- Feb 8, 2001
- 4,822
- 0
- 0
Moonbeam, for what it is worth, I think you are an above average poster that veers into the absurd to avoid taking responsibility for your thoughts and your feelings.
Look, ladies and gents, I have no interest in empty vitriol. It is generally boring, with only the occasional foray into the laughable.
I am not of the right or the left, certainly have no claim to pretentiousness, but probably would accept a label of practical libertarian and strict Constitutionalist.
As an admittedly amateur Constitutional scholar I would argue that it doesn't really take much to understand the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country. The problem is, there is little in the current debate which acknowledges the value of the debate that occurred then and the effectiveness of the outcome.
If you take the time to read the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as you might have read the Declaration of Independence so conveniently posted above (thanks for that!) you will be forced to note how little power is imbued to the federal government. Does the government encroachment on personal liberty and the pursuit of happiness since the 1920's make you angry, or just sad, at the loss of what this country could have been?
I am curious as to why the leftish posters have so much anger, but I don't really care about the personal issues which have brought you to that state. You continue to live in a country which does not stone you for feminism or fashion infractions, nor sends you to gas chambers, nor requires you to convert to the state religion, nor starves you to feed an elite, nor censors your reactionary comments, nor arbitrarily relocates you to remote gulags, nor separates your children from you to raise as state wards. While your economic freedom is slipping away in the guise of what's best for you, you will it to be this way.
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
Typical right wing post
1. Proclaim the left is name calling and spewing vitrol, CK
2. Announce that you are smarter, more traveled, and more worldly than the rest, CK
3. Blather on about a couple of pieces of 200yr parchment as a defense for you right wing position, CK
4. Commence name calling and reciting right wing slogans, CK
Come again when you have something constructive to post.
1. Proclaim the left is name calling and spewing vitrol, CK
2. Announce that you are smarter, more traveled, and more worldly than the rest, CK
3. Blather on about a couple of pieces of 200yr parchment as a defense for you right wing position, CK
4. Commence name calling and reciting right wing slogans, CK
Come again when you have something constructive to post.
P: Moonbeam, for what it is worth, I think you are an above average poster that veers into the absurd to avoid taking responsibility for your thoughts and your feelings.
M: Well I don't have too many thoughts and pretty much go only with the feelings
P: Look, ladies and gents, I have no interest in empty vitriol. It is generally boring, with only the occasional foray into the laughable.
M: Well maybe what you call vitriol isn't. This is what I mean by seeing things by opinion. What if your opinion is wrong?
P: I am not of the right or the left, certainly have no claim to pretentiousness, but probably would accept a label of practical libertarian and strict Constitutionalist.
M: What if you don't get to make your own labels because you are wrong, remember? Maybe there is somethng less pretentious than you currently understand.
P: As an admittedly amateur Constitutional scholar I would argue that it doesn't really take much to understand the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country. The problem is, there is little in the current debate which acknowledges the value of the debate that occurred then and the effectiveness of the outcome.
M: This is what you see.
P: If you take the time to read the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as you might have read the Declaration of Independence so conveniently posted above (thanks for that!) you will be forced to note how little power is imbued to the federal government. Does the government encroachment on personal liberty and the pursuit of happiness since the 1920's make you angry, or just sad, at the loss of what this country could have been?
M: I don't spend much time in regret. I believe everything is as it had to be.
P: I am curious as to why the leftish posters have so much anger, but I don't really care about the personal issues which have brought you to that state. You continue to live in a country which does not stone you for feminism or fashion infractions, nor sends you to gas chambers, nor requires you to convert to the state religion, nor starves you to feed an elite, nor censors your reactionary comments, nor arbitrarily relocates you to remote gulags, nor separates your children from you to raise as state wards. While your economic freedom is slipping away in the guise of what's best for you, you will it to be this way.
M: You make the assumption we have free will and thus responsibility. I believe we are asleep to reality and are robots, programmed full of shit.
You see what you believe, but I see what I believe and I don't believe anything except that not knowing anything amounts to knowing about all there is. I see you as a person needing to head to the bathroom for a dump and myself as one who just finished wiping.
M: Well I don't have too many thoughts and pretty much go only with the feelings
P: Look, ladies and gents, I have no interest in empty vitriol. It is generally boring, with only the occasional foray into the laughable.
M: Well maybe what you call vitriol isn't. This is what I mean by seeing things by opinion. What if your opinion is wrong?
P: I am not of the right or the left, certainly have no claim to pretentiousness, but probably would accept a label of practical libertarian and strict Constitutionalist.
M: What if you don't get to make your own labels because you are wrong, remember? Maybe there is somethng less pretentious than you currently understand.
P: As an admittedly amateur Constitutional scholar I would argue that it doesn't really take much to understand the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country. The problem is, there is little in the current debate which acknowledges the value of the debate that occurred then and the effectiveness of the outcome.
M: This is what you see.
P: If you take the time to read the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, as you might have read the Declaration of Independence so conveniently posted above (thanks for that!) you will be forced to note how little power is imbued to the federal government. Does the government encroachment on personal liberty and the pursuit of happiness since the 1920's make you angry, or just sad, at the loss of what this country could have been?
M: I don't spend much time in regret. I believe everything is as it had to be.
P: I am curious as to why the leftish posters have so much anger, but I don't really care about the personal issues which have brought you to that state. You continue to live in a country which does not stone you for feminism or fashion infractions, nor sends you to gas chambers, nor requires you to convert to the state religion, nor starves you to feed an elite, nor censors your reactionary comments, nor arbitrarily relocates you to remote gulags, nor separates your children from you to raise as state wards. While your economic freedom is slipping away in the guise of what's best for you, you will it to be this way.
M: You make the assumption we have free will and thus responsibility. I believe we are asleep to reality and are robots, programmed full of shit.
You see what you believe, but I see what I believe and I don't believe anything except that not knowing anything amounts to knowing about all there is. I see you as a person needing to head to the bathroom for a dump and myself as one who just finished wiping.
CrackRabbit
Lifer
- Mar 30, 2001
- 16,642
- 62
- 91
They might, your post however doesn't.
If you didn't let others do your thinking for you, you might realize that blaming all of the country's ills on "Liberals" will get you nowhere.
It's a ruse. The op is just a punk repug pretending to be reasonable. He can claim otherwise but that doesn't make it so. I wouldn't be surprised if he thinks sarah palin and audra shay are great americans. He uses 25 cent words where 5 cent words would do. Using non-sequiturs such as "amateur scholar" makes it hard to take him seriously.
- Feb 8, 2001
- 4,822
- 0
- 0
And these "others" are???
I tend to think self proclaimed "liberalism" is anything but. Note the source of caustic comments which are not meant to rebut but to insult, albeit in a childish, playground kind of way by name calling. Sheesh!
I believe there is plenty of blame to go around. However, it is also clear that the past six months have brought forth a mind boggling amount of government waste, even for the Democrat Party, historically notorious for profligacy. And the proposals for future deficit spending are worrisome in the extreme.
Right now the Democrats control both Houses of Congress and the Executive branch of government. And you hope to share blame with whom? The Republicans? The Socialists? The Libertarians? The Greens? The Tories? The Luddites? The Munchkins?
Notice all the people in this thread just calling PJabber names and offering no rebuttal to his opinion.
n yusef
Platinum Member
- Feb 20, 2005
- 2,158
- 1
- 0
This is where you lose me. I'm black and queer. I don't reminisce the "personal freedom" of pre-Depression America. I don't see it as a time when I could have pursued happiness. And I am not alone; women and the working class do not have fond memories of "personal freedom" in this time period either.
If there is any hope for the American right, it must recognize that the "good old days" were not good for the majority of Americans, and discontinue its appeal to them. That is, the American right must become conservative, not reactionary.
He said he had opinions but all I hear are truths. I don't rebut truths, I identify them as unexamined assumptions. You can't tell a bigot he's a bigot because his bigotry gets in the way of seeing.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
I wonder, Mr. OP, if you consider anyone who does not share your view on issues to be totally with out the sense god gave a turnip. Liberals and Conservatives and Libertarians and all the other political groups are representing an ideology and the citizens who accept that ideology as being right for them and their brother and sister citizens... How can that be wrong?
Are you a bit bigoted against the poor or the folks who tend toward more Liberals ideas? Or is it just that it is obvious from the documents cited that only one element of society has got it right? Of course, the last election seems to have shown how society changes.. heck, even the USSC has seen fit to make new law and discard settled law because it was right to do so... many examples of that... So why quote out dated documents as a source of current day reality?
Are you a bit bigoted against the poor or the folks who tend toward more Liberals ideas? Or is it just that it is obvious from the documents cited that only one element of society has got it right? Of course, the last election seems to have shown how society changes.. heck, even the USSC has seen fit to make new law and discard settled law because it was right to do so... many examples of that... So why quote out dated documents as a source of current day reality?
CrackRabbit
Lifer
- Mar 30, 2001
- 16,642
- 62
- 91
I blame the Calvin Coolidge.
But in all seriousness the problems that are facing the US today are something that have been brewing for the better part of two decades, it just happened to be now that things have come to a head.
I certainly don't agree with everything that President Obama and Congress are doing but they are trying. If I don't think they did a good job I can vote for someone else in who I think might do better the next time an election comes around. You can do the same! (How about that!)
The caustic comments come from us posters who are sick and tired of the crap from people that think that the world has gone from great to crap on January 21st.
You are welcome to your opinion, but if you have nothing better to post than thinly veiled extreme right wing propaganda and argue with people about the price the government is paying for ham for a food bank (and YES I WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE FUN OF YOU FOR THIS) then post elsewhere, we have plenty of posters who do that already.
- Feb 8, 2001
- 4,822
- 0
- 0
I don't want to make light of real grievances and real horror, but I would use other eras as better examples of bad times than the 20's.
Ahhh, the 1920's. Not my time either, much too young myself, but wish I could have been there if just for the parties.
Wikipedia - The Roaring 20's
My people were actually killing and being killed by the Russians and likely wishing they could be in America, or any other place, then. I'd ask my great grandparents, distant cousins, etc. what they were thinking of but a lot of them were kind of liquidated by the Bolsheviks.
I'll come to your case in a moment, but thanks for bringing up the ancient plight of women and the working classes (no welfare state then, right?)
I'm going to use Wikipedia as a reference as I am too relaxed to work much on this post right now -
Women of the 20's. Have you ever heard the term "flapper?"
Flappers
Flappers went to jazz clubs at night where they danced provocatively, smoked cigarettes through long holders, sniffed cocaine (which was legal at the time) and dated freely. They rode bicycles and drove cars and drank alcohol openly, a defiant act in the American period of Prohibition. Petting became more common than in the Victorian era. Petting Parties, where petting ("making out" and/or foreplay) was the main attraction, became popular.
Flappers also began taking work outside the home and challenging women's traditional societal roles. They also advocated voting and women's rights. With time came the development of dance styles then considered shocking, such as the Charleston, the Shimmy, the Bunny Hug and the Black Bottom.
Politically, the women's suffrage movement makes gains as women obtain full voting rights in the USA in 1920, and women begin to enter the workplace in larger numbers.
Those were the days, right? Sort of like the Sixties, but the girls of the 20's did it better longer.
The working class?
Has to be defined and our friend the Wiki points out many definitions, pick yours and we can discuss at length -
The Working Class
Since the end of the 20th century, the economic strength during the 1920s has drawn close comparison with the 1950s and 1990s, especially in the United States. These three decades are regarded as periods of economic prosperity, which lasted throughout nearly each entire decade. Each of the three decades followed a tremendous event that occurred in the previous decade (World War I and Spanish flu in the 1910s, World War II in the 1940s, and the end of the Cold War in the late 1980s).
So, the 20's were a time of economic prosperity in the U.S. and you will find that almost all segments of the population benefited, no matter how you care to define the "working class." BTW, the US is not really structured with definitions such as "working class," much more of a European/Bolshie kind of thing. My folks, the ex-Europeans, left the old country to get away from such definitions and limitations, see "land of opportunity" elsewhere.
Ahh yes, you played both the race card and the homosexual card. How nice of you.
Like Obama's erstwhile friend Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said not so long ago, "We don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. We don't have this phenomenon; I don't know who's told you we have it." An aide later claimed that he was misrepresented and was actually saying that "compared to American society, we don't have many homosexuals." Like in Iran today, maybe at that time we didn't have that many homosexuals. I don't know, the history seems vague, it was a hidden vice then wasn't it?
However, we did have The Pansy Craze, a period in the late 1920s and early 1930s in which gay clubs and performers (known as pansy performers) experienced a surge in underground popularity in the United States. Go figure.
Finally, black history. I did mention that the 20's were a golden age of jazz and club culture? Almost a rush of enamoration with black culture really.
True, at that time the KKK was the hot group to belong to for those with a need for a certain kind of affinity. The second Ku Klux Klan was founded in Atlanta with a new anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic, and anti-Semitic agenda. The number of racial lynchings escalated, and, from 1918 to 1927, 416 African Americans were killed, mostly in the South.
Klan delegates played a significant role at the path-setting 1924 Democratic National Convention in New York City, often called the "Klanbake Convention". The convention initially pitted Klan-backed candidate William Gibbs McAdoo (any relation to current White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs?) against Catholic New York Governor Al Smith. After days of stalemates and rioting, both candidates withdrew in favor of a compromise. Klan delegates defeated a Democratic Party platform plank that would have condemned their organization. How times have changed.
In the 1920's, American black family life was very similar to that of white families and families were as bonded as they could be. Divorce and separated families were virtually unknown.
Here I have to refer to something Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote in 1965, prescient and well worth reading in the entirety -
The Moynihan Report
Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal, which ran from 1933 to 1935, and the Four Freedoms of 1941 to Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty in the mid-60's did succeed in one thing, the government managed the virtual dissolution of the traditional black family. I don't think it really was their intent, but the law of unintended consequence seems as immutable as the law of gravity.
In the U.S. we can see that after the 20's, FDR's big government "solutions" did what the current Democratic government in Washington aspires to do. The results were mixed then, many have called them monumental failures, and while we do not have the hindsight of history to refer to, the current Democrat programs and proposals appear to have all of the trappings for an even greater backlash of unintended consequence.
The point I am trying to make is that big government is very often the problem and not the solution no matter your sex, your race or your socioeconomic status.
I would rather debate cause and effect than whether your sensibilities are offended, so please get back to me with something substantive in counterpoint. When you get a chance.
I rarely ever post here, just enjoy browsing and picking up interesting articles from time to time, but I wanted to say I really enjoyed the OP's opinion without saying I agree or disagree, and I'm embarrassed by most of the responses he's gotten. Thanks.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter