The Coffee Party

[Craig234]

I guess you've never read any Jefferson, The Federalist Papers, Franklin, Hamilton, Paine, Adams, Carroll, Henry, and a whole host of others. I'm not going to sit here and go back and forth saying "you're wrong... no you're wrong" because clearly you haven't read enough to even be capable of coming up with any names or examples.. you just cite broad generalizations.

As I sit here, near Jefferson's collected papers, having read the federalist papers, not far from my multiple Franklin books, near the reading I was doing on Paine last month.. and so on.

I'm not a big fan of Adams, though, not much interested in reading but bits from him. Anyway, your conclusion is factually very erroneous, which should give you a clue about the rest of what you said.

It's pretty ironic for you to make an assertion of what they said, fail to provide evidence for when requested, and then claim the problem is my not proving a negative.

I hereby claim the founding fathers long debated the threat from space aliens, and demand you provide evidence they did not, or I'll assert you have not read them.

You don't like to lose an argument do you?

To a fault. I've seen various 'attack as defense' come out of you, it's not becoming.

How about you either provide the evidence you have said many times is so easy to provide, or you find something better to than restating variations of why you won't.

And I'm not talking about finding an obscure comment in a paragraph on direct democracy, I'm talking about evidence of any substantive debate about it in the context of the constitution, as you claimed.

Not an excerpt of Paine on his book-long meditation on theory, but the men like Jefferson, Madison, Franklin (not the two wolf and a sheep quip), et al debating the topic.

 

[wiretap]

Man.. classic ad hominem attacks. You don't know the history through the founding father's own words/actions/writings, so you attack me saying I'm wrong.

Nice. They EXPLICITLY wrote the Constitution and argued it from all angles. They made the case AGAINST democracy where one group can vote away the rights of others with a simple majority, and they made the case in SUPPORT of a representative republic. It doesn't get much easier to understand than that.. there's nothing to argue about. It's a well understood historical fact by scholars all around the world. If you're going to still make straw man and ad hominem attacks, I'll pray for you and not sit here continue wasting time on history deniers such as yourself.

 

[Craig234]

Man.. classic ad hominem attacks. You don't know the history through the founding father's own words/actions/writings, so you attack me saying I'm wrong.

Nice. They EXPLICITLY wrote the Constitution and argued it from all angles. They made the case AGAINST democracy where one group can vote away the rights of others with a simple majority, and they made the case in SUPPORT of a representative republic. It doesn't get much easier to understand than that.. there's nothing to argue about. It's a well understood historical fact by scholars all around the world. If you're going to still make straw man and ad hominem attacks, I'll pray for you and not sit here continue wasting time on history deniers such as yourself.

Yes, such ad hominem attacks as 'you made an assertion and refuse requests to provide evidence'.

Man, you could probably sue for that kind of ad hominem. Wouldn't win, but you could sue.

I've read a good amount on the topic. I haven't read everything said by every founding father, as pretty much everyone has not. You made a claim you HAVE seen something I saidI haven't. I asked yuou to provide evidence, in case I'm ignorant of the exchange. You did not. You reststed your assertion they said something, over and over aqnd over you reasserting it, but not one ever doing the thing you were asked, that would help resolve the issue, providing evidence - link presumably - to the debates you allege. You just grow more an more 'ad hominem' yourself the longer you are remined you have provided no evidence.

If you had the evidence, why wouldn't you have posted it *yet*, instead of more statements how it's 'in the constitution', in elementary school, paraphrasing what you claim they said, and so on.

The burden is yours, and has not been even attempted. The longer you deflect, the more you imply you don't have any such evidence. I have said, maybe I'm wrong, prove it. You suggest I'm not.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's Craig....

Normally, when people point to the name of another poster as the only refutation of what that person has to say, it marks them as a complete and total idiot. The exception is when the post is by Tristicus, a known moron, the posts of whom all of good sense immediately dismiss as complete unmitigated drivel.

 

[Budmantom]

These idiot Leftists can't even come up with an original thought.... they should be called the "Coke Party", I'm sure that would be more appropriate.

The "Coke Party" paid for by food stamps and unemployment checks

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Government as Orwell saw it in "1984"

26 years later-

 

[Red Dawn]

What utter fail. We are not a democracy. But by all means place ones faith in gubment. Let me know if these black baggers have a rally in my town, I'll be there to meet them with the iron fist of liberty.

-edit-
Before the racist flag is thrown, coffee is black and is transported in bags.

Signed - a proud white American.

You know where you can put that iron fist Whitey

 

[ebaycj]

Bi partisan is BS are Republicans bipartisan? No, ever since I can remember it's solid vote on their stuff, both in power and out of power, it's like 51-0, 49-0 or whatever their numbers say. It's Dems that come over often like 12-36 and whatnot. Dems are their worst enemy and need to unite.

Couple Bipartisan gems
Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq:
GOP - 48-1
Dems - 29-22

The Protect America Act:
GOP - 44-0
Dems - 20-28

To support the new Bush-supported FISA law:
GOP - 48-0
Dems - 12-36

Zebo, You always call shit like it is.

 

[MotF Bane]

You know where you can put that iron fist Whitey

On his behalf, I winced.