Free Dating Site    

fireknight; The person you accused of hiding behind the GOP had made an incidental comment at the end of a paragraph that clearly illuminated several facts pertinent to the theme of your thread yet you chose to focus on the incidental comment basing your attack on that suggesting the behavior of a former president was irrelevant.

If we are guilty of anything it's not wanting to bend on certain issues or events.

As to my comments about the Clinton impeachment you cannot have it both ways. If you want to say that the character of the Nation's leader is of primary importance then you MUST bar none require the immediate impeachment of every member of the currently elected government house and senate for lying. Beyond that you MUST require the immediate arrest and impeachment of Bush for the repeated lies he's been caught in.

give us back the rights that was taken away from us,

the only right I see that was taken away from us is the right to communicate and conspire with terrorists.

"Now, there's one thing you might have noticed I don't complain about: politicians," he explained in a routine that challenged all the premises of today's half-a-loaf reformers. "Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky. They don't pass through a membrane from another reality. They come from American parents and American families, American homes, American schools, American churches, American businesses and American universities, and they are elected by American citizens. This is the best we can do folks. This is what we have to offer. It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good; you're just going to end up with a brand new bunch of selfish, ignorant Americans. So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it's not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here… like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There's a nice campaign slogan for somebody: "The Public Sucks. F**k Hope."

Because most people are close-minded. Yes, even you liberals.

Because they have to sit through crazy media attacks on Presidents and candidates they believe in. Then they find themselves furious at "the other side" for their tactics, but really they should be demanding a return to JOURNALISM. Our watchdog is a pitbull who has been viciously beaten.

How is it people have become some blind to reality.

I've been dead broke, and I've been well off, and then broke again, and well off again. I can say without a doubt well off is better. Stefano, too bad you're not running...I'd vote you into some office if I could, you are a reasonable liberal not a knee-jerk one. I was thinking about the times you were talking about, basically the "Leave it to Beaver" era I grew up in...I guess we were headed for a fall then, we had a happy and well-compensated workforce along with management who may have made more but not so darned much more the parking lot at the Ford plant was new Lincolns and old beaters...
most men then were veterans of WWII and/or Korea and had that much in common, we were trying for the moon...and once we got there it went downhill. What happened?

The Business Plot (also the Plot Against FDR and the White House Putsch) was a political conspiracy in 1933 wherein wealthy businessmen and corporations plotted a coup d’état to overthrow U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1934, the Business Plot was publicly revealed by retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testifying to the McCormack-Dickstein Congressional Committee. In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler's allegations of the existence of the plot, but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

Throughout the nation men and women, forgotten in the political philosophy of the Government, look to us here for guidance and for more equitable opportunity to share in the distribution of national wealth… I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people. This is more than a political campaign. It is a call to arms.

- Franklin Roosevelt
1932
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

This simplification left Hamilton’s legacy vulnerable. When the Great Depression arrived, Wall Street, seen as Hamilton’s creation, was widely blamed for the collapse. Though Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal government would ultimately swell to unprecedented size, FDR chose small-government Jefferson as his icon, dedicating the Jefferson Memorial in 1943. Hamilton’s ghost was relegated to the shadows.

Jefferson not only thwarted the efforts of Hamilton and others to establish a state church, but he also thwarted their efforts to establish an aristocracy. It was through the efforts of Thomas Jefferson that the first ten amendments, the very bulwark of our liberties, famous as the Bill of Rights, were incorporated in our Federal Constitution. It was Jefferson -- equally as successful as Lincoln -- who preserved the Union; Lincoln from Secession and Jefferson from Aristocracy; one in an intellectual battle, the other in a military one.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewjeff.htm

Never was so much false arithmetic employed on any subject as that which has been employed to persuade nations that it is their interest to go to war. Were the money which it has cost to gain...a little town, or a little territory, the right to cut wood here or to catch fish there, expended in improving what they already possess, in making roads, opening rivers, building ports, improving the arts, and finding employment for their idle poor, it would render them much stronger, much wealthier and happier.

- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia

http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=vn188jeffersoned

Mr. Reagan's July 3 proposals include a requirement of a "super-majority" vote of Congress to raise taxes, reduction of government regulations, a financial-impact statement for government actions, further privatization of government functions, and reform of the welfare system.

After six years of this Administration consistently favoring the rich and corporate over the poor and individual, we can be certain that each of these proposals is motivated by a Hamiltonian urge to protect the privileges of a few, not by a sympathetic understanding of the needs of the many.

Thomas Jefferson wrote that our inalienable rights are "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", not "life, liberty and property". He knew that highly unequal accumulations of property are as much a threat to freedom as unequal accumulations of political power. When he was a young revolutionary, he wrote some good advice for Hamiltonians:

"The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest. Only aim to do your duty, and mankind will give you credit where you fail. No longer persevere in sacrificing the rights of one part of the empire to the inordinate desires of another; but deal out to all equal and impartial right."

http://www.sustainer.org/dhm_archive/index.php?display_article=vn188jeffersoned

Though government continued to expand in support of national priorities like the Cold War and Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society, Jefferson remained ascendant for both egalitarian liberals and small-government conservatives. Indeed, led by low-taxes crusader and Republican Party stalwart Grover Norquist, activists at the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project have been mounting a campaign over the past several years to replace Hamilton’s face on the ten dollar bill with Reagan’s

http://www3.sympatico.ca/ian.g.mason/Alexander_Hamilton.htm

Jefferson asserted that ordinary people with sufficient education and virtue can govern themselves wisely, that liberty is the natural desire of all mankind, and that the world's monarchs and dictators will ultimately be overthrown. Hamilton, on the other hand, claimed Jefferson's view was folly, based on wishful thinking, because human nature itself precludes the kind of wisdom necessary for self-government.

Today, we have a coarser public discourse and lower standards, and we have suffered the consequences of a political party that quite openly set about to divide Americans into hostile camps because it believed that strategy would give them a narrow electoral advantage. The result is an atmosphere in which it is almost impossible to have a mature, adult, logical national debate about important issues.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0325/p09s01-coop.htm

And what does “Hamilton’s Republic” look like, from a government policy perspective? It is one that is run by a dictatorial chief executive with king-like powers, for one thing. At the Constitutional convention Hamilton presented his real agenda: a “permanent” president who would appoint all the governors, and who would have veto power over all state legislation. “A king!” is what his Jeffersonian detractors accused him of asking for, and they were right. He failed at the convention, but few could deny that modern American presidents are every bit as king-like as Hamilton wanted them to be – and more. How else could one describe a president who can bomb any country in the world at will, and without the least bit of congressional approval?

Hamilton was an advocate of military adventurism in pursuit of what he called “imperial glory.” Jefferson, Madison, and other founders thought this was the surest route to destroy American liberty, and they were right. Today, Hamilton’s agenda of the pursuit of “imperial glory” is called “national greatness conservatism.”

It was Hamilton who fathered the idea of a central bank run by politicians in the nation’s capitol. As such he is America’s founding father of central banking and all the economic miseries it has created, from the Great Depression to stagflation to the bursting of the latest housing price bubble.

With regard to economic policy, Hamilton was a British-style mercantilist who wanted to use the coercive powers of the state to subsidize selected businesses, who would in turn support the state and its growth. He was the founding father of “crony capitalism.” Americans had just fought a revolution against such a system, and Hamilton wanted to turn around and adopt that very system in America. His political heirs finally succeeded during the Lincoln administration, and have been building on that “success” ever since.

Hamilton was also the founding father of constitutional subversion. In contrast to Jefferson’s strict constructionist views, which sought to use the Constitution as a limitation on governmental powers, Hamilton thought of the Constitution as a document that could be “reinterpreted” by clever lawyers like himself and his political compatriot, Chief Justice John Marshall, to provide a “rubber stamp” on almost any governmental activity. He was the inventor of the subversive notion of “implied” powers of the Constitution. As Rossiter explained (approvingly): “It seems certain that Hamilton would have affixed a certain certificate of constitutionality to every last tax . . . . Hamilton took a large view of the power to tax because he took a large view of the power to spend.”

Hamilton’s Republic is a republic of excessive public debt; inflationary finance fueled by a central bank that is the cause of perpetual boom-and-bust cycles; a dictatorial executive branch aided and abetted by “black-robed deities” who have “reinterpreted” the Constitution so much that the founders would not even recognize what is called “constitutional law”; a tax burden that is even more excessive than that borne by medieval serfs; a standing army that is misused at the expense of genuine defense of America; an arrogant, imperialistic, and monopolistic government in Washington that rarely pays any attention at all to the citizens of the once-sovereign states; government policy that routinely benefits big, politically-connected businesses and wealthy individuals at the expense of the rest of society (neo-mercantilism); and protectionism.

http://politicalinquirer.com/2007/11/27/its-time-to-end-hamiltons-curse/