Progression or Regression, that is the question

[Wry Catcher]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

I think we can agree that turning the USA into a 3rd-World shithole is not progress. Yet, it is oddly championed by those who call themselves "progressive".

Well if you think this, you must have a basis of facts to share. Please do, and be specific as to what policies and laws progressives support which make us into a 3rd world shit hole. .

• labor Laws
• Women's rights to vote
• Social Security
• The Civil Rights Movement
• The passage of Medicare
• The clean air and water act

Open borders. Progressives cannot accept that you can take a Haitian or Honduran out of their shithole, but you can't take the shithole out of the Haitian or Honduran.

Racial and ethnic bigotry is not progressive, it is regressive.

racial and ethnic bigotry is something that exists in both parties.....

Of course, it's human nature. BUT, the policies of the parties are much different; racism & misogyny are much more common in the conservatives and those who vote for the Republicans, than in the Democratic Party.

 

[Wry Catcher]

On the surface it appears Democrats care more about non-citizens than citizens, though I don’t trust Washington Republicans to keep Americans’ interests to heart either. Imo both parties have traveled way off the mark regarding the value and meaning of their elected statuses. The majority of them are more interested in playing partisan games than serving the people.

Your premise: "it appears Democrats care more about non-citizens than citizens" is belied by the fact that citizens in the minority (i.e. the protected class) have advantages which were supported by the D's and have been rejected, mocked and opposed by the R's.

For examples, affirmative action; gay and lesbian rights to marry and serve in our military; a Women's right to choose to serve in a combat unit; R v. W; the Equal Rights Amendment and the Lily Ledbetter fair pay act.

D's also support non citizen's who are law abiding members of our communities, and suppport their natural rights, common law rights and rights bestowed to them in our own Bill of Rights.

Trump&Co are violating human rights as I write this, and not complying with the Federal Court to return minors to their parents in the time frame set by the court, and detaining in custody both parents - without a bail hearing - and children too young to be prosecuted by law.

One must conclude either the agencies which removed and placed these kids is inept and incompetent, or that doing so is a planned effort to make others seeking entry into our country to think twice or else. A form of seeking order without justice or the rule of law.

I don't see regression in thinking anyone here illegally should be deported. But their are practical problems. With birthright citizenship (which is extremely unlikely to change) we have child citizens, and even still other citizens married to illegal aliens. That doesn't necessarily mean their shouldn't be unpleasant consequences for law breakers though.

even Obama first tried to detain entire families. The court's said nay, but perhaps if we could drastically reduce the period between detention and a hearing on whether or not they could stay...... And I realize Trump wants to give no due process at all to these people, despite court rulings saying due process applies.

The problem is Trump alienates everyone who does not kiss his ass. We could work out the crisis at the border but for Trump's attack on Mexico and Mexicans; we could solve trade wars by making treaties with other regions of the world, like was done with NAFTA, BUT for Trump's bellicose and belligerent rhetoric and on perceived problems with NAFTA could be resolved if one seeks a win-win accord, as well as his desire to kill the PPACA when no replacement plan is prepared or even in the works.

 

[Some Guy]

Both parties are regressive in their own right
I dont see progress with either party.

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

 

[Wry Catcher]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

I think we can agree that turning the USA into a 3rd-World shithole is not progress. Yet, it is oddly championed by those who call themselves "progressive".

Well if you think this, you must have a basis of facts to share. Please do, and be specific as to what policies and laws progressives support which make us into a 3rd world shit hole. .

• labor Laws
• Women's rights to vote
• Social Security
• The Civil Rights Movement
• The passage of Medicare
• The clean air and water act

Open borders. Progressives cannot accept that you can take a Haitian or Honduran out of their shithole, but you can't take the shithole out of the Haitian or Honduran.

Racial and ethnic bigotry is not progressive, it is regressive.

A shithole is a shithole. It is the people who make it a shithole and it can be as progressive as Mao's Cultural Revolution, but it's still a shithole.

It is the leadership which creates a shit hole, which is why I oppose Donald Trump. It is not the people, the people are those who get up every day and face an impossible task when the leaders are focused on themselves and not the greater good. Trump's hat - MAGA - an impossible task when his idea is to destroy everything which came before him. Megalomaniacs, a person who is obsessed with their own power, are not builders, they are wreckers.

 

[Meathead]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

Communism was considered progress. Mao''s Cultural Revolution was considered great progress. Today the moniker for both is Democratic Socialism.

Since you likely no idea of what I'm talking about in your ignorance, allow me:

A Brief Overview of China’s Cultural Revolution

 

[bendog]

On the surface it appears Democrats care more about non-citizens than citizens, though I don’t trust Washington Republicans to keep Americans’ interests to heart either. Imo both parties have traveled way off the mark regarding the value and meaning of their elected statuses. The majority of them are more interested in playing partisan games than serving the people.

Your premise: "it appears Democrats care more about non-citizens than citizens" is belied by the fact that citizens in the minority (i.e. the protected class) have advantages which were supported by the D's and have been rejected, mocked and opposed by the R's.

For examples, affirmative action; gay and lesbian rights to marry and serve in our military; a Women's right to choose to serve in a combat unit; R v. W; the Equal Rights Amendment and the Lily Ledbetter fair pay act.

D's also support non citizen's who are law abiding members of our communities, and suppport their natural rights, common law rights and rights bestowed to them in our own Bill of Rights.

Trump&Co are violating human rights as I write this, and not complying with the Federal Court to return minors to their parents in the time frame set by the court, and detaining in custody both parents - without a bail hearing - and children too young to be prosecuted by law.

One must conclude either the agencies which removed and placed these kids is inept and incompetent, or that doing so is a planned effort to make others seeking entry into our country to think twice or else. A form of seeking order without justice or the rule of law.

I don't see regression in thinking anyone here illegally should be deported. But their are practical problems. With birthright citizenship (which is extremely unlikely to change) we have child citizens, and even still other citizens married to illegal aliens. That doesn't necessarily mean their shouldn't be unpleasant consequences for law breakers though.

even Obama first tried to detain entire families. The court's said nay, but perhaps if we could drastically reduce the period between detention and a hearing on whether or not they could stay...... And I realize Trump wants to give no due process at all to these people, despite court rulings saying due process applies.

The problem is Trump alienates everyone who does not kiss his ass. We could work out the crisis at the border but for Trump's attack on Mexico and Mexicans; we could solve trade wars by making treaties with other regions of the world, like was done with NAFTA, BUT for Trump's bellicose and belligerent rhetoric and on perceived problems with NAFTA could be resolved if one seeks a win-win accord, as well as his desire to kill the PPACA when no replacement plan is prepared or even in the works.

Trump is a regressive.

Progressive/regressive is not determined simply by what party one belongs to. Perhaps Trump's latest blowup at HW Bush was telling. Points of light. HW was just extolling the benefits of public service. Trump has to have an enemy. It's not a good way to live.

 

[bendog]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

Communism was considered progress. Mao''s Cultural Revolution was considered great progress. Today the moniker for both is Democratic Socialism.

Since you likely no idea of what I'm talking about in your ignorance, allow me:

A Brief Overview of China’s Cultural Revolution

Removing cultural and educational institutions is a key element in Trumpthink. Excellent link.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Both parties are regressive in their own right
I dont see progress with either party.

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

 

[bendog]

Both parties are regressive in their own right
I dont see progress with either party.

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

 

[Wry Catcher]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

Two fools found the DoI and the Preamble of COTUS funny.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Both parties are regressive in their own right
I dont see progress with either party.

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

Your last paragraph is why I've argued the Justices of the Supreme Court ought to served 10 year terms, and either stand for reelection in the next general election, and if supported to remain on the court, a second term of 10 years and then retire.

Also, the Supreme Court must have a code of ethics, and that code should mirror the code of ethics every other judge in America takes before putting on the robe.

 

[bendog]

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

Your last paragraph is why I've argued the Justices of the Supreme Court ought to served 10 year terms, and either stand for reelection in the next general election, and if supported to remain on the court, a second term of 10 years and then retire.

Also, the Supreme Court must have a code of ethics, and that code should mirror the code of ethics every other judge in America takes before putting on the robe.

I dunno. There are 6 and maybe 7 who vote for capital over labor everytime.

It seems to me that our problems don't involve govt doing too much. although I was against much of Obamacare's regulations on covering stuff.

Our govt refuses to pay its bills. Our govt refuses to enforce the laws that will close the border.

 

[AZGAL]

The far left think that they are just so much more enlightened than everyone else and they shove a false "progress" in everyone's faces. The far right possesses the stalwart tyrants of a stale patriarchy that is too far outdated. Best to be a free thinker and have a collection of beliefs in the present day United States.

 

[OKTexas]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

The first thing you need to remember, the meaning of the written word doesn't evolve with time. The founders vision of the federal government was very limited in size and scope. That simple fact shows the vision of the modern commiecrat are at odds with the founders.

Second, you have to keep in mind the definitions of "provide" and "promote". To "provide" the founders intended the federal government to directly pay for an activity. To "promote" meant to create an atmosphere for a successful activity, but not pay directly for the activity itself. Promote the general welfare in the preamble is a perfect example. So the nanny state desired by modern commiecrats, also puts them at odds with the founders.

The father of our Constitution explains it much better than I.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -James Madison Federalist 45

Add to this, the modern commiecrats have forced a morality on the country the founders wouldn't recognize, one that more closely resembles that of Sodom and Gomorrah, than what they saw as moral society. Don't bother to bring up the slavery argument either, that was remedied a long time before any living Americans were born.

While the US has progressed technologically and in creature comforts, have we really progressed within the founders vision, I don't think we have. How about you?


.

 

[Oldstyle]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

LOL...the only reason you liberals use the term "progressive" is that the voters got wise to who you were and you needed to repackage yourselves so a new generation could be deceived!

Funny how conservatives remain conservatives...

Even funnier is your claim that Democrats support the nation more than Republicans!

 

[Wry Catcher]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

The first thing you need to remember, the meaning of the written word doesn't evolve with time. The founders vision of the federal government was very limited in size and scope. That simple fact shows the vision of the modern commiecrat parts are at odds with the founders.

Second, you have to keep in mind the definitions of "provide" and "promote". To "provide" the founders intended the federal government to directly pay for an activity. To "promote" meant to create an atmosphere for a successful activity, but not pay directly for the activity itself. Promote the general welfare in the preamble is a perfect example. So the nanny state desired by modern commiecrats, also puts them at odds with the founders.

The father of our Constitution explains it much better than I.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -James Madison Federalist 45

Add to this, the modern commiecrats have forced a morality on the country the founders wouldn't recognize, one that more closely resembles that of Sodom and Gomorrah, than what they saw as moral society. Don't bother to bring up the slavery argument either, that was remedied a long time before any living Americans were born.

While the US has progressed technologically and in creature comforts, have we really progressed within the founders vision, I don't think we have. How about you?


.

The Federal Papers were was of 13 colonies

Both parties are regressive in their own right
I dont see progress with either party.

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

Not all of the founders wanted a limited government. We had one in the Articles of Confederation, and learned how weak they were. Hamilton, Jay and Madison wanted a stronger federal government, Hamilton even argued for a lifetime president.

 

[OKTexas]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

The first thing you need to remember, the meaning of the written word doesn't evolve with time. The founders vision of the federal government was very limited in size and scope. That simple fact shows the vision of the modern commiecrat parts are at odds with the founders.

Second, you have to keep in mind the definitions of "provide" and "promote". To "provide" the founders intended the federal government to directly pay for an activity. To "promote" meant to create an atmosphere for a successful activity, but not pay directly for the activity itself. Promote the general welfare in the preamble is a perfect example. So the nanny state desired by modern commiecrats, also puts them at odds with the founders.

The father of our Constitution explains it much better than I.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -James Madison Federalist 45

Add to this, the modern commiecrats have forced a morality on the country the founders wouldn't recognize, one that more closely resembles that of Sodom and Gomorrah, than what they saw as moral society. Don't bother to bring up the slavery argument either, that was remedied a long time before any living Americans were born.

While the US has progressed technologically and in creature comforts, have we really progressed within the founders vision, I don't think we have. How about you?


.

The Federal Papers were was of 13 colonies

Maybe you should open your eyes.

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

Not all of the founders wanted a limited government. We had one in the Articles of Confederation, and learned how weak they were. Hamilton, Jay and Madison wanted a stronger federal government, Hamilton even argued for a lifetime president.

They were called the Federalist papers and there were 13 sovereign States. Those State loaned portions of their sovereignty to the federal government. If they had the balls they could take it back, in part or all.


.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The far left think that they are just so much more enlightened than everyone else and they shove a false "progress" in everyone's faces. The far right possesses the stalwart tyrants of a stale patriarchy that is too far outdated. Best to be a free thinker and have a collection of beliefs in the present day United States.

What are your collection of beliefs?

 

[Wry Catcher]

re·gres·sion
noun

1. a return to a former or less developed state
2. a measure of the relation between the mean value of one variable (e.g., output) and corresponding values of other variables (e.g., time and cost).

pro·gres·sion
noun

1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
   synonyms: progress, advancement

To be clear, this is the difference in my mind between the current iteration of the Republican Party, and the current iteration of the Democratic Party.

Q. Which ideology seems to support the vision outlined in the Preamble to the United States:

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Be honest, consider the words and their meaning for today, and for tomorrows, during this time in our history.

The first thing you need to remember, the meaning of the written word doesn't evolve with time. The founders vision of the federal government was very limited in size and scope. That simple fact shows the vision of the modern commiecrat parts are at odds with the founders.

Second, you have to keep in mind the definitions of "provide" and "promote". To "provide" the founders intended the federal government to directly pay for an activity. To "promote" meant to create an atmosphere for a successful activity, but not pay directly for the activity itself. Promote the general welfare in the preamble is a perfect example. So the nanny state desired by modern commiecrats, also puts them at odds with the founders.

The father of our Constitution explains it much better than I.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. -James Madison Federalist 45

Add to this, the modern commiecrats have forced a morality on the country the founders wouldn't recognize, one that more closely resembles that of Sodom and Gomorrah, than what they saw as moral society. Don't bother to bring up the slavery argument either, that was remedied a long time before any living Americans were born.

While the US has progressed technologically and in creature comforts, have we really progressed within the founders vision, I don't think we have. How about you?


.

The Federal Papers were was of 13 colonies

Says the guy with tunnel vision.
Let me guess, your hacked out ass thinks the Ds are actually "progressive" right?
Wanting mentally ill grown men to shower beside little girls like they did in Rome 2K years ago?
Totalitarianism?
inconsistency on enforcement of laws?
You fucking idiots are willing to lose national sovereignty over something you cant even prove
shall i go on?
YOU need to open your eyes
The duopoly is a bunch of bullshit.

Pretending government is capable of solving problems is very regressive. Got plenty of that going on right now. I'd say both parties have done a hell of a job convincing a lot of stupid people that if they just put faith in my government that they'll be taken care of. Government is the single greatest source of evil, suffering and oppression the world has ever or will ever know.

And the Alternative is ....





IMO, chaos.

the Founders thought govt could solve problems. However they limited the power of govt.

We have structural deficits, but I don't really see the gummit doing that much more to affect the econ than it did in 1980, when the structural deficits were implemented.

Obamacare did mandate an increase in the illnesses insurance had to cover. But it's defunded now. And costs were increasing before that experiment, and pretty much the taxes it raised paid for the costs.

We have five SC Justices determined to reduce congress' power to address perceived problems.

Not all of the founders wanted a limited government. We had one in the Articles of Confederation, and learned how weak they were. Hamilton, Jay and Madison wanted a stronger federal government, Hamilton even argued for a lifetime president.

They were called the Federalist papers and there were 13 sovereign States. Those State loaned portions of their sovereignty to the federal government. If they had the balls they could take it back, in part or all.


.

If I recall my history, they tried in 1861 to take it all back.

 

[Harry Dresden]

I think we can agree that turning the USA into a 3rd-World shithole is not progress. Yet, it is oddly championed by those who call themselves "progressive".

Well if you think this, you must have a basis of facts to share. Please do, and be specific as to what policies and laws progressives support which make us into a 3rd world shit hole. .

• labor Laws
• Women's rights to vote
• Social Security
• The Civil Rights Movement
• The passage of Medicare
• The clean air and water act

Open borders. Progressives cannot accept that you can take a Haitian or Honduran out of their shithole, but you can't take the shithole out of the Haitian or Honduran.

Racial and ethnic bigotry is not progressive, it is regressive.

racial and ethnic bigotry is something that exists in both parties.....

Of course, it's human nature. BUT, the policies of the parties are much different; racism & misogyny are much more common in the conservatives and those who vote for the Republicans, than in the Democratic Party.

is that what they tell you Wry?.....sorry my time in the PO introduced me to quite a few liberals who were just as racist as any righty.....