There Is No "Far Right" In This Country

[Wry Catcher]

1. There is no "far right" in this country.
Yet....the very same folks who poke fun at religious Americans, by comparing God with Santa Claus, go on and on.....

"F**k the far right."
MARCO RUBIO: I 'Absolutely' Support Tuition Breaks For Illegal Aliens

'Or Sanders, who does even better against the far right tard candidates'
BUSTED ! – Republican State of Union Response Carried Amnesty Pledge in Spanish Version…

'I bet this will drive the far right loons insane:'
Nikki Haley rebukes Trump in State of the Union rebuttal

'Uh.. there is very much a "far right" in this country.'
The Delusional Candidate

'... what the far right reactionaries are posting.'
Another reason Americans WANT to see Obama and Obamacare GO!!!

'...for some time now the most and loudest noise has come from the Far Right.'
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

"...how insane the far right is."
Yes, You're A Communist





2. There is no "far right" in this country. So... how to explain the constant reference to this meme by Leftists?

One fact of life is that hearing a phrase often enough, one tends to accept it without spending the effort of examining same. The term "Far Right," used in a cavalier yet effective manner by the Left, is one of those terms.

Yet...upon examination....it proves to be imaginary, very much like the benefits of communism....or ObamaCare.




3. It is a well know axiom that, to see what the Left is doing, note what they are blaming the other side of doing.
One regularly sees the Leftists, Liberals, Progressives, Democrats, whatever....railing against the "Far Right," using "Far Right" as a pejorative, an imprecation.
And....BTW.....there certainly is a Far Left.


But I'll prove that "Far Right" doesn't exist.

Of course it exists. it's populated by the idiot fringe, those who are challenged by reality, reject pragmatism, fear new ideas and label everyone who isn't a member of the idiot fringe a Commie, Statist, Socialist, leftist, libtard, dumocrat and evil.

Hey, that defines you PC. Of course as a narcissist you hold a special place on the fringe, one focused entirely on you. Let's digress and examine the general characteristics of someone with a personality disorder:

• Affect [appropriateness, intensity, lability and range of emotions
  
• Cognition [how the patient perceives and interprets herself and others]
• Impulse control
• Interpersonal functioning

Those who have read your many many posts can see the pattern.

When your threads are challenged you react emotionally, demonstrating poor impulse control and very poor interpersonal functioning (every thread is filled with personal attacks on those who challenge your opinions).

No matter how many times that has been pointed out to you, you persist, a pattern that has been in effect for a long time; likely well before you joined this message board and likely began in early adolescents or childhood.

The truth hurts, but do try to learn from it.

Speaking of the truth....

So far, I've given these examples of traditionally American positions...the 'center' against which to compare the positions.
Radical positions as opposed to traditional ones identify "Far" Left or Right....


1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage.. Which one is radical?



2. Another of those positions under regular discussion is 'prayer' in the public arena....Congress opens each year with prayer. Opposing prayer is radical....religiosity is traditional in America.

3. Is 'free speech' embraced by one side, and opposed by the other? You betcha! Obama's Supreme Court nominee says it would be be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
Starting to see a pattern?

4. While we were founded on the biblical idea that all men are created equal,
LBJ advanced a two-class nation based on skin color.
....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action. Hence, Democrats....the Far Left.


5. Here's one more radical position by the Left....fighting to elect a sexual pervert and admitted liar and disbarred lawyer to the White House: Bill Clinton
Relative to American traditions, values, and history ...championing a man of such low character is a radical position.
Hence, Far Left..

6. Franklin Roosevelt threw the United States Constitution under the bus, and used the public fisc for all sorts of endeavors not authorized in Article 1, section 8.
A radical and Progressive position.
He was the ultimate "Far Leftist."

7. Under Franklin Roosevlet the federal government was transformed from one of limited & enumerated powers only to the Frankensteinian monster it is today. ....the regulatory welfare state where the federal government regulates business and commerce, natural resources, human resources, ...
Under the Progressives, the federal government was no longer limited by the enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution; ...
Radical to the utmost....hence Far Left.


And several times, I've presented this challenge: If you have used the fallacy "Far Right," or never considered its usage, see if you can come up with any radical positions by conservatives, the right wing.

Still waiting.



Pretend you are actually capable of thought.....and respond to the above.

Support for same sex marriage is not confined to the radical far left:

Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage

Tradition:
a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time
[FONT=Open Sans, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Definition of TRADITION


[/FONT]

Like blood letting?

 

[Dot Com]

Constitutionally speaking, you are clueless with that tail wagging dog idiocy. The several States ceded a portion of their sovereignty to the national government when they ratified the Constitution which included Article VI, Clause 2;

"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." [Emphasis Added]

The notion that only the federal government knows what the constitution actually says is ridiculous on its face. The several, sovereign states wrote the constitution before the supreme court even existed. The people of the several, sovereign states ratified the constitution before the supreme court even existed. The states are the authors. Who would know better about what it says than the actual authors? How could the states establish the constitution between themselves if they didn't know what it said?

The promise:

“…the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignity over all other objects.”
Federalist #39

Up to your usual horseshit of misquoting to change context AGAIN! Here is what Federalist #39 has to say within the FULL CONTEXT of what Madison wrote you dishonest twit...your bit is in RED and underlined in BLUE is the bit you omitted showing it was a comparison in the argument;

"But if the government be national with regard to the OPERATION of its powers, it changes its aspect again when we contemplate it in relation to the EXTENT of its powers. The idea of a national government involves in it, not only an authority over the individual citizens, but an indefinite supremacy over all persons and things, so far as they are objects of lawful government. Among a people consolidated into one nation, this supremacy is completely vested in the national legislature. Among communities united for particular purposes, it is vested partly in the general and partly in the municipal legislatures. In the former case, all local authorities are subordinate to the supreme; and may be controlled, directed, or abolished by it at pleasure. In the latter, the local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority, than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere. In this relation, then, the proposed government cannot be deemed a NATIONAL one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty over all other objects. It is true that in controversies relating to the boundary between the two jurisdictions, the tribunal which is ultimately to decide, is to be established under the general government. But this does not change the principle of the case. The decision is to be impartially made, according to the rules of the Constitution; and all the usual and most effectual precautions are taken to secure this impartiality. Some such tribunal is clearly essential to prevent an appeal to the sword and a dissolution of the compact; and that it ought to be established under the general rather than under the local governments, or, to speak more properly, that it could be safely established under the first alone, is a position not likely to be combated."

Clearly, Madison's reference to the Supremacy of the Constitution is sufficient to dispel any validity to the crackpot notion that the States are Supreme over the Union and the tail wags the damn dog!

Clean up your language and try again.

Horseshit is horseshit, Chica. When you purposefully redact portions of a sentence to change its intent that is horseshit conduct you dishonest pile of horseshit! Don't like being called on it...tough SHIT. You're not an admin... just a pile of dishonest horseshit!!

that was heinously intellectually dishonest what she did. Good thing she never went to University. That would've been grounds for summary dismissal.

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. There is no "far right" in this country.
Yet....the very same folks who poke fun at religious Americans, by comparing God with Santa Claus, go on and on.....

"F**k the far right."
MARCO RUBIO: I 'Absolutely' Support Tuition Breaks For Illegal Aliens

'Or Sanders, who does even better against the far right tard candidates'
BUSTED ! – Republican State of Union Response Carried Amnesty Pledge in Spanish Version…

'I bet this will drive the far right loons insane:'
Nikki Haley rebukes Trump in State of the Union rebuttal

'Uh.. there is very much a "far right" in this country.'
The Delusional Candidate

'... what the far right reactionaries are posting.'
Another reason Americans WANT to see Obama and Obamacare GO!!!

'...for some time now the most and loudest noise has come from the Far Right.'
Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

"...how insane the far right is."
Yes, You're A Communist





2. There is no "far right" in this country. So... how to explain the constant reference to this meme by Leftists?

One fact of life is that hearing a phrase often enough, one tends to accept it without spending the effort of examining same. The term "Far Right," used in a cavalier yet effective manner by the Left, is one of those terms.

Yet...upon examination....it proves to be imaginary, very much like the benefits of communism....or ObamaCare.




3. It is a well know axiom that, to see what the Left is doing, note what they are blaming the other side of doing.
One regularly sees the Leftists, Liberals, Progressives, Democrats, whatever....railing against the "Far Right," using "Far Right" as a pejorative, an imprecation.
And....BTW.....there certainly is a Far Left.


But I'll prove that "Far Right" doesn't exist.

Of course it exists. it's populated by the idiot fringe, those who are challenged by reality, reject pragmatism, fear new ideas and label everyone who isn't a member of the idiot fringe a Commie, Statist, Socialist, leftist, libtard, dumocrat and evil.

Hey, that defines you PC. Of course as a narcissist you hold a special place on the fringe, one focused entirely on you. Let's digress and examine the general characteristics of someone with a personality disorder:

• Affect [appropriateness, intensity, lability and range of emotions
  
• Cognition [how the patient perceives and interprets herself and others]
• Impulse control
• Interpersonal functioning

Those who have read your many many posts can see the pattern.

When your threads are challenged you react emotionally, demonstrating poor impulse control and very poor interpersonal functioning (every thread is filled with personal attacks on those who challenge your opinions).

No matter how many times that has been pointed out to you, you persist, a pattern that has been in effect for a long time; likely well before you joined this message board and likely began in early adolescents or childhood.

The truth hurts, but do try to learn from it.

Speaking of the truth....

So far, I've given these examples of traditionally American positions...the 'center' against which to compare the positions.
Radical positions as opposed to traditional ones identify "Far" Left or Right....


1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage.. Which one is radical?



2. Another of those positions under regular discussion is 'prayer' in the public arena....Congress opens each year with prayer. Opposing prayer is radical....religiosity is traditional in America.

3. Is 'free speech' embraced by one side, and opposed by the other? You betcha! Obama's Supreme Court nominee says it would be be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
Starting to see a pattern?

4. While we were founded on the biblical idea that all men are created equal,
LBJ advanced a two-class nation based on skin color.
....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action. Hence, Democrats....the Far Left.


5. Here's one more radical position by the Left....fighting to elect a sexual pervert and admitted liar and disbarred lawyer to the White House: Bill Clinton
Relative to American traditions, values, and history ...championing a man of such low character is a radical position.
Hence, Far Left..

6. Franklin Roosevelt threw the United States Constitution under the bus, and used the public fisc for all sorts of endeavors not authorized in Article 1, section 8.
A radical and Progressive position.
He was the ultimate "Far Leftist."

7. Under Franklin Roosevlet the federal government was transformed from one of limited & enumerated powers only to the Frankensteinian monster it is today. ....the regulatory welfare state where the federal government regulates business and commerce, natural resources, human resources, ...
Under the Progressives, the federal government was no longer limited by the enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution; ...
Radical to the utmost....hence Far Left.


And several times, I've presented this challenge: If you have used the fallacy "Far Right," or never considered its usage, see if you can come up with any radical positions by conservatives, the right wing.

Still waiting.



Pretend you are actually capable of thought.....and respond to the above.

Support for same sex marriage is not confined to the radical far left:

Changing Attitudes on Gay Marriage

Tradition:
a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time
[FONT=Open Sans, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Definition of TRADITION


[/FONT]

Like blood letting?

.

 

[xotoxi]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

 

[norwegen]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

 

[norwegen]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people.

Liberals are always wrong, to be sure, but why do they always insist on being wrong?

And history doesn't change.

 

[Mac1958]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

If there are very few, if any, people to the right of Ted Cruz - and we agree there - then along the spectrum he is Far Right.

Your interpretation of the Constitution, his interpretation of the Constitution, and that of others are not necessarily the same.
.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

You are wrong about the tradition of America, and totally misunderstand the "3/5th person" demand.


First, and of most significance, America was founded based on the Bible....hence, "all men are created equal."

Now, your history lesson:

1. "The principles on which on our country was established are articulated with clarity in the Declaration of Independence. On the matter of race, the Declaration has one simple but profound teaching: “all men are created equal.” That’s it. There are no qualifications or subtractions.
Nowhere does the Declaration or the Constitution, for that matter, classify human beings according to the color of their skin.

2. Contrary to common opinion, however, the three-fifths clause did not mean that the Founders thought that blacks were three-fifths of a human being. First of all, the text refers to “other persons”—the term persons meaning human beings. In fact, in 1790 there were approximately sixty-thousand free blacks, who possessed all the same rights as whites.
3. Secondly, the three-fifths clauses was a compromise between the North and South in which three-fifths of slaves were counted for purposes of taxation and representation. Southerners in fact wanted to count slaves as full persons, thus magnifying their political power. Northerners did not want slaves to be counted at all specifically because they thought it was wrong to further encourage the importation of more slaves.
....their overall project was to set anti-slavery principles in place so that they could be enforced at some point in the future."
No, America Was Not Founded On Racist Principles

 

[Camp]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

These numbers will illustrate the problem that our Founders....anti-slavery all....faced:

1. "Many of the Founders wanted to eliminate slavery, but they knew that at the earliest points in our history it would not be possible, and still keep the Union together. Just three years after ratification, in the census of 1790, the numbers were determined according to the Constitution proscription of “adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years…three-fifths of all other Persons.”

Rather than this representing racial animus, this compromise prevented the South from having the representation to always outvote the North on the issue of slavery.
In 1790, the slave population of South Carolina was 77% of the white population. By 1820, slaves outnumbered whites, 265,000 to 237,000, and by 1860, 412,000 to 291,000. Georgia and Virginia, similarly."
Full text of "Heads of families at the first census of the United States taken in the year 1790 .."

 

[norwegen]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

If there are very few, if any, people to the right of Ted Cruz - and we agree there - then along the spectrum he is Far Right.

Your interpretation of the Constitution, his interpretation of the Constitution, and that of others are not necessarily the same.
.

Not so. The spectrum I referred to originally wasn't limited to the present. Quakers, Antifederalists, and Americans in general before cessation from the commonwealth were on the political right. Cruz is to the left of them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

Well...then you should have no trouble showing which of the following are
"warped, distorted and wrong."

Go for it, you dope.


1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage.. Which one is radical?



2. Another of those positions under regular discussion is 'prayer' in the public arena....Congress opens each year with prayer. Opposing prayer is radical....religiosity is traditional in America.


3. Is 'free speech' embraced by one side, and opposed by the other? You betcha! Obama's Supreme Court nominee says it would be be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
Starting to see a pattern?


4. While we were founded on the biblical idea that all men are created equal,
LBJ advanced a two-class nation based on skin color.
....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action. Hence, Democrats....the Far Left.


5. Here's one more radical position by the Left....fighting to elect a sexual pervert and admitted liar and disbarred lawyer to the White House: Bill Clinton
Relative to American traditions, values, and history ...championing a man of such low character is a radical position.
Hence, Far Left..

6. Franklin Roosevelt threw the United States Constitution under the bus, and used the public fisc for all sorts of endeavors not authorized in Article 1, section 8.
A radical and Progressive position.
He was the ultimate "Far Leftist."

7. Under Franklin Roosevlet the federal government was transformed from one of limited & enumerated powers only to the Frankensteinian monster it is today. ....the regulatory welfare state where the federal government regulates business and commerce, natural resources, human resources, ...
Under the Progressives, the federal government was no longer limited by the enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution; ...
Radical to the utmost....hence Far Left.



8. Under Roosevelt's NRA, most manufacturing industries were suddenly forced into government-mandated cartels. Codes that regulated prices and terms of sale briefly transformed much of the American economy into a fascist-style arrangement,
"... into a fascist-style arrangement,..."
"A New Jersey tailor named Jacob Maged was arrested and sent to jail for the “crime” of pressing a suit of clothes for 35 cents rather than the NRA-inspired “Tailor’s Code” of 40 cents."
No surprise here: FDR's New Deal was a copy of Mussolini's economic program.
Could anything short of setting up concentration camps for our citizens, be more radical???
Oh...wait....




And several times, I've presented this challenge: If you have used the fallacy "Far Right," or never considered its usage, see if you can come up with any radical positions by conservatives, the right wing.

 

[norwegen]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

Your post is warped, distorted, and wrong, as evidenced by your babbling without argument. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as I would have expected.

 

[xotoxi]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people.

Liberals are always wrong, to be sure, but why do they always insist on being wrong?

And history doesn't change.

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

You are wrong about the tradition of America, and totally misunderstand the "3/5th person" demand.


First, and of most significance, America was founded based on the Bible....hence, "all men are created equal."

Now, your history lesson:

1. "The principles on which on our country was established are articulated with clarity in the Declaration of Independence. On the matter of race, the Declaration has one simple but profound teaching: “all men are created equal.” That’s it. There are no qualifications or subtractions.
Nowhere does the Declaration or the Constitution, for that matter, classify human beings according to the color of their skin.

2. Contrary to common opinion, however, the three-fifths clause did not mean that the Founders thought that blacks were three-fifths of a human being. First of all, the text refers to “other persons”—the term persons meaning human beings. In fact, in 1790 there were approximately sixty-thousand free blacks, who possessed all the same rights as whites.
3. Secondly, the three-fifths clauses was a compromise between the North and South in which three-fifths of slaves were counted for purposes of taxation and representation. Southerners in fact wanted to count slaves as full persons, thus magnifying their political power. Northerners did not want slaves to be counted at all specifically because they thought it was wrong to further encourage the importation of more slaves.
....their overall project was to set anti-slavery principles in place so that they could be enforced at some point in the future."
No, America Was Not Founded On Racist Principles

I stand corrected on the 3/5th issue.

However, historically American tradition did include slavery and the acceptance of slavery...yet that tradition has changed.

 

[xotoxi]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

Well...then you should have no trouble showing which of the following are
"warped, distorted and wrong."

Go for it, you dope.


1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage.. Which one is radical?



2. Another of those positions under regular discussion is 'prayer' in the public arena....Congress opens each year with prayer. Opposing prayer is radical....religiosity is traditional in America.


3. Is 'free speech' embraced by one side, and opposed by the other? You betcha! Obama's Supreme Court nominee says it would be be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
Starting to see a pattern?


4. While we were founded on the biblical idea that all men are created equal,
LBJ advanced a two-class nation based on skin color.
....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action. Hence, Democrats....the Far Left.


5. Here's one more radical position by the Left....fighting to elect a sexual pervert and admitted liar and disbarred lawyer to the White House: Bill Clinton
Relative to American traditions, values, and history ...championing a man of such low character is a radical position.
Hence, Far Left..

6. Franklin Roosevelt threw the United States Constitution under the bus, and used the public fisc for all sorts of endeavors not authorized in Article 1, section 8.
A radical and Progressive position.
He was the ultimate "Far Leftist."

7. Under Franklin Roosevlet the federal government was transformed from one of limited & enumerated powers only to the Frankensteinian monster it is today. ....the regulatory welfare state where the federal government regulates business and commerce, natural resources, human resources, ...
Under the Progressives, the federal government was no longer limited by the enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution; ...
Radical to the utmost....hence Far Left.



8. Under Roosevelt's NRA, most manufacturing industries were suddenly forced into government-mandated cartels. Codes that regulated prices and terms of sale briefly transformed much of the American economy into a fascist-style arrangement,
"... into a fascist-style arrangement,..."
"A New Jersey tailor named Jacob Maged was arrested and sent to jail for the “crime” of pressing a suit of clothes for 35 cents rather than the NRA-inspired “Tailor’s Code” of 40 cents."
No surprise here: FDR's New Deal was a copy of Mussolini's economic program.
Could anything short of setting up concentration camps for our citizens, be more radical???
Oh...wait....




And several times, I've presented this challenge: If you have used the fallacy "Far Right," or never considered its usage, see if you can come up with any radical positions by conservatives, the right wing.

Argumentum ad nauseam

 

[norwegen]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people.

Liberals are always wrong, to be sure, but why do they always insist on being wrong?

And history doesn't change.

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

You are wrong about the tradition of America, and totally misunderstand the "3/5th person" demand.


First, and of most significance, America was founded based on the Bible....hence, "all men are created equal."

Now, your history lesson:

1. "The principles on which on our country was established are articulated with clarity in the Declaration of Independence. On the matter of race, the Declaration has one simple but profound teaching: “all men are created equal.” That’s it. There are no qualifications or subtractions.
Nowhere does the Declaration or the Constitution, for that matter, classify human beings according to the color of their skin.

2. Contrary to common opinion, however, the three-fifths clause did not mean that the Founders thought that blacks were three-fifths of a human being. First of all, the text refers to “other persons”—the term persons meaning human beings. In fact, in 1790 there were approximately sixty-thousand free blacks, who possessed all the same rights as whites.
3. Secondly, the three-fifths clauses was a compromise between the North and South in which three-fifths of slaves were counted for purposes of taxation and representation. Southerners in fact wanted to count slaves as full persons, thus magnifying their political power. Northerners did not want slaves to be counted at all specifically because they thought it was wrong to further encourage the importation of more slaves.
....their overall project was to set anti-slavery principles in place so that they could be enforced at some point in the future."
No, America Was Not Founded On Racist Principles

I stand corrected on the 3/5th issue.

However, historically American tradition did include slavery and the acceptance of slavery...yet that tradition has changed.

Although government interceded, it didn't have to, as tradition was changing of its own volition.

Traditions change, government notwithstanding.

 

[Camp]

"Far Right" and "Far Left" are subjective and relative terms. Obviously.

Who is more conservative than Ted Cruz? Who is more liberal than Bernie Sanders?

If you can't come up with several examples, then Cruz & Sanders are the "Far" in the term. If you can, THOSE people are the "Far" in the term.

Obviously.


.

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

Your post is warped, distorted, and wrong, as evidenced by your babbling without argument. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as I would have expected.

There is an armed group holding government property in violation of the Constitution at the very moment. Right wing racist white supremacist groups are in abundance. For someone to claim there is no right wing is just an effort of the latest right wing spin that they do not exist due to the massive rejection of the right wing by the majority of the American people. They are not accepted so they are trying to say nuh uh, there is no such thing as right wing.

 

[Camp]

In the context of history, Ted Cruz is a Constitutionalist, or a centrist. The government created in 1789 was a government positioned considerably to the left of the government rooted in 150 years of tradition beforehand. The new government created by the Constitution was a more centralized government, one that consolidated the governments of the United States and claimed for itself some considerable prerogative, or a power to make laws "necessary and proper" in order to execute congressional authority.

After the Philadelphia Convention, America, over some time, shifted from a position on the right to a position in the center, where Ted Cruz and other conservatives hang their hats.

Since the Progressive Era, America has been moving farther to the left, farther away from its values and traditions.

Consider the history, as the OP asks you to. Conservatives and Constitutionalists are centrists. Liberals are far left.

Can you think of any person or group who is to the right of Ted Cruz?
.

Very few. Very few individuals and organizations are to the right of the Constitution.

That is, after all, the premise of the OP.

Her premise is warped, distorted and wrong, as evidenced by the comments, quotes and links you have ignored to prove such. In fact, your comment is as silly and ignorant as hers.

Well...then you should have no trouble showing which of the following are
"warped, distorted and wrong."

Go for it, you dope.


1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage.. Which one is radical?



2. Another of those positions under regular discussion is 'prayer' in the public arena....Congress opens each year with prayer. Opposing prayer is radical....religiosity is traditional in America.


3. Is 'free speech' embraced by one side, and opposed by the other? You betcha! Obama's Supreme Court nominee says it would be be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
Starting to see a pattern?


4. While we were founded on the biblical idea that all men are created equal,
LBJ advanced a two-class nation based on skin color.
....this radical view was advanced: affirmative action. Hence, Democrats....the Far Left.


5. Here's one more radical position by the Left....fighting to elect a sexual pervert and admitted liar and disbarred lawyer to the White House: Bill Clinton
Relative to American traditions, values, and history ...championing a man of such low character is a radical position.
Hence, Far Left..

6. Franklin Roosevelt threw the United States Constitution under the bus, and used the public fisc for all sorts of endeavors not authorized in Article 1, section 8.
A radical and Progressive position.
He was the ultimate "Far Leftist."

7. Under Franklin Roosevlet the federal government was transformed from one of limited & enumerated powers only to the Frankensteinian monster it is today. ....the regulatory welfare state where the federal government regulates business and commerce, natural resources, human resources, ...
Under the Progressives, the federal government was no longer limited by the enumerated powers delegated in the Constitution; ...
Radical to the utmost....hence Far Left.



8. Under Roosevelt's NRA, most manufacturing industries were suddenly forced into government-mandated cartels. Codes that regulated prices and terms of sale briefly transformed much of the American economy into a fascist-style arrangement,
"... into a fascist-style arrangement,..."
"A New Jersey tailor named Jacob Maged was arrested and sent to jail for the “crime” of pressing a suit of clothes for 35 cents rather than the NRA-inspired “Tailor’s Code” of 40 cents."
No surprise here: FDR's New Deal was a copy of Mussolini's economic program.
Could anything short of setting up concentration camps for our citizens, be more radical???
Oh...wait....




And several times, I've presented this challenge: If you have used the fallacy "Far Right," or never considered its usage, see if you can come up with any radical positions by conservatives, the right wing.

Argumentum ad nauseam

This is her routine. Repeat the same refuted and discredited nonsense over and over while ignoring that she has been exposed and lost her argument.

 

[xotoxi]

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people.

Liberals are always wrong, to be sure, but why do they always insist on being wrong?

And history doesn't change.

1. ... traditional marriage, that involves one man and one woman, and compare that with homosexual marriage..

Historically, that is correct.

However, historically black people were considered 3/5ths human and were owned by white people. Then history changed.

And historically, black people could not go to the same schools as white people. Then history changed.

And historically, only a man and a woman could be married. Then history changed.

Which "American tradition" do you believe in?

You are wrong about the tradition of America, and totally misunderstand the "3/5th person" demand.


First, and of most significance, America was founded based on the Bible....hence, "all men are created equal."

Now, your history lesson:

1. "The principles on which on our country was established are articulated with clarity in the Declaration of Independence. On the matter of race, the Declaration has one simple but profound teaching: “all men are created equal.” That’s it. There are no qualifications or subtractions.
Nowhere does the Declaration or the Constitution, for that matter, classify human beings according to the color of their skin.

2. Contrary to common opinion, however, the three-fifths clause did not mean that the Founders thought that blacks were three-fifths of a human being. First of all, the text refers to “other persons”—the term persons meaning human beings. In fact, in 1790 there were approximately sixty-thousand free blacks, who possessed all the same rights as whites.
3. Secondly, the three-fifths clauses was a compromise between the North and South in which three-fifths of slaves were counted for purposes of taxation and representation. Southerners in fact wanted to count slaves as full persons, thus magnifying their political power. Northerners did not want slaves to be counted at all specifically because they thought it was wrong to further encourage the importation of more slaves.
....their overall project was to set anti-slavery principles in place so that they could be enforced at some point in the future."
No, America Was Not Founded On Racist Principles

I stand corrected on the 3/5th issue.

However, historically American tradition did include slavery and the acceptance of slavery...yet that tradition has changed.

Although government interceded, it didn't have to, as tradition was changing of its own volition.

Traditions change, government notwithstanding.

My point exactly.

 

[Dot Com]

This is her routine. Repeat the same refuted and discredited nonsense over and over while ignoring that she has been exposed and lost her argument.

^ that

here is PoliticalChic posting from the Day Room