Why I hate both parties thread

[Nonc Hilaire]

Being a little bit randy can be a good thing if one doesn't overdo it.

[Typhoon]

. . .

Live free or die.

Indeed. However, Romney won the NH Republicrat 2012 primary . . .

____

In a previous post, someone [noddy, I think] observed that the prevailing perception on both the right and left is that "the govt should do something".

All that differs is what that something is. Both involve an expansion of govt and further intrusions into the lives of citizens.

[Mr. Perfect]

Yeah. Things can change though.

[Demon of Undoing]

Founding principles whose disposal started by 1888 in a famous essay by Teddy Roosevelt on how "outdated" the Constitution was...

Well it was good for nearly 100 years, I say time for a new Constitutional Century. Live free or die.

Well, let's be honest. Eighty. It died at the civil war.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Founding principles whose disposal started by 1888 in a famous essay by Teddy Roosevelt on how "outdated" the Constitution was...

Well it was good for nearly 100 years, I say time for a new Constitutional Century. Live free or die.

Well, let's be honest. Eighty. It died at the civil war.

Whatever you do, don't mention the war. I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it.

7xnNhzgcWTk

[Demon of Undoing]

Christ, that's almost painful to watch.

The encore appearance by the Ministry of Silly Walks put it over the top.

[cincinnatus]

Back to the hate fest:

Newt Gingrich
Nancy Pelosi

Two lavender-bag peas in a pod. They should f-ck and make even worse babies. Probably with horns and a tail.

[noddy]

I'm merely restating the founding principles of the United States of America.

principles that firmly come from the cultural experience of groups of north western european protestant puritans who dealt with politics that was bigger than them by running away from it.

principles that are self evident only if you are part of a small, self sufficient collective that wants nothing more than what it can provide itself.

not many of them left now and most of em are asian.

[Ibrahim]

principles that firmly come from the cultural experience of groups of north western european protestant puritans who dealt with politics that was bigger than them by running away from it.

By the time you get to the Constitution it's actually a bunch of Enlightenment landowners of rather diverse opinion and outlook, but all interested in protecting their individual wealth and privileges. The American salafism of trying to return to the era and ethos of the "Founding Fathers" doesn't take into account the social inequalities that were assumed in those days (slavery, inferiority of women, narrow franchise), but refuses to acknowledge that it is not possible and was never intended to expand those privileges of a minority of an agrarian economy to every member of an industrialized nation of hundreds of millions.

[Mr. Perfect]

By the time you get to the Constitution it's actually a bunch of Enlightenment landowners of rather diverse opinion and outlook, but all interested in protecting their individual wealth and privileges.

So what.

The American salafism of trying to return to the era and ethos of the "Founding Fathers" doesn't take into account the social inequalities that were assumed in those days (slavery, inferiority of women, narrow franchise),

Err the constitution has been operating just fine since women got the vote. No need to change anything but add the one amendment.

We want to return to the ethos of small government. And I think we will.

but refuses to acknowledge that it is not possible and was never intended to expand those privileges of a minority of an agrarian economy to every member of an industrialized nation of hundreds of millions.

It's very possible to get along without Obamacare, Dodd/Frank, TARP, Stimulus, BATF, DEA, IRS, HUD, Fed, Department of Education/HHS/HUD/Energy, Freddie and Fannie, T&A/TSA, just off the top of my head.

I think it is very possible for us to fully enjoy all of our Bill of Rights, including the 10th amendment. Very possible. I don't see any problem at all.

[Simple Minded]

that is a minority viewpoint in the modern west...im quite the loon for believing it myself but im not loony enough to fool myself into thinking its mainstream.

mainstream has a mantra that goes "government should do something about....." and that mantra can be heard from both sides of the house, except its on different issues.

in the realm of the possible, all i could hope for is incremental and those increments can be supported by moderates, you just need to focus on the individual liberty coolaid and the multicultural coolaid because by those paths the authoritarians on both sides can be tempered... your god given rights are different to a "communists" god given rights.. its a different worldview .. one my dad calls the bog irish one (anglo sympathist he is), your argument that they are going to magically dissapear is a joke, they always come back.

keep em within budget and stop em from enforcing "their" values on others..asking for more than that is asking for cultural cleansing.

Excellent summary!!! Those who demand "throw me in chains but feed me" can always find a willing master!

Those who demand that govt do the impossible (provide an existance that neither God nor their parents could supply) can always rely on someone lying to them to get their vote. And if they wait another election cycle, they can always depend on the next candidate to say "Yeah, the incumbent got into office by lying to you and claiming he had magic powers! What a scumbag!! But I'm a lot smarter than him/her!! And I really do have magic powers!!! So vote for me, not the guy who is lying to you!!! Square circles and free lunches for everyone!!!"

I view disappointment similar to offense, those who set themselves up for it, often find it!!! Good deal!!!

Gotta love it when life is just!! Or when individuals are their own worst enemies...... which is often the same.

[Simple Minded]

Being a little bit randy can be a good thing if one doesn't overdo it.

LOL
Ohhhh..... beeeehaaavvveee!

I generally consider anyone who uses the term "rugged individualism" in connection with Ayn Rand to be a second hander (her term) who has not read her works (or at least not the same text I have read), who as you point out, is overdoing it. More often than not, I'm correct.

I realize that different people can have different opinions after reading the same text, but often, the interpretation is influenced by current events in the life of the reader. Which I guess is why the popularity of most authors is cyclical.

Then again, if anyone writes 10,000(?) pages, what individual reader in their right mind is going to agree with more than 40-50%(?) at most of what any author publishes?

People are human, or at least most of them. Damn shame!

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Yeah. Things can change though.

It seems Noddy and Ibrahim get the gist of what I am saying even if the three of us may not agree on a history or proscription for it. Certain characters, which now appear waning, need to be reasserted in order to achieve what you want. The Constitution itself cannot build that character, only the people can. So in order to build the people, you must build the desirable communal sense and embrace something beyond calls of liberty and individualism.

[Demon of Undoing]

Yeah. Things can change though.

It seems Noddy and Ibrahim get the gist of what I am saying even if the three of us may not agree on a history or proscription for it. Certain characters, which now appear waning, need to be reasserted in order to achieve what you want. The Constitution itself cannot build that character, only the people can. So in order to build the people, you must build the desirable communal sense and embrace something beyond calls of liberty and individualism.

...Aaaaand that's not going to happen any time soon.

Got canned beans?

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Yeah. Things can change though.

It seems Noddy and Ibrahim get the gist of what I am saying even if the three of us may not agree on a history or proscription for it. Certain characters, which now appear waning, need to be reasserted in order to achieve what you want. The Constitution itself cannot build that character, only the people can. So in order to build the people, you must build the desirable communal sense and embrace something beyond calls of liberty and individualism.

...Aaaaand that's not going to happen any time soon.

Got canned beans?

Of course not, but it shouldn't preclude an attempt to figure it out.

[Demon of Undoing]

Just for shits and giggles;

Why bother?

[Enki]

Founding principles whose disposal started by 1888 in a famous essay by Teddy Roosevelt on how "outdated" the Constitution was...

Well it was good for nearly 100 years, I say time for a new Constitutional Century. Live free or die.

Well, let's be honest. Eighty. It died at the civil war.

If one can rightly say it existed in a time when people were being systematically murdered by the government and one man could OWN another.

[Ibrahim]

Founding principles whose disposal started by 1888 in a famous essay by Teddy Roosevelt on how "outdated" the Constitution was...

Well it was good for nearly 100 years, I say time for a new Constitutional Century. Live free or die.

Well, let's be honest. Eighty. It died at the civil war.

If one can rightly say it existed in a time when people were being systematically murdered by the government and one man could OWN another.

Well that's the basic problem. It's something that never historically existed. American salafists are looking back to imaginary golden ages.

[Demon of Undoing]

If one can rightly say it existed in a time when people were being systematically murdered by the government and one man could OWN another.

Well, it did- for those for whom the constitution was written. It didn't do much for people in China, either. It's all about who you include. Until we start legislating with Mongolian input in our time today, let's cut the hubris.

[Mr. Perfect]

Founding principles whose disposal started by 1888 in a famous essay by Teddy Roosevelt on how "outdated" the Constitution was...

Well it was good for nearly 100 years, I say time for a new Constitutional Century. Live free or die.

Well, let's be honest. Eighty. It died at the civil war.

If one can rightly say it existed in a time when people were being systematically murdered by the government and one man could OWN another.

Tinker I've nver followed this argument.

Are you saying if we eliminated Obamacare, Dodd/Frank, TARP, Stimulus, BATF, DEA, IRS, HUD, Fed, Department of Education/HHS/HUD/Energy, Freddie and Fannie, T&A/TSA, and abided by the 10th amendment that slavery/segregation, women losing the vote would come back?

I don't follow you.

[Mr. Perfect]

Back to the hate fest:

Newt Gingrich
Nancy Pelosi

Two lavender-bag peas in a pod. They should f-ck and make even worse babies. Probably with horns and a tail.

Two negatives make a positive.

[Enki]

Tinker I've nver followed this argument.

Are you saying if we eliminated Obamacare, Dodd/Frank, TARP, Stimulus, BATF, DEA, IRS, HUD, Fed, Department of Education/HHS/HUD/Energy, Freddie and Fannie, T&A/TSA, and abided by the 10th amendment that slavery/segregation, women losing the vote would come back?

I don't follow you.

I am not making an argument about the future. I am making an argument about the past.

No, I do not believe that if we scaled back the Federal government we'd return to slavery or any of that. The only real anti-Paul argument that makes any sense to me that I hear from Progressives is their concern over the EPA.

But there is a reality that at no time in American history has it ever been a free country. I would love to see it BECOME one. But it's never been one.

[Enki]

Back to the hate fest:

Newt Gingrich
Nancy Pelosi

Two lavender-bag peas in a pod. They should f-ck and make even worse babies. Probably with horns and a tail.

Two negatives make a positive.

They positively co-sponsored over 400 pieces of legislation.

[Mr. Perfect]

Tinker I've nver followed this argument.

Are you saying if we eliminated Obamacare, Dodd/Frank, TARP, Stimulus, BATF, DEA, IRS, HUD, Fed, Department of Education/HHS/HUD/Energy, Freddie and Fannie, T&A/TSA, and abided by the 10th amendment that slavery/segregation, women losing the vote would come back?

I don't follow you.

I am not making an argument about the future. I am making an argument about the past.

No, I do not believe that if we scaled back the Federal government we'd return to slavery or any of that. The only real anti-Paul argument that makes any sense to me that I hear from Progressives is their concern over the EPA.

But there is a reality that at no time in American history has it ever been a free country. I would love to see it BECOME one. But it's never been one.

I suppose you could argue that, but I would take the liberty spoken of by the founders and the way they talked about it and mostly implemented, and gut the government by some 50% and see what happens.

[Enki]

Tinker I've nver followed this argument.

Are you saying if we eliminated Obamacare, Dodd/Frank, TARP, Stimulus, BATF, DEA, IRS, HUD, Fed, Department of Education/HHS/HUD/Energy, Freddie and Fannie, T&A/TSA, and abided by the 10th amendment that slavery/segregation, women losing the vote would come back?

I don't follow you.

I am not making an argument about the future. I am making an argument about the past.

No, I do not believe that if we scaled back the Federal government we'd return to slavery or any of that. The only real anti-Paul argument that makes any sense to me that I hear from Progressives is their concern over the EPA.

But there is a reality that at no time in American history has it ever been a free country. I would love to see it BECOME one. But it's never been one.

I suppose you could argue that, but I would take the liberty spoken of by the founders and the way they talked about it and mostly implemented, and gut the government by some 50% and see what happens.

I'm all for that. I'd love that. Lets make it happen.