Did you hear about the progressive Democrat who loved America?

Funny. Blind patriotism is a sign of insecurity, rather than strength. The reason why Democrats and the Center Left/Left don't go mad with flag waving and 'patriotic' events is because America can only be a free and democratic society so long as citizens are aware and informed, rather than just blindly support their country.

Tyranny has always come from the flag waving crowd, who never question their country even if it does something terribly wrong.

If not waving a flag, or saying you love America every time on television is viewed as a bad thing, then the true republic is on its last legs. Loving America isn't waving flags or saying you love it, but believing in liberty and justice for all, whether they are American or from another country.

We were not founded go be democratic. .. that's your problem right there you don't know what form of government we are founded on.

tapatalk post
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/republic
republic   Use Republic in a sentence
re·pub·lic [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
noun
1.
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
Thanks for playing. A republic is a form of representative democracy, often with checks and balances which exist to combat a tyranny of the majority.

The American Republic was in fact inspired or partly based on the Roman Republic, and the Greco-Roman architecture is a dead give away. Even the Roman Republic had democratic elections, just they were a lot more controlled by the oligarchy.
 
Neither did I.

Yes, only far right wing conservatives love America. :cuckoo:

My kid leaves for Parris Island in three weeks. He's definitely a liberal and he definitely loves this country. Fuck off.
Good luck to him and I hope he stays safe wherever he gets deployed.
If the Left loved the country they wouldn't always want to fundamentally change it would they? They want a Socialist democracy that will inevitably turn into the fascist socialist state because that's just what Socialism is where as the rest of us wish to keep our constitutional republic.

We can go a long way to saving this country by repealing the 16th and 17th amendment. Take income tax away from the government and stop electing senators.

The right wingers want to turn this into a stone a fag,women wear burqa's theocracy so....
As normal leftest do nothing more then lie like you just did.... If your ideology was so fucking great why do you have to lie about it and lie about conservatives?
 
Funny. Blind patriotism is a sign of insecurity, rather than strength. The reason why Democrats and the Center Left/Left don't go mad with flag waving and 'patriotic' events is because America can only be a free and democratic society so long as citizens are aware and informed, rather than just blindly support their country.

Tyranny has always come from the flag waving crowd, who never question their country even if it does something terribly wrong.

If not waving a flag, or saying you love America every time on television is viewed as a bad thing, then the true republic is on its last legs. Loving America isn't waving flags or saying you love it, but believing in liberty and justice for all, whether they are American or from another country.

We were not founded go be democratic. .. that's your problem right there you don't know what form of government we are founded on.

tapatalk post
Republic | Define Republic at Dictionary.com
republic   Use Republic in a sentence
re·pub·lic [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
noun
1.
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
Thanks for playing. A republic is a form of representative democracy, often with checks and balances which exist to combat a tyranny of the majority.

The American Republic was in fact inspired or partly based on the Roman Republic, and the Greco-Roman architecture is a dead give away. Even the Roman Republic had democratic elections, just they were a lot more controlled by the oligarchy.

Not the same kind of republic fool.
 
.

Can someone give me a clear and civil explanation of why a person would want to fundamentally change something they love?

.

you'd have to ask the radical right about that.


Deflection noted.

th

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKxDdxzX0kI"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKxDdxzX0kI[/ame]

Anyone else?

.
 
Last edited:
.

Can someone give me a clear and civil explanation of why a person would want to fundamentally change something they love?

.

I love my friend. He is a heroin addict because of dumb choices he made earlier in his life. I would want to fundamentally change that about him because I love him.

Love makes us want to change things for the better. It's a great motivation for change.
 
.

Can someone give me a clear and civil explanation of why a person would want to fundamentally change something they love?

.

I love my friend. He is a heroin addict because of dumb choices he made earlier in his life. I would want to fundamentally change that about him because I love him.

Love makes us want to change things for the better. It's a great motivation for change.
a person isnt a form of government. It also isnt one that actually worked.
 
Funny. Blind patriotism is a sign of insecurity, rather than strength. The reason why Democrats and the Center Left/Left don't go mad with flag waving and 'patriotic' events is because America can only be a free and democratic society so long as citizens are aware and informed, rather than just blindly support their country.

Tyranny has always come from the flag waving crowd, who never question their country even if it does something terribly wrong.

If not waving a flag, or saying you love America every time on television is viewed as a bad thing, then the true republic is on its last legs. Loving America isn't waving flags or saying you love it, but believing in liberty and justice for all, whether they are American or from another country.

We were not founded go be democratic. .. that's your problem right there you don't know what form of government we are founded on.

tapatalk post
Republic | Define Republic at Dictionary.com
republic   Use Republic in a sentence
re·pub·lic [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
noun
1.
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
Thanks for playing. A republic is a form of representative democracy, often with checks and balances which exist to combat a tyranny of the majority.

The American Republic was in fact inspired or partly based on the Roman Republic, and the Greco-Roman architecture is a dead give away. Even the Roman Republic had democratic elections, just they were a lot more controlled by the oligarchy.
In the constitutional republic that was the United States, some citizens were entitled to vote for some officers. Democracy was limited to the lower chamber of the legislature (the Senate would "check the imprudence of democracy" *). And all officers were to govern according to law.

Might you explain to us how a democratic government - a rule of the people - does not amount to a "tyranny of the majority"?

Thank you kindly.


* Alexander Hamilton
 
We were not founded go be democratic. .. that's your problem right there you don't know what form of government we are founded on.

tapatalk post
Republic | Define Republic at Dictionary.com
republic   Use Republic in a sentence
re·pub·lic [ri-puhb-lik] Show IPA
noun
1.
a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by them.
Thanks for playing. A republic is a form of representative democracy, often with checks and balances which exist to combat a tyranny of the majority.

The American Republic was in fact inspired or partly based on the Roman Republic, and the Greco-Roman architecture is a dead give away. Even the Roman Republic had democratic elections, just they were a lot more controlled by the oligarchy.
In the constitutional republic that was the United States, some citizens were entitled to vote for some officers. Democracy was limited to the lower chamber of the legislature (the Senate would "check the imprudence of democracy" *). And all officers were to govern according to law.

Might you explain to us how a democratic government - a rule of the people - does not amount to a "tyranny of the majority"?

Thank you kindly.


* Alexander Hamilton
Like the roman republic, a limited sphere of democratic elections, is still democratic elections. It is silly that you are trying to argue that a republic doesn't contain democracy, and that the rhetoric of America being a democratic society went over your head during the cold war.

Curious how when it suits them, that Republicans will proclaim we live in a democracy, as if a vote of 51% justifies legislation banning same-sex marriage. Then the next minute when a minority like LGBT or non-Christians oppose it, Republicans proclaim it as a republic, as if it is an justifiable excuse to deny rights and discriminate. The justification doesn't work of course, the supreme court sees through it.

Unless you believe that everyone is a collective of automatons (rather than a group of individuals), a tyranny of the majority is established when most of eligible voters (in most cases a simple majority) undermine the rights and freedoms of others, and the said minority has not consented to such treatment.

Democracy isn't inherently a tyranny of the majority, anymore than people are inherently authoritarian. The checks and balances in the US work too well, there is political deadlock, and it is difficult to pass laws or get things done with the over the top bureaucracy.
 
Last edited:
Good luck to him and I hope he stays safe wherever he gets deployed.


The right wingers want to turn this into a stone a fag,women wear burqa's theocracy so....
As normal leftest do nothing more then lie like you just did.... If your ideology was so fucking great why do you have to lie about it and lie about conservatives?
So its fine when the rightwingers lie about "leftwingers" but not OK when I tell a pretty close truth? Tough shit.

I don't lie about you on the left

tapatalk post
 
Republic | Define Republic at Dictionary.com
Thanks for playing. A republic is a form of representative democracy, often with checks and balances which exist to combat a tyranny of the majority.

The American Republic was in fact inspired or partly based on the Roman Republic, and the Greco-Roman architecture is a dead give away. Even the Roman Republic had democratic elections, just they were a lot more controlled by the oligarchy.
In the constitutional republic that was the United States, some citizens were entitled to vote for some officers. Democracy was limited to the lower chamber of the legislature (the Senate would "check the imprudence of democracy" *). And all officers were to govern according to law.

Might you explain to us how a democratic government - a rule of the people - does not amount to a "tyranny of the majority"?

Thank you kindly.


* Alexander Hamilton
Like the roman republic, a limited sphere of democratic elections, is still democratic elections. It is silly that you are trying to argue that a republic doesn't contain democracy, and that the rhetoric of America being a democratic society went over your head during the cold war.

Curious how when it suits them, that Republicans will proclaim we live in a democracy, as if a vote of 51% justifies legislation banning same-sex marriage. Then the next minute when a minority like LGBT or non-Christians oppose it, Republicans proclaim it as a republic, as if it is an justifiable excuse to deny rights and discriminate. The justification doesn't work of course, the supreme court sees through it.

Unless you believe that everyone is a collective of automatons (rather than a group of individuals), a tyranny of the majority is established when most of eligible voters (in most cases a simple majority) undermine the rights and freedoms of others, and the said minority has not consented to such treatment.

Democracy isn't inherently a tyranny of the majority, anymore than people are inherently authoritarian. The checks and balances in the US work too well, there is political deadlock, and it is difficult to pass laws or get things done with the over the top bureaucracy.

We were nothing like the Roman empire.... we were a republic founded on set laws that limit the government. The Roman empire was still a empire that didn't limit the government. We are becoming more like them now because fools like yourself can't see the difference

tapatalk post
 
Michael Sam is only annoying to some because he was Oppressed YESTERDAY.

Oppressed by who, name one other 249th pick in the draft the got the publicity he did. Where was all the fuss over the 248th or 247th prick, do you even know who they are?
 
Good luck to him and I hope he stays safe wherever he gets deployed.


The right wingers want to turn this into a stone a fag,women wear burqa's theocracy so....
As normal leftest do nothing more then lie like you just did.... If your ideology was so fucking great why do you have to lie about it and lie about conservatives?
So its fine when the rightwingers lie about "leftwingers" but not OK when I tell a pretty close truth? Tough shit.

ok three points

what do we say thats a lie about leftwingers?

second, when did we say we want to stone fags or women that wear burqas?

third why did the left left INVITE the prez of iran WHO DOES stone fags and women who wear burqas, but then protest condi rice?



its clear you are full of shir
 
In the constitutional republic that was the United States, some citizens were entitled to vote for some officers. Democracy was limited to the lower chamber of the legislature (the Senate would "check the imprudence of democracy" *). And all officers were to govern according to law.

Might you explain to us how a democratic government - a rule of the people - does not amount to a "tyranny of the majority"?

Thank you kindly.


* Alexander Hamilton
Like the roman republic, a limited sphere of democratic elections, is still democratic elections. It is silly that you are trying to argue that a republic doesn't contain democracy, and that the rhetoric of America being a democratic society went over your head during the cold war.

Curious how when it suits them, that Republicans will proclaim we live in a democracy, as if a vote of 51% justifies legislation banning same-sex marriage. Then the next minute when a minority like LGBT or non-Christians oppose it, Republicans proclaim it as a republic, as if it is an justifiable excuse to deny rights and discriminate. The justification doesn't work of course, the supreme court sees through it.

Unless you believe that everyone is a collective of automatons (rather than a group of individuals), a tyranny of the majority is established when most of eligible voters (in most cases a simple majority) undermine the rights and freedoms of others, and the said minority has not consented to such treatment.

Democracy isn't inherently a tyranny of the majority, anymore than people are inherently authoritarian. The checks and balances in the US work too well, there is political deadlock, and it is difficult to pass laws or get things done with the over the top bureaucracy.

We were nothing like the Roman empire... we were a republic founded on set laws that limit the government. The Roman empire was still a empire that didn't limit the government. We are becoming more like them now because fools like yourself can't see the difference

tapatalk post
I said the Roman Republic not the Roman Empire, and I didn't say that America is the Roman Republic, I said it was inspired and partly based on it. The Roman Republic was founded on laws that limited government i.e. the monarchy was overthrown and a republic was established.
Roman_constitution.svg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Roman_constitution.svg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Roman_Republic
The Constitution of the Roman Republic was a set of guidelines and principles passed down mainly through precedent.[1] The constitution was largely unwritten and uncodified, and evolved over time. Rather than creating a government that was primarily a democracy (as was ancient Athens), an aristocracy (as was ancient Sparta), or a monarchy (as was Rome before and, in many respects, after the Republic), the Roman constitution mixed these three elements, thus creating three separate branches of government.[2] The democratic element took the form of the legislative assemblies, the aristocratic element took the form of the Senate, and the monarchical element took the form of the many term-limited consuls.[3]
Basically the Roman Republic, was a forebear of the modern republic today - as it reneged on establishing a full democracy* like Athens, instead favoring representation.

*Though it didn't allow non-Athenians and women to vote.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top