In Theory Liberals Should Not Be Allowed To Hold Office In America.

[AmericanFirst]

True, they wouldn't want you or your ilk anywhere near the levers of government.

Since they only wanted white male protestant slave owners to be in office you are probably right about that.

I guess we can put you down as one who doesn't believe 18th Century liberalism had any connection with modern liberalism.

Of course there is a connection but if liberalism didn't change with the times it would be conservatism and therefore at odds with the ideal that democracy must be continually perfected and be as flexible and adaptive as possible.

So liberalism can morph into virtually anything? In other words, what it was in the past has no connection with what it is today.

The idea that democracy can be perfected is akin to the idea that a ball of shit can be made to taste good by covering it with frosting. The Founding Fathers didn't believe in democracy. That's why turds like you despise them.

No, liberalism and conservatism are based on core beliefs. Some founders were afraid of democracy but as Jefferson said "all men are created equal" and over the years we, as other nations, became more democratic and continue in that regard. Even the framers of the Constitution voted for or against the acceptance of the Constitution, then the Constitution was submitted to "we the people" for ratification. Look at the democratic changes in just your lifetime, with women, Blacks, voting, and other areas.

The liberals today can't hold a candle to the founders. The commies control the libtarfs of today.

 

[regent]

Might check out the Age of Enlightenment which was a major influence on the writers of the Constitution.
"Liberalism as conservatism have some core beliefs, and from those core beliefs other forms have emerged, but the liberal core beliefs remain the founding of liberalism."
Regent.

Modern liberals reject all the core beliefs of 18th Century liberals

Can you name a core belief of liberalism or conservatism?

Yes. But I also know that would be grist for more political arguments. As for the diversity of liberalism and conservatism, I usually liken it to churches. We start with one belief but then that splits off to another belief and still another then we have all types of churches with different practices but at the bottom of the heap is the core belief, maybe, there is a God or Gods?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Ok, we get it... you have some kind of weird gay fetish thing... not creepy at all, right?

lol

 

[AmericanFirst]

Might check out the Age of Enlightenment which was a major influence on the writers of the Constitution.
"Liberalism as conservatism have some core beliefs, and from those core beliefs other forms have emerged, but the liberal core beliefs remain the founding of liberalism."
Regent.

Modern liberals reject all the core beliefs of 18th Century liberals

Can you name a core belief of liberalism or conservatism?

Yes. But I also know that would be grist for more political arguments. As for the diversity of liberalism and conservatism, I usually liken it to churches. We start with one belief but then that splits off to another belief and still another then we have all types of churches with different practices but at the bottom of the heap is the core belief, maybe, there is a God or Gods?

One God.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Might check out the Age of Enlightenment which was a major influence on the writers of the Constitution.
"Liberalism as conservatism have some core beliefs, and from those core beliefs other forms have emerged, but the liberal core beliefs remain the founding of liberalism."
Regent.

Modern liberals reject all the core beliefs of 18th Century liberals

Can you name a core belief of liberalism or conservatism?

liberalism: ignore history because you're too dumb to understand it and just try something new like HItler, Stalin, and Mao did.

conservatism: study and learn from history and move forward very slowly and cautiously expecting to make adjustments along the way.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

then the Constitution was submitted to "we the people" for ratification.

fool liberal , it was submitted to states for radification, not we the people!! States were barely democratic if at all!!

As a result extraordinarily coercive measures were taken to force Antifederalists to attend. Antifederalists were found at their boarding house and then dragged through the streets of Philadelphia and deposited in the Pennsylvania State House with the doors locked behind them. The presence of these Antifederalists against their will, created the required number of members to allow a special convention to be called in the state, which eventually voted 46 to 23 to accept the Constitution.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The liberals today can't hold a candle to the founders. The commies control the libtarfs of today.

this is true and Obamacare is perfect example!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. As Jefferson wrote in 1788 the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

yes and Jefferson was 100% opposed to government gaining ground you poor silly fool! Now you know the one simple reason why he and Madison founded the Republican Party in 1793!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So liberalism can morph into virtually anything? In other words, what it was in the past has no connection with what it is today.

yes exactly!!! this is how liberals went from revolution against the king of England to spying for and giving bomb to king of Russia (Stalin).

 

[koshergrl]

. It's only since Reagan they got all monolithic and unreasonably ideological.

how is the ideology of freedom from big liberal govt unreasonable when it is the purpose of the Constitution??

Even attempting to answer that question would force me accept a host of bad conservative "thought" as valid interpretations of how the government is supposed to be.

We know you are adamantly opposed to thought in all it's various forms, occupied. Nobody expects any different...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If most wanted to stick with the Articles why didn't they?

Most thought they had or that what was proposed was little different. This is why for example Hamilton disappeared for much of the summer, why Patrick Henry did not show at all, and why Jefferson of all people did not object much.

Jefferson and Madison were happy to serve under Washington but when they saw it really wasn't the Articles any more they immediately left to form the Republican Party which would in turn cast the Federalists into the dust bin of history in what was called the Second American Revolution.!!

Welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

 

[regent]

Might check out the Age of Enlightenment which was a major influence on the writers of the Constitution.
"Liberalism as conservatism have some core beliefs, and from those core beliefs other forms have emerged, but the liberal core beliefs remain the founding of liberalism."
Regent.

Modern liberals reject all the core beliefs of 18th Century liberals

Can you name a core belief of liberalism or conservatism?

liberalism: ignore history because you're too dumb to understand it and just try something new like HItler, Stalin, and Mao did.

conservatism: study and learn from history and move forward very slowly and cautiously expecting to make adjustments along the way.

Liberals don't need much more, as long as they can keep you posting.

. As Jefferson wrote in 1788 the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.

yes and Jefferson was 100% opposed to government gaining ground you poor silly fool! Now you know the one simple reason why he and Madison founded the Republican Party in 1793!

But apparently Jefferson recognized it was the natural progress of things for government to gain ground, and has this not been true since 1788? Has the American government not grown or gained ground in the last 200 plus years?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

But apparently Jefferson recognized it was the natural progress of things for government to gain ground,

Too stupid!! he was not resigned to it. He devoted his entire life to defeating liberalism and believed America was something new under the sun.


Jefferson's election was one of his greatest political victories, vindicating his belief that "the sovereign people" would repel attacks on their liberties and the enduring republican principles of 1776. "As the storm is now subsiding, and the horizon becoming serene," he wrote to a political ally, "[w]e can no longer say there is nothing new under the sun. For this whole chapter in the history of man is new. The great extent of our Republic is new.... The mighty wave of public opinion which has rolled over it is new.... The order and good sense displayed in this recovery from delusion, and in the momentous crisis which lately arose, really bespeak a strength of character in our nation which augurs well for the duration of our Republic."

 

[regent]

If most wanted to stick with the Articles why didn't they?

Most thought they had or that what was proposed was little different. This is why for example Hamilton disappeared for much of the summer, why Patrick Henry did not show at all, and why Jefferson of all people did not object much.

Jefferson and Madison were happy to serve under Washington but when they saw it really wasn't the Articles any more they immediately left to form the Republican Party which would in turn cast the Federalists into the dust bin of history in what was called the Second American Revolution.!!

Welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

So when Jefferson and Madison discovered the document was the Constitution and not the Articles they both left immediately. Did Madison have any idea what was in the Constitution or was it all new to him. And still later Jefferson writes "The Constitution is unquestionably the wisest ever presented to men."
Please no more history lessons, my kids might read them.

 

[occupied]

. It's only since Reagan they got all monolithic and unreasonably ideological.

how is the ideology of freedom from big liberal govt unreasonable when it is the purpose of the Constitution??

Even attempting to answer that question would force me accept a host of bad conservative "thought" as valid interpretations of how the government is supposed to be.

We know you are adamantly opposed to thought in all it's various forms, occupied. Nobody expects any different...

Not opposed to thought, it's what separates us from the animals, What I am opposed to is policy being based on time worn truisms instead of rational thought. You yourself beleve things solely based on who is saying it, as if conservatives are incapable of intellectual blindness or deception.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If most wanted to stick with the Articles why didn't they?

Most thought they had or that what was proposed was little different. This is why for example Hamilton disappeared for much of the summer, why Patrick Henry did not show at all, and why Jefferson of all people did not object much.

Jefferson and Madison were happy to serve under Washington but when they saw it really wasn't the Articles any more they immediately left to form the Republican Party which would in turn cast the Federalists into the dust bin of history in what was called the Second American Revolution.!!

Welcome to your first lesson in American History!!

So when Jefferson and Madison discovered the document was the Constitution and not the Articles they both left immediately. Did Madison have any idea what was in the Constitution or was it all new to him. And still later Jefferson writes "The Constitution is unquestionably the wisest ever presented to men."
Please no more history lessons, my kids might read them.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Did Madison have any idea what was in the Constitution or was it all new to him..

it was all new to him and Jefferson in the way Federalists were mistakenly interpreting it so they formed the Republican Party to wage what they called the Second American Revolution.

Do you understand now, liberal.

 

[occupied]

Did Madison have any idea what was in the Constitution or was it all new to him..

it was all new to him and Jefferson in the way Federalists were mistakenly interpreting it so they formed the Republican Party to wage what they called the Second American Revolution.

Do you understand now, liberal.

The republican party is not that old kook.

 

[Iceweasel]

You deserve a country ruled by a single party with no fear of ever being voted out. Russia comes to mind, move there immediately.

You can't read. He didn't say Democrats shouldn't hold office. Not long ago there were conservative Democrats.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Did Madison have any idea what was in the Constitution or was it all new to him..

it was all new to him and Jefferson in the way Federalists were mistakenly interpreting it so they formed the Republican Party to wage what they called the Second American Revolution.

Do you understand now, liberal.

The republican party is not that old kook.

When Jefferson declared in the passage he did include in his first inaguural that: we are all republicans; we are all federalists." he meant really that the party wars were over; that the Republicans had won;and that the Federalists should fit themselves in...

A.James Reichley "The Life of the Parties"( most thorough look at Party history ever written) Page 52

"In referring to political parties I have adopted the names which the respective parties used in self-designation. Thus the Jeffersonian party has been referred to throughout as the Republican Party. This name came into use early in the 1790's among persons who considered themselves of a common political "interest", and the term "Republican interest" was generally used until it was replaced by the more definite "Republican Party".

The Jeffersonian Republicans( the formation of Party organization (1789-1801) by Noble E. Cunningham,Jr.