Democrats... Rejecting John F. Kennedy

[NYcarbineer]

There are no God given rights. If there were, God would have told us so.

And you just put yourself on the other side of the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The UN Declaration of Human RIghts, and modern conservatives.

There is no mention of God in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Hee Hee, I love that you ignored the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights and focused on the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

I purposefully para phrased God Given to Inherent out of respect for your lib intolerance of religion.

And indeed, that UN Declaration is quite clear that Human Rights are Inherent and NOT granted by the UN or any other Governmental organization.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

Inherent, inalienable,

"Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,"

Here to help you out.

"fun·da·men·tal
ˌfəndəˈmen(t)əl/
adjective

1. 1.
   forming a necessary base or core; of central importance."

This is not a edict GRANTING rights to people, but an announcement of their belief in Human Rights as ALREADY being part of the Human Condition.

By your belief that the State is GRANTING rights, you libs reveal yourself to be extreme reactionaries trying to turn the clock back to BEFORE the Age of Enlightenment, to the late Medieval Period, where the King granted Rights and Privileges.

With the slight adjustment of replace the Divine Right of Kings, with the All Powerful State.

You brought it up. I proved you wrong.

I'm waiting for proof that rights are God given.

And by that I mean proof beyond quoting some other HUMAN's opinion that they are God given.

My point was not to prove to you that my philosophy was correct, but simply to point out to you that JFK shared it.

As per the OP.

And also to reveal just how reactionary your philosophy is. As a bonus.

Ok, so a couple months ago President Obama said this:

"Speaking in Chicago on Thursday, President Obama said that "dignity and opportunity aren't just gifts to be handed down by a generous government or by a generous employer, they are rights given by God, as undeniable and worth protecting as the Grand Canyon or the Great Smoky Mountains."

So what were saying about modern liberals?

lolol

Obama Dignity and Opportunity...Are Rights Given by God CNS News

 

[Correll]

And you just put yourself on the other side of the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The UN Declaration of Human RIghts, and modern conservatives.

There is no mention of God in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Hee Hee, I love that you ignored the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights and focused on the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

I purposefully para phrased God Given to Inherent out of respect for your lib intolerance of religion.

And indeed, that UN Declaration is quite clear that Human Rights are Inherent and NOT granted by the UN or any other Governmental organization.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

Inherent, inalienable,

"Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,"

Here to help you out.

"fun·da·men·tal
ˌfəndəˈmen(t)əl/
adjective

1. 1.
   forming a necessary base or core; of central importance."

This is not a edict GRANTING rights to people, but an announcement of their belief in Human Rights as ALREADY being part of the Human Condition.

By your belief that the State is GRANTING rights, you libs reveal yourself to be extreme reactionaries trying to turn the clock back to BEFORE the Age of Enlightenment, to the late Medieval Period, where the King granted Rights and Privileges.

With the slight adjustment of replace the Divine Right of Kings, with the All Powerful State.

You brought it up. I proved you wrong.

I'm waiting for proof that rights are God given.

And by that I mean proof beyond quoting some other HUMAN's opinion that they are God given.

My point was not to prove to you that my philosophy was correct, but simply to point out to you that JFK shared it.

As per the OP.

And also to reveal just how reactionary your philosophy is. As a bonus.

So you're retracting your claim that we have God given rights, thus concurring that I was right all along.

Please don't lie about what I said.

My intent as per the OP was to show the philosophical divide between modern libs, and conservatives AND JFK (and the Founding Fathers and Enlightenment thinkers, ect.)

And as a bonus to reveal how reactionary your beliefs are.

Your belief that the government grants rights shows how you view the relationship between the State and it's Citizens.

 

[Clementine]

Bull. The source is your lib behavior. YOu see the results of your policies and keep doing more of them.

Clementine is drawing the obvious conclusion that you are purposefully achieving the easily predictable results of your actions.

There are other possible explanations.

Many conservatives believe liberalism is a mental disorder. Surely you've heard the saying, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and to keep expecting a different result"?

Others believe that liberals are stupid.

Exactly. We have seen the results of liberal policies for decades. Nothing has changed for the better, in fact things have gotten progressively worse. If this isn't what they wanted, they would have changed course by now.

Liberals try to hold themselves out as champions for the poor, but they haven't bought many out of poverty. More are settled onto the liberal plantation and there seems little hope that they will ever be free from that. The left says they want to elevate people, but government cannot do that. We can only sustain people until they take initiative and climb out of poverty. The left has really pushed the entitlement mentality and victimhood, both of which serve to keep people where they are instead of making changes.

If it's not a deliberate attempt to bring as many people as possible into a life of government dependency, then the left is incredibly foolish for continuing policies that don't work as they claim they will. Meanwhile, they know they can count on the dependents voting for them. There is no other explanation. Shame that people don't believe that they would be better off taking the reins of their own life instead of waiting years for government to make their lives better. Government does not create success or wealth. Government only seeks to control, confiscate and redistribute.

Liberals talk a big game, but their actions don't match the words.

 

[Correll]

And you just put yourself on the other side of the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, The UN Declaration of Human RIghts, and modern conservatives.

There is no mention of God in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Hee Hee, I love that you ignored the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights and focused on the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

I purposefully para phrased God Given to Inherent out of respect for your lib intolerance of religion.

And indeed, that UN Declaration is quite clear that Human Rights are Inherent and NOT granted by the UN or any other Governmental organization.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

Inherent, inalienable,

"Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,"

Here to help you out.

"fun·da·men·tal
ˌfəndəˈmen(t)əl/
adjective

1. 1.
   forming a necessary base or core; of central importance."

This is not a edict GRANTING rights to people, but an announcement of their belief in Human Rights as ALREADY being part of the Human Condition.

By your belief that the State is GRANTING rights, you libs reveal yourself to be extreme reactionaries trying to turn the clock back to BEFORE the Age of Enlightenment, to the late Medieval Period, where the King granted Rights and Privileges.

With the slight adjustment of replace the Divine Right of Kings, with the All Powerful State.

You brought it up. I proved you wrong.

I'm waiting for proof that rights are God given.

And by that I mean proof beyond quoting some other HUMAN's opinion that they are God given.

My point was not to prove to you that my philosophy was correct, but simply to point out to you that JFK shared it.

As per the OP.

And also to reveal just how reactionary your philosophy is. As a bonus.

Ok, so a couple months ago President Obama said this:

"Speaking in Chicago on Thursday, President Obama said that "dignity and opportunity aren't just gifts to be handed down by a generous government or by a generous employer, they are rights given by God, as undeniable and worth protecting as the Grand Canyon or the Great Smoky Mountains."

So what were saying about modern liberals?

lolol

Obama Dignity and Opportunity...Are Rights Given by God CNS News

What would happen if Obama was as dismissive and derisive about religious people and religious beliefs as you just were?

 

[NYcarbineer]

There is no mention of God in the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

Hee Hee, I love that you ignored the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights and focused on the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

I purposefully para phrased God Given to Inherent out of respect for your lib intolerance of religion.

And indeed, that UN Declaration is quite clear that Human Rights are Inherent and NOT granted by the UN or any other Governmental organization.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

Inherent, inalienable,

"Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,"

Here to help you out.

"fun·da·men·tal
ˌfəndəˈmen(t)əl/
adjective

1. 1.
   forming a necessary base or core; of central importance."

This is not a edict GRANTING rights to people, but an announcement of their belief in Human Rights as ALREADY being part of the Human Condition.

By your belief that the State is GRANTING rights, you libs reveal yourself to be extreme reactionaries trying to turn the clock back to BEFORE the Age of Enlightenment, to the late Medieval Period, where the King granted Rights and Privileges.

With the slight adjustment of replace the Divine Right of Kings, with the All Powerful State.

You brought it up. I proved you wrong.

I'm waiting for proof that rights are God given.

And by that I mean proof beyond quoting some other HUMAN's opinion that they are God given.

My point was not to prove to you that my philosophy was correct, but simply to point out to you that JFK shared it.

As per the OP.

And also to reveal just how reactionary your philosophy is. As a bonus.

Ok, so a couple months ago President Obama said this:

"Speaking in Chicago on Thursday, President Obama said that "dignity and opportunity aren't just gifts to be handed down by a generous government or by a generous employer, they are rights given by God, as undeniable and worth protecting as the Grand Canyon or the Great Smoky Mountains."

So what were saying about modern liberals?

lolol

Obama Dignity and Opportunity...Are Rights Given by God CNS News

What would happen if Obama was as dismissive and derisive about religious people and religious beliefs as you just were?

Don't change the subject. Let's stick to how stupid and inaccurate your posts have been.

 

[Correll]

Hee Hee, I love that you ignored the Age of Enlightenment, THe Founding Fathers, JFK, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights and focused on the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

I purposefully para phrased God Given to Inherent out of respect for your lib intolerance of religion.

And indeed, that UN Declaration is quite clear that Human Rights are Inherent and NOT granted by the UN or any other Governmental organization.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,"

Inherent, inalienable,

"Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,"

Here to help you out.

"fun·da·men·tal
ˌfəndəˈmen(t)əl/
adjective

1. 1.
   forming a necessary base or core; of central importance."

This is not a edict GRANTING rights to people, but an announcement of their belief in Human Rights as ALREADY being part of the Human Condition.

By your belief that the State is GRANTING rights, you libs reveal yourself to be extreme reactionaries trying to turn the clock back to BEFORE the Age of Enlightenment, to the late Medieval Period, where the King granted Rights and Privileges.

With the slight adjustment of replace the Divine Right of Kings, with the All Powerful State.

You brought it up. I proved you wrong.

I'm waiting for proof that rights are God given.

And by that I mean proof beyond quoting some other HUMAN's opinion that they are God given.

My point was not to prove to you that my philosophy was correct, but simply to point out to you that JFK shared it.

As per the OP.

And also to reveal just how reactionary your philosophy is. As a bonus.

Ok, so a couple months ago President Obama said this:

"Speaking in Chicago on Thursday, President Obama said that "dignity and opportunity aren't just gifts to be handed down by a generous government or by a generous employer, they are rights given by God, as undeniable and worth protecting as the Grand Canyon or the Great Smoky Mountains."

So what were saying about modern liberals?

lolol

Obama Dignity and Opportunity...Are Rights Given by God CNS News

What would happen if Obama was as dismissive and derisive about religious people and religious beliefs as you just were?

Don't change the subject. Let's stick to how stupid and inaccurate your posts have been.

NOt changing the subject.

Obama is not a credible source about what Obama believes.

You were being honest.

Your position is the one I find nearly all liberals hold.

I judge liberals accordingly.

You do not believe in God, and you do believe that GOvenrment grants us our rights, contrary to the Law of the Land, and the UN Declaration of Human RIghts.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Nowadays the Democratic Party would consider Kennedy a homophobic, right wing, bible thumping moron.


View attachment 40362

JFK would be a conservative in America today.

Really?

Kennedy called his agenda/program the New Frontier.

New Frontier - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Convince us that is the conservative agenda of today.

Here's five minutes that should nail it down. Think Obama/Hillary and democrats when you hear it. Oh and he DIRECTLY talks about the first.

that was the speech that got kennedy killed.He was our last real president we had,one who served the people instead of the bankers and he paid the price of it for doing so.

No president since then has reinstated his executive order he signed that would have eliminated the fed.Five months after he signed that executive order,he was murdered.LBJ immediately stopped the printing of UNITED STATES NOTES that were being printed out which is why we have federal reserve notes now which are as worthless as monopoly money in reality.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Nowadays the Democratic Party would consider Kennedy a homophobic, right wing, bible thumping moron.


View attachment 40362

What is the relevance, if any, to the political scene of today?

That's where the rejection come in. You would agree that the Democrat Party of today is nothing like the Democratic Party of the Kennedy era. Tell your fellow Democrats, they don't seem to know.

Nope, I would not agree. And, I have NO fellow Democrats. I'm NOT a Democrat, nor a Republican.

Gee I wonder why you don't agree .. mmm

(Pick a side, you need to spice it up a bit..sheesh..)

There's no side to pick. There's no difference between the two parties. Both Republicans and Democrats are self-serving, egotistical, greedy, dishonest power hungry crooks. The evidence to support that statement is on Main Street America, all across this once great nation. Also, the past 50 plus years of "The Selling of America" is a testament to what I have just said. Over the past 50 plus years, we've had both Democrats and Republicans in power, through many administrations, and look at where we are today. Professional politicians all play the same game, they just wear different jerseys at game time, that's it. Professional politicians are nothing more than puppets for the wealthy, the powerful, and the influential. We have a Lobbyist controlled U.S. Congress, and an oval office bought and paid for. Corporate America, Wall Street, the financial institutions, and special interests dictate legislation and policy.

So, there's no side to pick. I'd rather stay an American for America, than to play the game and be one of the sheep in the flock. I'm old enough ( 67 ), wise and smart enough, and have seen and experienced enough to know better. I have been following the game for many years, and have witnessed the decline and fall of this once great nation. We'll never establish anything of value for future generations, as long as we remain sheep in the flock, and allow the shepherds to lead us astray.

You just took him to school and gave him a first class education.That was why they killed JFK because he wasnt towing the party line that each president since then has.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Nowadays the Democratic Party would consider Kennedy a homophobic, right wing, bible thumping moron.


View attachment 40362

JFK would be a conservative in America today.

JFK would despise today's conservative movement. They are more batshit crazy than he had to deal with

Another dishonest post, if you think JFK was more like Obama or hillary then a Scott Walker or Ted Cruz you are fucking nuts

well said.


Let me guess,that was a post made by rightwinger right? He is USMB'S resident troll.check my sig below.

 

[Lumpy 1]

I just realised that I'm tired.. very tired ..

I just realized you're not an American. Mind your own business.

I just realised that I'm tired.. very tired ..

I just realized you're not an American. Mind your own business.

.. can you pledge this without choking on the words..?

 

[kaz]

Yeah, he was as fucked up as Reagan.

There can be only one God, and yours is government

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I just realised that I'm tired.. very tired ..

I just realized you're not an American. Mind your own business.

I just realised that I'm tired.. very tired ..

I just realized you're not an American. Mind your own business.

.. can you pledge this without choking on the words..?

View attachment 40409

that is funny that propaganda piece taught in out corrupt schools saying-" in justice for all" the fact that washington is run by criminals who run the country and commit crimes everyday,justice? now THATS funny.

 

[jasonnfree]

Nowadays the Democratic Party would consider Kennedy a homophobic, right wing, bible thumping moron.


View attachment 40362

JFK would be a conservative in America today.

JFK would despise today's conservative movement. They are more batshit crazy than he had to deal with

Another dishonest post, if you think JFK was more like Obama or hillary then a Scott Walker or Ted Cruz you are fucking nuts

I remember JFK as pro union, quite unlike today's republicans. So was Martin Luther King by the way. I doubt very much that they'd have much in common with today's republican party of the very wealthy.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Bull. The source is your lib behavior. YOu see the results of your policies and keep doing more of them.

Clementine is drawing the obvious conclusion that you are purposefully achieving the easily predictable results of your actions.

There are other possible explanations.

Many conservatives believe liberalism is a mental disorder. Surely you've heard the saying, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and to keep expecting a different result"?

Others believe that liberals are stupid.

Exactly. We have seen the results of liberal policies for decades. Nothing has changed for the better, in fact things have gotten progressively worse. If this isn't what they wanted, they would have changed course by now.

Liberals try to hold themselves out as champions for the poor, but they haven't bought many out of poverty. More are settled onto the liberal plantation and there seems little hope that they will ever be free from that. The left says they want to elevate people, but government cannot do that. We can only sustain people until they take initiative and climb out of poverty. The left has really pushed the entitlement mentality and victimhood, both of which serve to keep people where they are instead of making changes.

If it's not a deliberate attempt to bring as many people as possible into a life of government dependency, then the left is incredibly foolish for continuing policies that don't work as they claim they will. Meanwhile, they know they can count on the dependents voting for them. There is no other explanation. Shame that people don't believe that they would be better off taking the reins of their own life instead of waiting years for government to make their lives better. Government does not create success or wealth. Government only seeks to control, confiscate and redistribute.

Liberals talk a big game, but their actions don't match the words.

Great post Clementine, very well said...

 

[rightwinger]

Here is Kennedy's economic agenda in the New Frontier:

1. The addition of a temporary thirteen-week supplement to jobless benefits,
2. The extension of aid to the children of unemployed workers,
3. The redevelopment of distressed areas,
4. An increase in Social Security payments and the encouragement of earlier retirement,
5. An increase in the minimum wage and an extension in coverage,
6. The provision of emergency relief to feed grain farmers, and
7. The financing of a comprehensive homebuilding and slum clearance program.

Now let's hear all you RWnuts pretend that is your agenda.

I can see why he is a conservative icon

They even get the "Ask not" quote wrong

 

[rightwinger]

JFK of today would make Hillary look like Goldwater. Just becaus you morons don't change in fifty years doesn't mean he was the same. He wasn't that stupid.

Conservatives villainized JFK as a commie liberal when he was alive. same as MLK

Now, Conservatives claim them as their own

 

[Pogo]

Where do you clowns get this cockamamie idea that one political party or ideology, all by itself, "wants to keep the poor in poverty to ensure votes"? Or keep them there for any reason?

Got a link to anyone, anywhere, any time, saying anything to that effect? Or just ipse dixit from some fat fack in Florida with a radio microphone?

He is judging you by the fruits of your labors.

That post makes no sense on any level. It isn't even my point; I have no "labors".
And I believe "Clementine" would be a "she".

FIne, she is judging libs/dems by the fruits of their labors.

-- Which makes my point and indicates the question can't be answered, i.e. there is no source.

Bull. The "source" is you libs seeing what the results are of your policies and still deciding to stick to those policies.

If you aren't happy with the outcomes, then why don't your change your policies?

"My policies"?
I believe the subject of the thread title is "Democrats".

Anyway perhaps illiteracy prevails but my question was, and remains unaddressed, how the poster (or anyone) knows that some political party, all by itself, "wants to keep the poor in poverty". As opposed to both party wanting that. And I use the singular intentionally.

It bespeaks a fundamental naïveté about the political system, if not outright partisan wankitudinous hackery.

Where do you clowns get this cockamamie idea that one political party or ideology, all by itself, "wants to keep the poor in poverty to ensure votes"? Or keep them there for any reason?

Got a link to anyone, anywhere, any time, saying anything to that effect? Or just ipse dixit from some fat fack in Florida with a radio microphone?

He is judging you by the fruits of your labors.

That post makes no sense on any level. It isn't even my point; I have no "labors".
And I believe "Clementine" would be a "she".

FIne, she is judging libs/dems by the fruits of their labors.

-- Which makes my point and indicates the question can't be answered, i.e. there is no source.

Bull. The source is your lib behavior. YOu see the results of your policies and keep doing more of them.

Clementine is drawing the obvious conclusion that you are purposefully achieving the easily predictable results of your actions.

There are other possible explanations.

Many conservatives believe liberalism is a mental disorder. Surely you've heard the saying, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and to keep expecting a different result"?

Others believe that liberals are stupid.

Since the distinction between Democrat and Liberal apparently sails over your head, you might wanna reconsider tossing the term "stupid" about. Just sayin'.

 

[Pogo]

Dems today do not reject JFK, but their platform today is considerably to the left of JFK...but that is true of the R party too.

Yup, the whole country has moved left (big leftist government) and Kennedy has been left at the center right.

Cluelessness abounds.

Although I did sneak a smile at the phrase "left at center right".

But seriously Lumpster -- you gotta extract your nose from Lush Rimjob's colostomy bag. It's not healthy in there.

 

[HenryBHough]

Liberal civility run amuck.

 

[Correll]

He is judging you by the fruits of your labors.

That post makes no sense on any level. It isn't even my point; I have no "labors".
And I believe "Clementine" would be a "she".

FIne, she is judging libs/dems by the fruits of their labors.

-- Which makes my point and indicates the question can't be answered, i.e. there is no source.

Bull. The "source" is you libs seeing what the results are of your policies and still deciding to stick to those policies.

If you aren't happy with the outcomes, then why don't your change your policies?

"My policies"?
I believe the subject of the thread title is "Democrats".

Anyway perhaps illiteracy prevails but my question was, and remains unaddressed, how the poster (or anyone) knows that some political party, all by itself, "wants to keep the poor in poverty". As opposed to both party wanting that. And I use the singular intentionally.

It bespeaks a fundamental naïveté about the political system, if not outright partisan wankitudinous hackery.

He is judging you by the fruits of your labors.

That post makes no sense on any level. It isn't even my point; I have no "labors".
And I believe "Clementine" would be a "she".

FIne, she is judging libs/dems by the fruits of their labors.

-- Which makes my point and indicates the question can't be answered, i.e. there is no source.

Bull. The source is your lib behavior. YOu see the results of your policies and keep doing more of them.

Clementine is drawing the obvious conclusion that you are purposefully achieving the easily predictable results of your actions.

There are other possible explanations.

Many conservatives believe liberalism is a mental disorder. Surely you've heard the saying, "insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and to keep expecting a different result"?

Others believe that liberals are stupid.

Since the distinction between Democrat and Liberal apparently sails over your head, you might wanna reconsider tossing the term "stupid" about. Just sayin'.

1. THe Republicans gain no advantage from keeping anyone poor. The poor are least likely to vote for them, as opposed to the party of every greater handouts.

2. I have no problem with the distinction between Democrat and Liberal. You seem to have a problem accepting that there is a lot of overlap between the two groups.

3. And regardless, my point stands. She is judging you libs/dems by the fruits of your labors.

4. If you are rejecting her and my assumption(s) that you are a lib and a dem, then come out and clearly state it instead of beating around the bush.