Why Republicans are the world's greatest heros!

[Toronado3800]

What is a conservative conservative about?

limited government, its the principle on which Jefferson created the country 200 years ago.

You may be the only person on earth not to know that!.

Ok. So limited government. I can tell I am truing your patience so I will not ask a third time if conservativism has anything to do with the constitution.

And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply? (another way of wording that patriot act question). No tricks, just looking for your definition. You read alot so I find ya very interesting.

 

[AmazonTania]

Lol. You got me. Now we just say you are a drug dealer, Japanese spy, or enemy combatant and confiscate your property?

No. Now you have something called "The Rule of Law," which is another component of Capitalism.

 

[AmazonTania]

lol. as if someone who said such things would be considered a capitalist these days

"I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
-- Thomas Jefferson; from letter to George Logan (Nov. 12, 1816)

"legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let their subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of property of every kind therefore to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other relations in equal degree is a politic measure, and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise."
-- Thomas Jefferson; from letter to James Madison (Oct. 28, 1785)

I don't remember claiming that Jefferson was a capitalist. Keep in mind, Pro Business does not always mean Free Markets.

 

[rdean]

Legends in their own tiny minds.

 

[Toronado3800]

Lol. You got me. Now we just say you are a drug dealer, Japanese spy, or enemy combatant and confiscate your property?

No. Now you have something called "The Rule of Law," which is another component of Capitalism.

No, now I disagree.

Rule of law would allow the rule of any law. The King's law, whoever's as long as it is organized. I dunno if the term is newer but kings others having to playby the law of he land is an old idea.

No doubt at different times during the dark ages this seemed to disappear. Still though no more than a President deciding just to keep humans in Cuba for a decade or more.

 

[JQPublic1]

THE RULE OF LAW!


The rule of law generally refers to the "authority and influence of law in society," especially as a constraint upon behavior, including behavior of government officials. [2] This phrase is also sometimes used in other senses. [3]

In its general sense, the phrase can be traced back to the 16th century, and it was popularized in the 19th century by British jurist A. V. Dicey. The concept was familiar to ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, who wrote "Law should govern". [4] Rule of law implies that every citizen is subject to the law. It stands in contrast to the idea that the ruler is above the law, for example by divine right.

Despite wide use by politicians, judges and academics, the rule of law has been described as "an exceedingly elusive notion" [5] giving rise to a "rampant divergence of understandings ... everyone is for it but have contrasting convictions about what it is." [6]

At least two principal conceptions of the rule of law can be identified: a formalist or "thin" definition, and a substantive or "thick" definition. Formalist definitions of the rule of law do not make a judgment about the "justness" of law itself, but define specific procedural attributes that a legal framework must have in order to be in compliance with the rule of law. Substantive conceptions of the[ rule of law go beyond this and include certain substantive rights that are said to be based on, or derived from, the rule of law.

Rule of law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AmazonTania]

No, now I disagree.

Rule of law would allow the rule of any law. The King's law, whoever's as long as it is organized. I dunno if the term is newer but kings others having to playby the law of he land is an old idea.

No doubt at different times during the dark ages this seemed to disappear. Still though no more than a President deciding just to keep humans in Cuba for a decade or more.

All the Rule of Law does is to make the laws predictable, so it's easier to understand whether or not your actions will land you in court. If they are not predictable, people would not engage in simple barter.

 

[Toronado3800]

Huh. Seems to be splitting hairs. I feel we do not disagree clearly enough to motivate me.

"rule of law" pretty much involves the degree politicians be they kings or congressmen or despots can do what they want.

As it applies to capitalism I am not sure how to find disagreement.....um.....unlawful periods slow down commerce? That does not seem exciting to debate.


Ok, and I am trying hard to be controversial here.

In a period of too small of government commerce will slow down as businessmen can do whatever they want. I just could not go to a pharmacy in crazy Denver and know the FDA was protecting me. I would have to return to st louis.

There, legal rules help.

Sorry, not very interesting.

 

[Agit8r]

The term Rule of Law refers to a state in which everyone is equally subject to the laws.

Rule of law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

or to put it another way; "everyone plays by the same set of rules"

 

[AmazonTania]

Huh. Seems to be splitting hairs. I feel we do not disagree clearly enough to motivate me.

"rule of law" pretty much involves the degree politicians be they kings or congressmen or despots can do what they want.

That depends on the framework of the social system. France created it's Bill of Rights a month before the United States did. They've had almost the same rights included, one example would be Freedom of Speech. What exactly were the differences?

In the French version, the law states that you are free to say and write whatever you please, so long as it's not against the law.

In the American version, the law states that the Government doesn't have the power to abrigde on anyone else's freedom of the press or speech.

As it applies to capitalism I am not sure how to find disagreement.....um.....unlawful periods slow down commerce? That does not seem exciting to debate.

The idea of Capitalism is to engage in voluntary transactions which benefit all involved parties. This doesn't always happen. Acknowledging that people will seek profits means that greedy people will engage in force or fraud to obtain them. The market has two ways of dealing with this:

1) Making force or fraud unprofitable. Economic equilibrium does this in the best possible way without Government intervention.

2) Rule of Law is there to punish or defend against the initiation of force and fraud. This involves stopping a dishonest player in the market or protecting people from an armed criminal gang. The laws are only suppose to apply prospectively, and not retroactively. This means that the Government should not initiate in force on it's own, and creating laws which interferes with the inner workings of the marketplace.

It simply means equality before the law and no one can rise above it.

Ok, and I am trying hard to be controversial here.

In a period of too small of government commerce will slow down as businessmen can do whatever they want.

How will a businessman be able to do whatever he or she desires?

I just could not go to a pharmacy in crazy Denver and know the FDA was protecting me. I would have to return to st louis.

There, legal rules help.

Sorry, not very interesting.

There are plenty of ways the FDA doesn't protect individuals. In fact, it's probably done more harm than good with it's existence, but it still stands only because it's an agency. As an private organization, it would have been dismantled years ago or run out of business by another private organization.

This is generally what I mean when I say the rule of law means equality before the law and no one can rise above it.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

you lack the IQ to learn. You've asked 100 times. Anyway, a liberal favors bigger and bigger government while conservatives from Jefferson on don't. Got it now!

Really? Cuz all those Koch-sucking, GOP boot-licking mega corporaitions seem to LOVE your GOP congresscritters much more than your typical democrat (unless the democtrat is winning. Gotta back the right horse!) - who seem to expand the government to whatever extent those corporations' black little hearts' desire. You RW'ers don't seem to give a SHIT about that! The corps give them millions... I wouldn't be surprised if it weren't billions - and what do you think they get out of it? Tax breaks. Preferrable legislation. Regulations. Cabinet appointments. Moron.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

The corps give them[corporations] millions.

dear, first time around Obama got more in corporate contributions.

see why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[Toronado3800]

What is a conservative conservative about?

limited government, its the principle on which Jefferson created the country 200 years ago.

You may be the only person on earth not to know that!.

Ok. So limited government. I can tell I am truing your patience so I will not ask a third time if conservativism has anything to do with the constitution.

And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply? (another way of wording that patriot act question). No tricks, just looking for your definition. You read alot so I find ya very interesting.

Edward, you skipped my question to you. People might think you are hiding from it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

limited government, its the principle on which Jefferson created the country 200 years ago.

You may be the only person on earth not to know that!.

Ok. So limited government. I can tell I am truing your patience so I will not ask a third time if conservativism has anything to do with the constitution.

And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply? (another way of wording that patriot act question). No tricks, just looking for your definition. You read alot so I find ya very interesting.

Edward, you skipped my question to you. People might think you are hiding from it.

whats the question????????????????

 

[Toronado3800]

ROTFL.

"Ok. So limited government. I can tell I am truing your patience so I will not ask a third time if conservativism has anything to do with the constitution.

And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply? (another way of wording that patriot act question). No tricks, just looking for your definition. You read alot so I find ya very interesting."

?And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

ROTFL.

"Ok. So limited government. I can tell I am truing your patience so I will not ask a third time if conservativism has anything to do with the constitution.

And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply? (another way of wording that patriot act question). No tricks, just looking for your definition. You read alot so I find ya very interesting."

?And you said conservativism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply?

whats the question???????????????????? Try to state in one sentence like a lawyer in court.

 

[Toronado3800]

OK.....

Do you Edward believe conservatism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

OK.....

Do you Edward believe conservatism has nothing to do with limiting government powers where the military and basic rights to due process apply?

lets not be personal worring about what I believe when conservatism is 1000's of years old and I merely represent it to illiterate liberals like you who don't know it because you lack the IQ to understand it.

as I said it is a contradiction when you talk about limiting the power of the military when generally speaking you want a mililtary to be super powerful so you never have to worry about being killed by the enemy. Still over your head????

 

[Toronado3800]

What you believe is liberal and conservative comes up in darn near every one of your posts. Just trying to figure out where your point if view lies.

A political message board is a strange place not to have one or to be put off when it is asked.

If you want to avoid talking liberal vs conservative or republican vs liberal I would think you would quit bringing it up.

BTW, it makes absolute sense to support small government in regards to not believing in anti gay laws or whatever while believing a big, strong FDA or patent office is needed. You just can't go around calling people names if you have mixed beliefs like most do.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

You think CHINA is a capitalist nation?



That explains much about your POV, then.

Exactly.

But the 13% poverty rate is even more hilarious than the "capitalist" delusion some of these morons regurgitate. I am laughing out loud at that.

The WB measure of poverty is a relative measure within a defined region or jurisdiction. Compared to the US, for example about 50% of Chinese live in poverty, or about 650kk people, about twice the population of the US.

Expecting fake-capitalist nutballs more attached to Kinkadian delusions than to reality to understand relative measures is about like expecting a monkey to explain Eliot's Prufrock.