"You didn't get there on your own"

[Big Fitz]

You didn't found this.

Oops, oh wait... he did.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Do you think Cuba, China, or North Korea or the U.S.S.R. just became totalitarian states BAM overnight?

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."-Jefferson

 

[Foxfyre]

Do you think Cuba, China, or North Korea or the U.S.S.R. just became totalitarian states BAM overnight?

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."-Jefferson

LOL. You should post that in the Revolution thread in the CDZ.

Jefferson's point of course being that those who do not cherish their freedoms and guard them diligently will inevitably lose them. There will always be those who covet power and will take them from us if we allow it.

 

[The T]

Do you think Cuba, China, or North Korea or the U.S.S.R. just became totalitarian states BAM overnight?

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."-Jefferson

LOL. You should post that in the Revolution thread in the CDZ.

Jefferson's point of course being that those who do not cherish their freedoms and guard them diligently will inevitably lose them. There will always be those who covet power and will take them from us if we allow it.

Indeed. And WE have allowed it...been too tolerant for too long, and now pay the price of fighting to reclaim the birthright of liberty from those we trusted to safeguard it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Do you think Cuba, China, or North Korea or the U.S.S.R. just became totalitarian states BAM overnight?

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."-Jefferson

LOL. You should post that in the Revolution thread in the CDZ.

Jefferson's point of course being that those who do not cherish their freedoms and guard them diligently will inevitably lose them. There will always be those who covet power and will take them from us if we allow it.

what could possibly be the end game for our brain dead liberals now the Hitler Stalin Mao Tojo Castro Pot pot, and now Europe have failed???

 

[Bfgrn]

Do you think Cuba, China, or North Korea or the U.S.S.R. just became totalitarian states BAM overnight? People went to bed under freedom one night and the next morning woke up to a communist country? Do you think Hitler or Mussolini transformed their countries into facist states without that requiring a developing process over some time?

No in all cases it required government propaganda to convince the people that government was the solution to their worst problems, and that a charismatic leader could lead them to a prosperous bright new existence beyond their wildest dreams. In all cases people were encouraged to look to government as their savior rather than to their own industry.

And it was a focus on the 'collective' instead of individual freedom that allowed totalitarian governments to be installed in each and every one of those countries.

And then when that 'Charismatic leader' fianally achieved what they wanted [power grab], They proceded to get rid of thier useful idiots that defended them.

Some of the people on here had better be careful of what they wish for, what they think they're defending. They may very well get what they wanted and more likely what they never expected. History is replete with examples as you have continually cited. History doesn't lie...it's only revised by those in power.

And again I am not ready to accuse our President of having designs of becoming a dictator. But the mantra he is using, the rhetoric he is working into his speeches, the methods he is using continue to point to the collective rather than the industry of the individual as the means to a brighter future.

And I'm sorry folks. To any serious student of history, that should scare you.

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

 

[Foxfyre]

"Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny."-Jefferson

LOL. You should post that in the Revolution thread in the CDZ.

Jefferson's point of course being that those who do not cherish their freedoms and guard them diligently will inevitably lose them. There will always be those who covet power and will take them from us if we allow it.

what could possibly be the end game for our brain dead liberals now the Hitler Stalin Mao Tojo Castro Pot pot, and now Europe have failed???

But none of those did it right of course. With their superior morality and being nicer people and having no motive other than compassion, equality, tolerance, and all that, our American progressives wouldn't screw it up like everybody else has if we would just give them the power to do what they want.

 

[The T]

And then when that 'Charismatic leader' fianally achieved what they wanted [power grab], They proceded to get rid of thier useful idiots that defended them.

Some of the people on here had better be careful of what they wish for, what they think they're defending. They may very well get what they wanted and more likely what they never expected. History is replete with examples as you have continually cited. History doesn't lie...it's only revised by those in power.

And again I am not ready to accuse our President of having designs of becoming a dictator. But the mantra he is using, the rhetoric he is working into his speeches, the methods he is using continue to point to the collective rather than the industry of the individual as the means to a brighter future.

And I'm sorry folks. To any serious student of history, that should scare you.

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

Do your pages speak? or are YOU reading it BuFu?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Thank you for the opening...

Paul O'Neill, George W. Bush's first Treasury Secretary - 60 Minutes


The president had promised to cut taxes, and he did. Within six months of taking office, he pushed a trillion dollars worth of tax cuts through Congress.

But O'Neill thought it should have been the end. After 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan, the budget deficit was growing. So at a meeting with the vice president after the mid-term elections in 2002, O'Neill argued against a second round of tax cuts.

"Cheney, at this moment, shows his hand," says Suskind. "He says, 'You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.' … O'Neill is speechless."

"It was not just about not wanting the tax cut. It was about how to use the nation's resources to improve the condition of our society," says O'Neill. "And I thought the weight of working on Social Security and fundamental tax reform was a lot more important than a tax reduction."

So what ?

What is your point.

Cheney said it. So what ?

That is an opening. You needed someone to lead you to this ?

Your whole "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance then baffle them with bulls**t" approach is all to worn out.

The first time I heard that, I knew Cheney was wrong.

You are a tool. A locked up brain dead tool.

There was not a fucking PEEP from you right wingers when Reagan raised debt ceiling 18 times and George W. Bush raised it 7 times.

What we heard from you tools was parroting of what Cheney said.

AGAIN...

Where did our debt come from? When did massive debt become part of the American economy?

Reagan switched the federal government from what he critically called, a “tax and spend” policy, to a “borrow and spend” policy, where the government continued its heavy spending, but used borrowed money instead of tax revenue to pay the bills. The results were catastrophic. Although it had taken the United States more than 200 years to accumulate the first $1 trillion of national debt, it took only five years under Reagan to add the second one trillion dollars to the debt. By the end of the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administrations, the national debt had quadrupled to $4 trillion!

And where was all this angst and concern about debt from conservatives when Bush and Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress for almost a decade??? When Bush was starting a 3 trillion dollar war of ideology in Iraq, there was not a fucking PEEP from you right wingers, just cheers and 'bring 'em on'...

Just wanted to clarify a bit of an error on your part before you start talking debt and spending.
The Iraq war under George W. Bush during the duration of his 8 years cost taxpayers $820 Billion, not the exaggerated $3 trillion.

Take that in comparison to Barrack Obama with his $787 Billion stimulus plan (just one spending bill) and we see just who IS the big spender in the White House.

If you want to adjust for inflation or interest fine, but you have to do the same to Obama's Stimulus bill as well if you want to have an accurate apples to apples comparison.

 

[CMike]

You had to drive on the road you previously and continuously paid for by being taxed to get to work in order to succeed therefore more government is the answer and the reason for your success?

Wow. And that really shows how the government led to a business mans success.

/sarcasm off

 

[Listening]

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

From Federalist 10:

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

************************

And thus we see that distrust of the government is a good thing.

Liberalism does not trust people. It trusts government.

Big difference.

Big mistake.

Your pontificating grows old.

 

[Foxfyre]

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

From Federalist 10:

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

************************

And thus we see that distrust of the government is a good thing.

Liberalism does not trust people. It trusts government.

Big difference.

Big mistake.

Your pontificating grows old.

You have to understand that I don't believe Bfgn has ever had an original thought. He has certain sites he goes to for the purpose of cutting and pasting a 'sound bite' that he presumes is a dig at whatever the rest of us have posted.

In the case of Gladstone's quotation however, in the 19th century, Gladstone's (and everybody else's) definition of conservative was very close to the definition of the modern day leftist/progressive/liberal. And the definition of liberal at that time was very close to the definition of th modern day American conservative/rightwinger/classical liberal.

So he got it right. He intended it to be a gig at our conservatism but in fact posted a quotation defending it.

 

[Listening]

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

From Federalist 10:

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

************************

And thus we see that distrust of the government is a good thing.

Liberalism does not trust people. It trusts government.

Big difference.

Big mistake.

Your pontificating grows old.

You have to understand that I don't believe Bfgn has ever had an original thought. He has certain sites he goes to for the purpose of cutting and pasting a 'sound bite' that he presumes is a dig at whatever the rest of us have posted.

In the case of Gladstone's quotation however, in the 19th century, Gladstone's (and everybody else's) definition of conservative was very close to the definition of the modern day leftist/progressive/liberal. And the definition of liberal at that time was very close to the definition of th modern day American conservative/rightwinger/classical liberal.

So he got it right. He intended it to be a gig at our conservatism but in fact posted a quotation defending it.

Agreed.

But my point still stands.

Conservatives would not have their views if they didn't trust people to take care of themselves. They believe that many will work hard to succeed.

Liberalism trusts government, not people. It is the ultimate cowardice.

 

[Bfgrn]

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

From Federalist 10:

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

************************

And thus we see that distrust of the government is a good thing.

Liberalism does not trust people. It trusts government.

Big difference.

Big mistake.

Your pontificating grows old.

You have to understand that I don't believe Bfgn has ever had an original thought. He has certain sites he goes to for the purpose of cutting and pasting a 'sound bite' that he presumes is a dig at whatever the rest of us have posted.

In the case of Gladstone's quotation however, in the 19th century, Gladstone's (and everybody else's) definition of conservative was very close to the definition of the modern day leftist/progressive/liberal. And the definition of liberal at that time was very close to the definition of th modern day American conservative/rightwinger/classical liberal.

So he got it right. He intended it to be a gig at our conservatism but in fact posted a quotation defending it.

We have gone over this before. You do not have a liberal bone in your body. You are a conservative to the core.

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Buchanan is saying exactly what I have been saying about conservatives, you ARE the 'peasants for plutocracy' poster in the flesh.

There is one constant since man walked upright...human nature. Gladstone's truths applies even MORE today with the propaganda machine conservatives parrot.

As I read your posts, others like T and Listening, it is nothing but partisan bullshit. I was on numerous message boards when Bush was in office, there was not a PEEP of this paranoid tin foil crap...

 

[OODA_Loop]

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Natural law establishes hierarchy based on natural ability.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Liberalism is trust of the people,

right!!! Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Tojo, Castro, King George, FDR, BO showed their trust of the people by taking all their power away and putting in a central government that they controlled.

See why we say a liberal will be slow, very very slow.

 

[Listening]

We have gone over this before. You do not have a liberal bone in your body. You are a conservative to the core.

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.

ROTFLMAO

When you read liberal authors through the ages, one thing they have in common is the concept of an intellectual elite who should be given charge for making decisions.

You are so full of s**t, your eyes are probably brown.

And we are still gonna whack Social Security.

 

[Foxfyre]

From Federalist 10:

It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

************************

And thus we see that distrust of the government is a good thing.

Liberalism does not trust people. It trusts government.

Big difference.

Big mistake.

Your pontificating grows old.

You have to understand that I don't believe Bfgn has ever had an original thought. He has certain sites he goes to for the purpose of cutting and pasting a 'sound bite' that he presumes is a dig at whatever the rest of us have posted.

In the case of Gladstone's quotation however, in the 19th century, Gladstone's (and everybody else's) definition of conservative was very close to the definition of the modern day leftist/progressive/liberal. And the definition of liberal at that time was very close to the definition of th modern day American conservative/rightwinger/classical liberal.

So he got it right. He intended it to be a gig at our conservatism but in fact posted a quotation defending it.

We have gone over this before. You do not have a liberal bone in your body. You are a conservative to the core.

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Buchanan is saying exactly what I have been saying about conservatives, you ARE the 'peasants for plutocracy' poster in the flesh.

There is one constant since man walked upright...human nature. Gladstone's truths applies even MORE today with the propaganda machine conservatives parrot.

As I read your posts, others like T and Listening, it is nothing but partisan bullshit. I was on numerous message boards when Bush was in office, there was not a PEEP of this paranoid tin foil crap...

Yeah we have been over this before. And you still don't have a clue what classical liberalism is, what period of history it comes from, and you don't have a clue that the Gladstone quotation you cited, for his time, meant the exact opposite of what you thought it said.

If you go with Buchanan or Gladstone to make your case, you are lifting up modern day conservatives as the true progressives and lover of liberty, and the modern day liberal as the authoritarian government controlling the people by instilling fear.

But keep it up. You're finally cutting and pasting some really good stuff even if you are shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Classical liberals assume a natural equality of humans; conservatives assume a natural hierarchy.
James M. Buchanan

Natural law establishes hierarchy based on natural ability.

Yep evolution depends on being able to see differences. A society that homogenizes people is doomed.

If not for liberal perversions we could make heroes out of all our most successful people just as we do out of our star athletes and entertainers.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yeah we have been over this before. And you still don't have a clue what classical liberalism is,

Classical liberals were those who wanted change toward freedom or limited government. Classical liberals=modern conservatives.

Liberal have to play stupid because the truth cuts them out of American History and makes their only real home, Cuba