree?



Our teachers are overpaid

Imagine putting out a product like Brutus...I demand my money back


----------



## Sherry

Brutus said:


> Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.
> 
> So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.
> 
> The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
> communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).
> 
> Do you agree?



Woodrow Wilson was no friend of freedom and liberty.


----------



## Brutus

Bodeca: Actually, Jefferson's Party was the Democrat-Republicans...

Brutus: wrong wrong wrong; of course you can't prove it with speech, letter, ballot,  or newspaper from 1790's!!! sorry!! 


Bodeca: shortened for a while to Republicans then to Democrats and completely revamped under Jackson.

Brutus: sorry never shortened which is why you offer no proof. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.

Bodeca:  The Federalists were the Conservatives under Hamilton 

Brutus: of course that is very very stupid given that the Federalists wanted a powerful federal government while the Republicans were 100% opposed!!

Bodeca: and the Democrat-Republicans were the Liberals under Jefferson.

Brutus: actually Jefferson was 100% all about freedom or liberty from government. Again, welcome to your first real lesson in American History.


----------



## Mr Natural

Mr Clean:  Brutus, try using the Quote function.


----------



## Brutus

Rightwinger: Our teachers are overpaid

Imagine putting out a product like Brutus...I demand my money back 

Brutus: of course the liberal lacks the IQ to specificially challenge anything I"ve said. Its easier to pretend you're smart than to demonstrate it, isn't it?


----------



## rightwinger

Brutus said:


> Rightwinger: Our teachers are overpaid
> 
> Imagine putting out a product like Brutus...I demand my money back
> 
> Brutus: of course the liberal lacks the IQ to specificially challenge anything I"ve said. Its easier to pretend you're smart than to demonstrate it, isn't it?



Google is your friend...

Every time that Brutus posts.....an angel loses her wings


----------



## konradv

Brutus said:


> Bodeca: Actually, Jefferson's Party was the Democrat-Republicans...
> 
> Brutus: wrong wrong wrong; of course you can't prove it with speech, letter, ballot,  or newspaper from 1790's!!! sorry!!
> 
> 
> Bodeca: shortened for a while to Republicans then to Democrats and completely revamped under Jackson.
> 
> Brutus: sorry never shortened which is why you offer no proof. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.
> 
> Bodeca:  The Federalists were the Conservatives under Hamilton
> 
> Brutus: of course that is very very stupid given that the Federalists wanted a powerful federal government while the Republicans were 100% opposed!!
> 
> Bodeca: and the Democrat-Republicans were the Liberals under Jefferson.
> 
> Brutus: actually Jefferson was 100% all about freedom or liberty from government. Again, welcome to your first real lesson in American History.



He also believed that government could do things to help the poor.

*I am conscious that an equal division of property is impracticable, but the consequences of this enormous inequality producing so much misery to the bulk of mankind, legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let their subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of property of every kind therefore to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other relations in equal degree, is a politic measure and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise.*

To James Madison, Paris, September 20, 1785 

From Revolution to Reconstruction: Presidents: Thomas Jefferson: Letters: Property and Natural Right


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Cecilie: Sorry, but no. Thomas Jefferson, according to the White House website among other sources, was the leader of the Democratic-Republican Party, which was a completely different organization from the modern-day Republican Party. They DID oppose the Federalist Party, that much is true.
> 
> Brutus: of course that is the point. The liberals are hiding the truth from you. If you look at newspapers, speeches, letters, and the Congressional Record  from the period you will be amazed to discover that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 and the term Democratic -Republican was never used. And, just like modern Republicans, the entire purpose of Jefferson's new Party was to promote freedom by diminishing government. Welcome to your first lesson in American History.
> 
> Cecilie: Thomas Jefferson | The White House
> 
> The modern-day Republican Party began as a protest against the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854. When the Whig Party died out, the Republican Party essentially took their place on the national stage. The first candidate from the Republican Party to be elected to the Presidency was Abraham Lincoln in 1860, which is the reason that many in the Republican Party still refer to it as "the party of Lincoln".
> 
> Brutus: notice the way they say, modern Republican, to ignore the original Republican Party that Jefferson founded. Liberals or Democrats love to use the term: Democratic-Republican because it implies they have a connection to the founding and American principles, when really they don't and so belong in Cuba.
> 
> Cecelie: Republican Presidents of the U.S.
> Republican Party - Conservapedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republi...(United_States)
> (Yes, I know, I don't normally accept Wikipedia as a source on this board, but this isn't a controversial question or a hot-button topic.)
> 
> Brutus: and now that you've had your first real lesson in American History you know better. It is my honor to serve you.
> 
> Cecelie: George Washington didn't really have a political party affiliation, because he despised the entire idea of parties.
> 
> Brutus: OMG!! GW and Hamilton were Federalists down to their shorts. GW was  happy to see Republicans imprisioned under the Alien and Sedition Acts.
> 
> Cecilie: And the Democrat Party didn't exist back then. It arose in the 1830s out of the split in and death of the original Democrat-Republican Party of Thomas Jefferson, and the first President to be elected from the newly-formed Democrat Party was Andrew Jackson.
> 
> Brutus: in terms of philosophy the Federalist Party of Washington, Hamilton and Adams was Democratic in that it stood for government and against freedom.



Is there something difficult about using the quote function that I'm unaware of?  Seems to be working fine to me.

Clean it up.


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Please see my response to Cecilie for your first lesson in American History. It is my honor to help a liberal.



You taught a lesson in how to violate basic message board courtesy, and one in how to be a conspiracy theorist playing at "Cleverest Guy in the Room".  American History?  Not so much.


----------



## bodecea

Mr Clean said:


> Mr Clean:  Brutus, try using the Quote function.



I blame his teachers for his woeful lack of knowledge of American Political History and his inability to figure out the quote function.


----------



## bodecea

Cecilie1200 said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please see my response to Cecilie for your first lesson in American History. It is my honor to help a liberal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You taught a lesson in how to violate basic message board courtesy, and one in how to be a conspiracy theorist playing at "Cleverest Guy in the Room".  American History?  Not so much.
Click to expand...


He called you a liberal....welcome aboard, Cecilie...we've got cookies.


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Rightwinger: Our teachers are overpaid
> 
> Imagine putting out a product like Brutus...I demand my money back
> 
> Brutus: of course the liberal lacks the IQ to specificially challenge anything I"ve said. Its easier to pretend you're smart than to demonstrate it, isn't it?



Okay, it's bad enough when you invent conversations with real people using partial or edited quotes.  It's another thing when you waste time and screen space to invent wholly imaginary conversations just so you can say, "Look how brilliant I would sound if a real person were to use the arguments I really WISH they would."  If you want to talk to the voice in your echoing, vacuous skull, kindly do it on your own time.


----------



## Brutus

Brutus: of course the thread is designed to teach liberals that Jefferson was the first Republican; he held the same views regarding freedom and liberty from government as modern Republicans, and that liberal or Democratic ideas have no place in the American tradition despite the dishonest attempt to associate with Jefferson, and the American founding,  through the name, "Democrat-Republican."  

Now you know why liberals, not conservatives, spied for Stalin.


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Brutus: of course the thread is designed to teach liberals that Jefferson was the first Republican; he held the same views regarding freedom and liberty from government as modern Republicans, and that liberal or Democratic ideas have no place in the American tradition despite the dishonest attempt to associate with Jefferson, and the American founding,  through the name, "Democrat-Republican."
> 
> Now you know why liberals, not conservatives, spied for Stalin.



No, the thread is intended to show everyone how clever you are, "Oooh, look, he figured out something new and unique that no one else saw", and fails miserably.  It teaches no one anything except that you like to conflate opinions with facts.

The FACT is that neither the Democrat nor the Republican Party existed in Jefferson's time.  There was a completely separate and different party, the Democratic-Republican Party, which no longer exists and to which both the Democrats and the Republicans made reference when they chose their names for political calculations of their own.  Trying to claim Thomas Jefferson for one or the other modern party is stupid and childish.

If you wish to try to make an argument that one or the other party is more similar in views and attitudes to Thomas Jefferson than the other, then do that.  But stop wasting everyone's time with this nutty and remarkably UNclever attempt to associate him with something he never had contact with.  You might as well try to claim a modern-day political affiliation for Napoleon or Jesus Christ or Cro-Magnon Man.


----------



## Brutus

Cecile: No, the thread is intended to show everyone how clever you are, "Oooh, look, he figured out something new and unique that no one else saw", and fails miserably. It teaches no one anything except that you like to conflate opinions with facts.

Brutus: so if there is a mistake in the reasoning why be so afriad to point out what it is?? 

Cecile: The FACT is that neither the Democrat nor the Republican Party existed in Jefferson's time. 

Brutus: "Although people were still deeply ambivalent about political parties, although one party did not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the other, and although men on both sides were nostalgic- at one time or another- for the imaginary golden age of political harmony, few people could be found in the early 1790's who believed the parties did not exist. The parties had names: Federalist and Republican."- Susan Dunn, "Jefferson's Second Revolution."

Cecile: There was a completely separate and different party, the Democratic-Republican Party, which no longer exists and to which both the Democrats and the Republicans made reference when they chose their names for political calculations of their own. Trying to claim Thomas Jefferson for one or the other modern party is stupid and childish.

Brutus: and now even you know better. Who would have thought even a dominatrix could learn??

Cecile: If you wish to try to make an argument that one or the other party is more similar in views and attitudes to Thomas Jefferson than the other, then do that. 

Brutus:  Try??? Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to stand for freedom and liberty from government, and nothing else. Federalists then and Democrats now are 100% opposed. Again, welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

Cecile: But stop wasting everyone's time with this nutty and remarkably UNclever attempt to associate him with something he never had contact with. You might as well try to claim a modern-day political affiliation for Napoleon or Jesus Christ or Cro-Magnon Man.

Brutus: I assume the liberal knows better now??


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Cecile: No, the thread is intended to show everyone how clever you are, "Oooh, look, he figured out something new and unique that no one else saw", and fails miserably. It teaches no one anything except that you like to conflate opinions with facts.
> 
> Brutus: so if there is a mistake in the reasoning why be so afriad to point out what it is??
> 
> Cecile: The FACT is that neither the Democrat nor the Republican Party existed in Jefferson's time.
> 
> Brutus: "Although people were still deeply ambivalent about political parties, although one party did not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the other, and although men on both sides were nostalgic- at one time or another- for the imaginary golden age of political harmony, few people could be found in the early 1790's who believed the parties did not exist. The parties had names: Federalist and Republican."- Susan Dunn, "Jefferson's Second Revolution."
> 
> Cecile: There was a completely separate and different party, the Democratic-Republican Party, which no longer exists and to which both the Democrats and the Republicans made reference when they chose their names for political calculations of their own. Trying to claim Thomas Jefferson for one or the other modern party is stupid and childish.
> 
> Brutus: and now even you know better. Who would have thought even a dominatrix could learn??
> 
> Cecile: If you wish to try to make an argument that one or the other party is more similar in views and attitudes to Thomas Jefferson than the other, then do that.
> 
> Brutus:  Try??? Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to stand for freedom and liberty from government, and nothing else. Federalists then and Democrats now are 100% opposed. Again, welcome to your first lesson in American History!!
> 
> Cecile: But stop wasting everyone's time with this nutty and remarkably UNclever attempt to associate him with something he never had contact with. You might as well try to claim a modern-day political affiliation for Napoleon or Jesus Christ or Cro-Magnon Man.
> 
> Brutus: I assume the liberal knows better now??



This is your last warning, fucktard.  Ignore it, and you can talk to yourself (which I get the impression you're pretty much already doing).

1)  You are massively abusing basic message board courtesy with your fucked-up posting style and insistence on cropping people's posts into your own daydreamed conversations, rather than using the quote function.  We are NOT supporting actors in your little life movie, and your continued, deliberate bad manners are the Internet equivalent of walking into someone's house and pissing on their carpet.  Knock it the fuck off.

2)  Your opinions are NOT fact, and it doesn't matter to anyone whether or not you can find some unknown author to quote - or misquote, as might be the case.  Who knows?  No one's ever heard of her - to allegedly support you.  The political parties themselves have the dates of their foundings, and even the details, on their websites.  If either of them COULD claim Jefferson in that fashion, they would.

3)  It is incredibly ill-mannered and childish to drag other people's personal lives into a discussion.  And this is completely aside from how utterly asinine you sound, throwing out "dominatrix" as though I'm supposed to be shocked and insulted by it.  My personal and sexual proclivities have nothing to do with this, nor do they indicate anything about my education and intelligence levels.  This can be seen by the fact that YOU are presumably vanilla in your tastes, and you're a frigging moron.

4)  I am one of the most conservative members of this board, as anyone here can and will tell you, and as anyone with at least a teaspoonful of brains would know . . . which obviously leaves you out.  My belief that you're a mouthbreathing. self-important dolt has nothing to do with my political affiliations, and I'm not telling you that you're an offensive, driveling waste of space because I'm from "the other side" and you're scoring big political points.  We're technically on the same political side, and I STILL think the best part of you dribbled down your father's leg.

Now grow the fuck up and clean up your act, or get the fuck off my screen, cluebird.


----------



## Sheldon

Brutus said:


> Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794, to stand against the Federalist Party,  and for freedom and liberty from government both of which he thought were greatly threatened at the time.
> 
> So, when Jefferson became president in 1800 he was the first Republican President. He stood for what modern Republicans stand for.
> 
> The first Democrat president, i.e., a president who stood against freedom and liberty, was the monarchically inspired Washington( nominally a Federalist)  or the
> communistically inspired FDR( nominally a Democrat).
> 
> Do you agree?



Monarchical inspired Washington? You mean the guy who voluntarily walked away from a third-term, despite winning 100% of the electoral votes both times? The guy who refused to be given any title other than "Mr. President"? The guy who rejected Hamilton's suggestion that the President be elected for life? That Washington? 


You're so gone. How embarrassing for you.


----------



## Brutus

Cecilie1200 said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cecile: No, the thread is intended to show everyone how clever you are, "Oooh, look, he figured out something new and unique that no one else saw", and fails miserably. It teaches no one anything except that you like to conflate opinions with facts.
> 
> Brutus: so if there is a mistake in the reasoning why be so afriad to point out what it is??
> 
> Cecile: The FACT is that neither the Democrat nor the Republican Party existed in Jefferson's time.
> 
> Brutus: "Although people were still deeply ambivalent about political parties, although one party did not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the other, and although men on both sides were nostalgic- at one time or another- for the imaginary golden age of political harmony, few people could be found in the early 1790's who believed the parties did not exist. The parties had names: Federalist and Republican."- Susan Dunn, "Jefferson's Second Revolution."
> 
> Cecile: There was a completely separate and different party, the Democratic-Republican Party, which no longer exists and to which both the Democrats and the Republicans made reference when they chose their names for political calculations of their own. Trying to claim Thomas Jefferson for one or the other modern party is stupid and childish.
> 
> Brutus: and now even you know better. Who would have thought even a dominatrix could learn??
> 
> Cecile: If you wish to try to make an argument that one or the other party is more similar in views and attitudes to Thomas Jefferson than the other, then do that.
> 
> Brutus:  Try??? Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to stand for freedom and liberty from government, and nothing else. Federalists then and Democrats now are 100% opposed. Again, welcome to your first lesson in American History!!
> 
> Cecile: But stop wasting everyone's time with this nutty and remarkably UNclever attempt to associate him with something he never had contact with. You might as well try to claim a modern-day political affiliation for Napoleon or Jesus Christ or Cro-Magnon Man.
> 
> Brutus: I assume the liberal knows better now??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is your last warning, fucktard.  Ignore it, and you can talk to yourself (which I get the impression you're pretty much already doing).
> 
> 1)  You are massively abusing basic message board courtesy with your fucked-up posting style and insistence on cropping people's posts into your own daydreamed conversations, rather than using the quote function.  We are NOT supporting actors in your little life movie, and your continued, deliberate bad manners are the Internet equivalent of walking into someone's house and pissing on their carpet.  Knock it the fuck off.
> 
> 2)  Your opinions are NOT fact, and it doesn't matter to anyone whether or not you can find some unknown author to quote - or misquote, as might be the case.  Who knows?  No one's ever heard of her - to allegedly support you.  The political parties themselves have the dates of their foundings, and even the details, on their websites.  If either of them COULD claim Jefferson in that fashion, they would.
> 
> 3)  It is incredibly ill-mannered and childish to drag other people's personal lives into a discussion.  And this is completely aside from how utterly asinine you sound, throwing out "dominatrix" as though I'm supposed to be shocked and insulted by it.  My personal and sexual proclivities have nothing to do with this, nor do they indicate anything about my education and intelligence levels.  This can be seen by the fact that YOU are presumably vanilla in your tastes, and you're a frigging moron.
> 
> 4)  I am one of the most conservative members of this board, as anyone here can and will tell you, and as anyone with at least a teaspoonful of brains would know . . . which obviously leaves you out.  My belief that you're a mouthbreathing. self-important dolt has nothing to do with my political affiliations, and I'm not telling you that you're an offensive, driveling waste of space because I'm from "the other side" and you're scoring big political points.  We're technically on the same political side, and I STILL think the best part of you dribbled down your father's leg.
> 
> Now grow the fuck up and clean up your act, or get the fuck off my screen, cluebird.
Click to expand...


Brutus: personal attack apparently because you lack IQ for substance?


----------



## JamesInFlorida

Brutus said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cecile: No, the thread is intended to show everyone how clever you are, "Oooh, look, he figured out something new and unique that no one else saw", and fails miserably. It teaches no one anything except that you like to conflate opinions with facts.
> 
> Brutus: so if there is a mistake in the reasoning why be so afriad to point out what it is??
> 
> Cecile: The FACT is that neither the Democrat nor the Republican Party existed in Jefferson's time.
> 
> Brutus: "Although people were still deeply ambivalent about political parties, although one party did not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the other, and although men on both sides were nostalgic- at one time or another- for the imaginary golden age of political harmony, few people could be found in the early 1790's who believed the parties did not exist. The parties had names: Federalist and Republican."- Susan Dunn, "Jefferson's Second Revolution."
> 
> Cecile: There was a completely separate and different party, the Democratic-Republican Party, which no longer exists and to which both the Democrats and the Republicans made reference when they chose their names for political calculations of their own. Trying to claim Thomas Jefferson for one or the other modern party is stupid and childish.
> 
> Brutus: and now even you know better. Who would have thought even a dominatrix could learn??
> 
> Cecile: If you wish to try to make an argument that one or the other party is more similar in views and attitudes to Thomas Jefferson than the other, then do that.
> 
> Brutus:  Try??? Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to stand for freedom and liberty from government, and nothing else. Federalists then and Democrats now are 100% opposed. Again, welcome to your first lesson in American History!!
> 
> Cecile: But stop wasting everyone's time with this nutty and remarkably UNclever attempt to associate him with something he never had contact with. You might as well try to claim a modern-day political affiliation for Napoleon or Jesus Christ or Cro-Magnon Man.
> 
> Brutus: I assume the liberal knows better now??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is your last warning, fucktard.  Ignore it, and you can talk to yourself (which I get the impression you're pretty much already doing).
> 
> 1)  You are massively abusing basic message board courtesy with your fucked-up posting style and insistence on cropping people's posts into your own daydreamed conversations, rather than using the quote function.  We are NOT supporting actors in your little life movie, and your continued, deliberate bad manners are the Internet equivalent of walking into someone's house and pissing on their carpet.  Knock it the fuck off.
> 
> 2)  Your opinions are NOT fact, and it doesn't matter to anyone whether or not you can find some unknown author to quote - or misquote, as might be the case.  Who knows?  No one's ever heard of her - to allegedly support you.  The political parties themselves have the dates of their foundings, and even the details, on their websites.  If either of them COULD claim Jefferson in that fashion, they would.
> 
> 3)  It is incredibly ill-mannered and childish to drag other people's personal lives into a discussion.  And this is completely aside from how utterly asinine you sound, throwing out "dominatrix" as though I'm supposed to be shocked and insulted by it.  My personal and sexual proclivities have nothing to do with this, nor do they indicate anything about my education and intelligence levels.  This can be seen by the fact that YOU are presumably vanilla in your tastes, and you're a frigging moron.
> 
> 4)  I am one of the most conservative members of this board, as anyone here can and will tell you, and as anyone with at least a teaspoonful of brains would know . . . which obviously leaves you out.  My belief that you're a mouthbreathing. self-important dolt has nothing to do with my political affiliations, and I'm not telling you that you're an offensive, driveling waste of space because I'm from "the other side" and you're scoring big political points.  We're technically on the same political side, and I STILL think the best part of you dribbled down your father's leg.
> 
> Now grow the fuck up and clean up your act, or get the fuck off my screen, cluebird.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brutus: personal attack apparently because you lack IQ for substance?
Click to expand...


Brutus: I don't know how to use quotes, and ignore the points of others, while pulling random stuff out of my ass.

James: cool....


----------



## Cecilie1200

JamesInFlorida said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is your last warning, fucktard.  Ignore it, and you can talk to yourself (which I get the impression you're pretty much already doing).
> 
> 1)  You are massively abusing basic message board courtesy with your fucked-up posting style and insistence on cropping people's posts into your own daydreamed conversations, rather than using the quote function.  We are NOT supporting actors in your little life movie, and your continued, deliberate bad manners are the Internet equivalent of walking into someone's house and pissing on their carpet.  Knock it the fuck off.
> 
> 2)  Your opinions are NOT fact, and it doesn't matter to anyone whether or not you can find some unknown author to quote - or misquote, as might be the case.  Who knows?  No one's ever heard of her - to allegedly support you.  The political parties themselves have the dates of their foundings, and even the details, on their websites.  If either of them COULD claim Jefferson in that fashion, they would.
> 
> 3)  It is incredibly ill-mannered and childish to drag other people's personal lives into a discussion.  And this is completely aside from how utterly asinine you sound, throwing out "dominatrix" as though I'm supposed to be shocked and insulted by it.  My personal and sexual proclivities have nothing to do with this, nor do they indicate anything about my education and intelligence levels.  This can be seen by the fact that YOU are presumably vanilla in your tastes, and you're a frigging moron.
> 
> 4)  I am one of the most conservative members of this board, as anyone here can and will tell you, and as anyone with at least a teaspoonful of brains would know . . . which obviously leaves you out.  My belief that you're a mouthbreathing. self-important dolt has nothing to do with my political affiliations, and I'm not telling you that you're an offensive, driveling waste of space because I'm from "the other side" and you're scoring big political points.  We're technically on the same political side, and I STILL think the best part of you dribbled down your father's leg.
> 
> Now grow the fuck up and clean up your act, or get the fuck off my screen, cluebird.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutus: personal attack apparently because you lack IQ for substance?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brutus: I don't know how to use quotes, and ignore the points of others, while pulling random stuff out of my ass.
> 
> James: cool....
Click to expand...


You forgot . . .

Brutus:  I assume everyone who thinks I'm a giant, flaming idiot is a liberal, because I'm too much of a giant, flaming idiot to realize that my own ideological colleagues dislike me, or to realize that my personality is more repugnant than any political philosophy I could ever hold.

Cecilie:  Well, FINALLY, you said something that wasn't a waste of kinetic energy.


----------



## Brutus

Brutus/Celcelia: I assume everyone who thinks I'm a giant, flaming idiot is a liberal, because I'm too much of a giant, flaming idiot to realize that my own ideological colleagues dislike me, or to realize that my personality is more repugnant than any political philosophy I could ever hold.

Cecilie: Well, FINALLY, you said something that wasn't a waste of kinetic energy.

Brutus: personal attack, lies, and fraudulently attributing things to Brutus that he did not say, and all because the goof ball dominatrix lacks the character to lose a debate very badly.


----------



## Cecilie1200

Brutus said:


> Brutus/Celcelia: I assume everyone who thinks I'm a giant, flaming idiot is a liberal, because I'm too much of a giant, flaming idiot to realize that my own ideological colleagues dislike me, or to realize that my personality is more repugnant than any political philosophy I could ever hold.
> 
> Cecilie: Well, FINALLY, you said something that wasn't a waste of kinetic energy.
> 
> Brutus: personal attack, lies, and fraudulently attributing things to Brutus that he did not say, and all because the goof ball dominatrix lacks the character to lose a debate very badly.



Happy swirling, ass clown.  FLUSH!


----------



## Brutus

Sheldon: Monarchical inspired Washington? You mean the guy who voluntarily walked away from a third-term, despite winning 100% of the electoral votes both times? The guy who refused to be given any title other than "Mr. President"? The guy who rejected Hamilton's suggestion that the President be elected for life? That Washington?

Brutus: No, the Washington that Jefferson hated and feared; the Washington who caused Jefferson to form the Republican Party in 1794 to re establish the meaning of the Revolution. Your version of Washington is not even High School. Why not read all about Jefferson's Second American Revolution?


----------



## kwc57

Brutus said:


> Please see my response to Cecilie for your first lesson in American History. It is my honor to help a liberal.



Hey look everybody, someone invented a new improved asshole!


----------



## Cecilie1200

kwc57 said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please see my response to Cecilie for your first lesson in American History. It is my honor to help a liberal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey look everybody, someone invented a new improved asshole!
Click to expand...


I must have missed the part where it was "improved".  The "asshole" part, I'll grant you.


----------



## Brutus

As long as you now agree that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to opposed the Federalists (Washington, Hamilton, Adams) who he was sure opposed freedom and liberty from government just as modern liberals do.


----------



## konradv

Brutus said:


> As long as you now agree that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to opposed the Federalists (Washington, Hamilton, Adams) who he was sure opposed freedom and liberty from government just as modern liberals do.



I doubt many would agree with that.  It's just about all revisionist history!!!


----------



## Brutus

konradv said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> As long as you now agree that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to opposed the Federalists (Washington, Hamilton, Adams) who he was sure opposed freedom and liberty from government just as modern liberals do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt many would agree with that.  It's just about all revisionist history!!!
Click to expand...


Brutus: so then please tell us exactly where the mistake is. Thanks. I'm sure though you don't know or you would have been all too happy to point it out without being asked.


----------



## Sheldon

Brutus said:


> Sheldon: Monarchical inspired Washington? You mean the guy who voluntarily walked away from a third-term, despite winning 100% of the electoral votes both times? The guy who refused to be given any title other than "Mr. President"? The guy who rejected Hamilton's suggestion that the President be elected for life? That Washington?
> 
> Brutus: No, the Washington that Jefferson hated and feared; the Washington who caused Jefferson to form the Republican Party in 1794 to re establish the meaning of the Revolution. Your version of Washington is not even High School. Why not read all about Jefferson's Second American Revolution?




Feared? So you think Thomas Jefferson was a pussy. Duh. Debate me right now about anything, bro. I will crush an earthworm like you with my fire-breathing fists and make your face melt and your children weep over your exploded corpse. Your version of American history is not even, I don't know, possibly from this specific terrestrial realm. "Brutus".


----------



## Brutus

Sheldon said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sheldon: Monarchical inspired Washington? You mean the guy who voluntarily walked away from a third-term, despite winning 100% of the electoral votes both times? The guy who refused to be given any title other than "Mr. President"? The guy who rejected Hamilton's suggestion that the President be elected for life? That Washington?
> 
> Brutus: No, the Washington that Jefferson hated and feared; the Washington who caused Jefferson to form the Republican Party in 1794 to re establish the meaning of the Revolution. Your version of Washington is not even High School. Why not read all about Jefferson's Second American Revolution?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feared? So you think Thomas Jefferson was a pussy. Duh. Debate me right now about anything, bro. I will crush an earthworm like you with my fire-breathing fists and make your face melt and your children weep over your exploded corpse. Your version of American history is not even, I don't know, possibly from this specific terrestrial realm. "Brutus".
Click to expand...


Brutus: what is it that you'd like to debate about exactly?


----------



## Sheldon

Brutus said:


> Sheldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sheldon: Monarchical inspired Washington? You mean the guy who voluntarily walked away from a third-term, despite winning 100% of the electoral votes both times? The guy who refused to be given any title other than "Mr. President"? The guy who rejected Hamilton's suggestion that the President be elected for life? That Washington?
> 
> Brutus: No, the Washington that Jefferson hated and feared; the Washington who caused Jefferson to form the Republican Party in 1794 to re establish the meaning of the Revolution. Your version of Washington is not even High School. Why not read all about Jefferson's Second American Revolution?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feared? So you think Thomas Jefferson was a pussy. Duh. Debate me right now about anything, bro. I will crush an earthworm like you with my fire-breathing fists and make your face melt and your children weep over your exploded corpse. Your version of American history is not even, I don't know, possibly from this specific terrestrial realm. "Brutus".
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brutus: what is it that you'd like to debate about exactly?
Click to expand...



You said my version of Washington is not even high school. That's true. I learned that shit in middle school. So you challenging its veracity makes me wonder about your own level of knowledge on this subject, your other retarded posts here notwithstanding. Here's another fact: you've yet to define what "monarchically inspired" means, and in what ways this makes Washington unique in the context of the time period. An undefined premise is a shitty way to start the conversation. Dork.


----------



## Brutus

Sheldon said:


> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sheldon said:
> 
> 
> 
> Feared? So you think Thomas Jefferson was a pussy. Duh. Debate me right now about anything, bro. I will crush an earthworm like you with my fire-breathing fists and make your face melt and your children weep over your exploded corpse. Your version of American history is not even, I don't know, possibly from this specific terrestrial realm. "Brutus".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutus: what is it that you'd like to debate about exactly?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Sheldon: You said my version of Washington is not even high school. That's true. I learned that shit in middle school.
> 
> Brutus: yes that's when you learned he chopped down the Cherry Tree!! Why not grow up?
> 
> 
> Sheldon: So you challenging its veracity makes me wonder about your own level of knowledge on this subject,
> 
> 
> Brutus: so why not pick the biggest substantive error you've found and point it out for the whole world to see? A little tough when you rely on Middle School history isn't it?
> 
> 
> Sheldon: your other retarded posts here notwithstanding. Here's another fact: you've yet to define what "monarchically inspired" means,
> 
> Brutus: Jefferson started the Republican Party because the Republicans thought Washington and the Federalists were covert monarchists or "royalists" as they called them!
> 
> sheldon: and in what ways this makes Washington unique in the context of the time period.
> 
> Brutus: Washington and the Federalists were uniquely un American to the Republicans. In fact, when Jefferson defeated them they were never heard from again. Freedom or liberty from government became the American tradition. Jefferson called it the second American Revolution because it established that the first revolution had been about freedom from all government, not just the government of England. Welcome to your first post middle school lesson in American History!
> 
> Shelton: An undefined premise is a shitty way to start the conversation. Dork.
> 
> Brutus:  no need to be embarrassed. You're a liberal!!
Click to expand...


----------



## Sheldon

Brutus said:


> sheldon: and in what ways this makes Washington unique in the context of the time period.
> 
> Brutus: Washington and the Federalists were uniquely un American to the Republicans. In fact, when Jefferson defeated them they were never heard from again. Freedom or liberty from government became the American tradition. Jefferson called it the second American Revolution because it established that the first revolution had been about freedom from all government, not just the government of England. Welcome to your first post middle school lesson in American History!




Way to not even come close to addressing the question. 


I'm not interested in your semantical games about Jefferson's party name. He was the father of anti-federalist thought, which is the roots of the states' rights platform that today's GOP preaches. Whether they practice it or not is another issue. But when people refer to Republicans today, they are referring to the party that was officially formed in the Civil War era. That's what you're getting mixed up.

So again, in what ways was Washington "monrachically inspired", and how does it make him unique in the context of the time period?


----------



## midcan5

Too funny.  "We cannot predict the future, but the past is changing before our very eyes."  Soviet radio reporting on the Politburos deliberations. Brutus is Russian or maybe the product of home schooling or....  Imagine the founding fathers viewing the present writing on their times, and wondering who in the heck is Jefferson or this Washington guy?  

"The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts." Quote DB :: Speeches :: George Washington :: George Washington's Farewell Address Speech

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."  Thomas Jefferson

"... legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property... Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right." Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison 1785


----------



## konradv

Brutus said:


> konradv said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Brutus said:
> 
> 
> 
> As long as you now agree that Jefferson founded the Republican Party in 1794 to opposed the Federalists (Washington, Hamilton, Adams) who he was sure opposed freedom and liberty from government just as modern liberals do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt many would agree with that.  It's just about all revisionist history!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Brutus: so then please tell us exactly where the mistake is. Thanks. I'm sure though you don't know or you would have been all too happy to point it out without being asked.
Click to expand...


Well, for one, no one agrees that Jefferson founded the Republican party.  For another, no one believes Washington, Hamilton and Adams were against freedom.  For a third, you mention freedon from government, but are strangely silent about freedom from YOU!!!


----------



## Brutus

Kinradv: Well, for one, no one agrees that Jefferson founded the Republican party. 

Brutus: Jefferson apparently agrees that he did based on the name he used for his Party in every letter, speech, newspaper, article, and Congressional Report that I have ever read. Moreover so do the historians of the period: 

"Although people were still deeply ambivalent about political parties, although one party did not necessarily recognize the legitimacy of the other, and although men on both sides were nostalgic- at one time or another- for the imaginary golden age of political harmony, few people could be found in the early 1790's who believed the parties did not exist. The parties had names: Federalist and Republican."-Susan Dunn,Jefferson's Second Revolution.


Konradv: For another, no one believes Washington, Hamilton and Adams were against freedom. 

Brutus: then why on earth did Jefferson leave Washington's cabinet to form the Republican Party to destroy the Federalist Party of Washington Hamilton and Adams??? Why did Jefferson call their destruction, and the Republican victory,  the Second American Revolution? You're going by grade school history and liberal encyclopedias. Sorry!

Konradv: For a third, you mention freedon from government, but are strangely silent about freedom from YOU!!! 

Brutus: personal attack to change subject from your obvious defeat


----------



## Brutus

Sheldon: and in what ways this makes Washington unique in the context of the time period. 

Brutus: Washington and the Federalists were uniquely un American to the Republicans. In fact, when Jefferson defeated them they were never heard from again. Freedom or liberty from government became the American tradition. Jefferson called it the second American Revolution because it established that the first revolution had been about freedom from all government, not just the government of England. Welcome to your first post middle school lesson in American History!


Sheldon: Way to not even come close to addressing the question. 


Brutus: you are slow!! Jefferson left the cabinet  of Washington because he thought they were monarchists. He formed the Republican party to destroy them just for that reason and no other!! Jefferson thought Washington had fought the revolution to get freedom from England so he could establish a monarchy here. Adams rode around in a coach made by King George's coach maker. At  the most famous dinner party in American History Hamilton said the government of England was the finest in human history. Adams was called a royalist and monarchist in the election of 1800!!! Again, it is my honor to give your very lesson in American History, beyond HS or liberal encyclopedias. 

Sheldon: I'm not interested in your semantical games about Jefferson's party name. He was the father of anti-federalist thought, which is the roots of the states' rights platform that today's GOP preaches. 

Brutus: actually todays Republicans rarely worry about, think about or say much about state's rights. They want a reduced Federal Government through a Balanced Budget Amendment and tax/spending cuts to expand individual rights, not state's rights. Sorry!


Sheldon: Whether they practice it or not is another issue. But when people refer to Republicans today, they are referring to the party that was officially formed in the Civil War era. 

Brutus: true enough but when intelligent people refer to the Republican Party they also refer to the first Republican Party of Jefferson because it shares the name and exact ideology of the modern Republican Party. Democrats of course hate that because it makes clear that they have no connection, in name or philosophy,  to the founding and so would be more at home in Cuba than America where they would not have to subvert the goverment in order to get a philosophy they liked. 


Shelson: That's what you're getting mixed up.

Brutus: I assume you understand now?


----------



## JamesInFlorida

Brutus said:


> Sheldon: and in what ways this makes Washington unique in the context of the time period.
> 
> Brutus: Washington and the Federalists were uniquely un American to the Republicans. In fact, when Jefferson defeated them they were never heard from again. Freedom or liberty from government became the American tradition. Jefferson called it the second American Revolution because it established that the first revolution had been about freedom from all government, not just the government of England. Welcome to your first post middle school lesson in American History!
> 
> 
> Sheldon: Way to not even come close to addressing the question.
> 
> 
> Brutus: you are slow!! *Jefferson left the cabinet  of Washington because he thought they were monarchists. He formed the Republican party to destroy them just for that reason and no other!! *Jefferson thought Washington had fought the revolution to get freedom from England so he could establish a monarchy here. Adams rode around in a coach made by King George's coach maker. At  the most famous dinner party in American History Hamilton said the government of England was the finest in human history. Adams was called a royalist and monarchist in the election of 1800!!! Again, it is my honor to give your very lesson in American History, beyond HS or liberal encyclopedias.
> 
> Sheldon: I'm not interested in your semantical games about Jefferson's party name. He was the father of anti-federalist thought, which is the roots of the states' rights platform that today's GOP preaches.
> 
> Brutus: actually todays Republicans rarely worry about, think about or say much about state's rights. They want a reduced Federal Government through a Balanced Budget Amendment and tax/spending cuts to expand individual rights, not state's rights. Sorry!
> 
> 
> Sheldon: Whether they practice it or not is another issue. But when people refer to Republicans today, they are referring to the party that was officially formed in the Civil War era.
> 
> Brutus: true enough but when intelligent people refer to the Republican Party they also *refer to the first Republican Party of Jefferson because it shares the name and exact ideology of the modern Republican Party. *Democrats of course hate that because it makes clear that they have no connection, in name or philosophy,  to the founding and so would be more at home in Cuba than America where they would not have to subvert the goverment in order to get a philosophy they liked.
> 
> 
> Shelson: That's what you're getting mixed up.
> 
> Brutus: I assume you understand now?



If Jefferson's Republican party was formed to, and I quote from your exact words:

"Republican party to destroy them just for that reason and no other!!" (referring to the federalists/Washington/Hamilton, etc).

But then you say "shares the name and exact ideology of the modern Republican Party.".

So my question is simple:

Are you suggesting that the modern Republican's only reason is to defeat Washington, due to fear of a monarchy?


----------



## Brutus

Jamesin fla:  Are you suggesting that the modern Republican's only reason is to defeat Washington, due to fear of a monarchy?

Brutus: to defeat the statist ideology, one version of which was represented by Washington and the Federalists.


----------



## JamesInFlorida

Brutus said:


> Jamesin fla:  Are you suggesting that the modern Republican's only reason is to defeat Washington, due to fear of a monarchy?
> 
> Brutus: to defeat the statist ideology, one version of which was represented by Washington and the Federalists.



You stated in a previous post in this thread is that the modern republican party wants to reduce the federal government, and expand individual liberty.

But off the top of my head your statement has 2 immediate flaws:

1. Your problem is that James Madison was a co-founder (Jefferson didn't form the party on his own), yet he was a main writer of the constitution, and pushed heavily for the drafting of the constitution. The constitution by its existence set up the federal government that we have today. Without Madison, we might not even have the federal government.

2. Their party back then had a very different view on individual liberty. Yet Madison himself was the one who proposed for black people being 3/5's of a person (legally). This is not to mention they thought it was ok to own slaves, women shouldn't be able to vote, if you weren't a white land owning male-you were a second class citizen (legally). This is NOT the views of the modern Republican party when it comes to individual liberties.


----------



## Brutus

Jamesin fla:  Are you suggesting that the modern Republican's only reason is to defeat Washington, due to fear of a monarchy?

Brutus: to defeat the statist ideology, one version of which was represented by Washington and the Federalists.

James: You stated in a previous post in this thread is that the modern republican party wants to reduce the federal government, and expand individual liberty.

But off the top of my head your statement has 2 immediate flaws:

1. Your problem is that James Madison was a co-founder (Jefferson didn't form the party on his own), yet he was a main writer of the constitution, and pushed heavily for the drafting of the constitution. The constitution by its existence set up the federal government that we have today. Without Madison, we might not even have the federal government.

Brutus: all agree ;so what???????????????????/


James: 2. Their party back then had a very different view on individual liberty. Yet Madison himself was the one who proposed for black people being 3/5's of a person (legally). This is not to mention they thought it was ok to own slaves, women shouldn't be able to vote, if you weren't a white land owning male-you were a second class citizen (legally). This is NOT the views of the modern Republican party when it comes to individual liberties.


Brutus:ah but Jefferson and the others  created and lived on the cusp of history. For them is was a huge revolution to believe that they themselves could be free, let alone real slaves. But even so, Jefferson's original draft of the Constitution was more about slavery than taxes. He and the others knowingly fired the shot heard around the world even when they had no idea if it would hit its target or if their personal consequences would be deadly. To say that our Founders were born slave holders is true, but it is also true that they did more to set in motion freedom for slaves than all human beings or any other group in human history. Certainly they did more than any of us would have had the intelligence and courage to do given the times they in which they lived and the consequences they faced; so lets all thank God for these incredible heroes who, most recently, freed 1.5 billion from communism with their undying influence.

Those among us who imagine they are morally superior to the Founders are fools too stupid to know they inheritied their wisdom without so much as a drop of blood, a calorie of effort, the inkling of a thought, or an ounce of morality.


----------

