By the way, liberals: When you're told to "question authority," does it NEVER occur to you to include the ones pointing their fingers? Or are you simply blindly swallowing that Jews are vermin, I mean, conservatives are bad?
Raven: First I went to some of the best private schools in this country, not that public schools properly funded don't provide good educations, just to show that you leap to assumptions. Second Rome was about as conservative as you can get or do you know nothing of the patricians, plebs, slaves and class structure that was both Republican and Emprial Rome.
The abolitionists may have been capitalists but they were none the less liberal in the political and remember this was before corporations had be devised. Yankee industrialists also gave rise to New England free thinkers, Unitarianism, Emerson and Walden Pond. Pretty Liberal even from today's perspective. And since I come from that tradition I think I know what I'm talking about.
Your logic is flawed: liberalism in the past become the conservative thought of today and that means conservativism has prevailed. Whatever non-public school education you obtained short changed you on logical thinking. Liberalism of yesterday becoming the conservatism of today means liberalism prevailed. I can follow a premise quite well, thank you. Keep reading Coulter, Limbaugh, Riley, et al and you will develop the logic of Carroll's Alice.
Sorry (notso)sharp, but history proves you wrong. In the long run conservatism always fails. King George III was conservative, the Founders were liberals; slave holders were conservatives, abolitionists were liberals; etc. Progress and expanded thinking can never be held back for long. Liberal thoughts of 100 years ago are the conservative philosophy of today. You'll never win. BTW the intelligencia has always been predominately liberal throughout history.
Boy, I sure can tell you went to public school! Abolitionists were staunch, industrial capitalists, and according to your own statement that "liberal thoughts 100 years ago are the conservative philosophy today" ...
Shadow: The founders supported: 1. Owning Guns 2. Small Government 3. Apportioned taxes 4. Freedom Democrats Support 1. No guns 2. Large government 3. High unapportioned taxes 4. Overwhelming government regulations Todays "Liberals" have lost their way...
What the Founders did was brilliant. They created a document that was vague and expansive enough that it could grow and evolve (as is natural under English Common Law) to meet the needs of a backwater country in 1789 and also those of a mighty power that they knew would inevitably stretch from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Spk: Your list is not quite accurate it should have said:
1. They believed in owning guns if a militia were necessary.
2. They believed in a federal system where local/state matter were handled on a local/state level. National concerns would then be addressed national by the federal government.
3. They believed in taxes being imposed only by a body elected by the people.
Way off target, the militia was defined as "the whole of the people", its intent was control over ones government. The militia never stops being needed for as long as government exists. Their view on taxes did not allow for socialist robbery either. It sounds like you had some biased teachers. If you far leftists hate being armed simply refuse to buy a firearm and be done with the issue.
4. They believed in Freedom and since then it has spread to freedom for slaves, freedom for women to have voting rights, freedom for women to conrol their own bodies; there is still lots of room for freedom to grow and thanks to the Founders we have a Constitution that grows with our needs. That's what a common law system is all about. That's why the Founders chose it. Try studying and learning the truth not con-pap history.
They believed in freedom of speech too. Democrats today call any disagreeable speech "hate speech" and dont seem to think it protected. While allowing women rights democratic states also allow public funding and public schools to spread Islam. How many rights will they have under Islamic law when the constitution "grows with our needs" under majority vote?
4. They believed in Freedom and since then it has spread to freedom for slaves, freedom for women to have equal rights, freedom for women to conrol their own bodies; there is still lots of room for freedom to grow and thanks to the Founders we have a Constitution that grows with our needs. That's why the Foounders chose a common law system for us.
You think of total reversal as growth? The far left seems to define freedom as the right not to feel offended, thus many cry for limits on speech. Your definition of freedom is not shared by all, which means "grow with our needs" actually means that it gets reworded with your whims. The founders never chose socialism, or big government, or NAFTA, or open borders, or socialized health care. You did.
Huh? The founders were not liberals in the way you are defining it. They werent marxists, they didnt think stealing a neighbors money was ok. You say the radical left cant be held back? Given the fact that they took over our "educational system" you are right. We are all headed for a bloodbath if you get your way as the traditional minority wont want to surrender property, guns, speech rights, or individual freedoms. Desperation and total lack of representation leads to violence and war.
sharpnova: you are delusional, the Bush diverted our military action away from the terrorists and instead attacked Iraq, and if you can't see that, then I understand how you can think Bush is awesome, what a deluded fool you and your ilk are
Imagine this party boy, your holy savior voted for the Iraq war and helped to spread the word that Saddam had WMDs. She went along with Bush, then changed her mind and denied everything. I am a New Englander myself and I cant imagine what makes this holy savior of the far left so amazing. Her first 8 years as president sucked, it wont be better next time. She just wont have Bill standing in front of her while she makes policy.
Agrees about Kucinich... Democrat / republican - the only difference is that the republicans will boldly lie to your face, and the democrats are better at covering their tracks.
It's killing all you right wing nuts, but she is going to be the next President of the United States. That she is savy, articulate and competent (unlike the present occupant of the Oval Office) only make you even more crazy. We've be lost on the right for too long and welcome a left turn.
Oh look another "we". I belong to no party and I believe in no invisible god, but something tells me that "we" doesnt include me. I have no interest in further helping the KLA exterminate Serbs and take land. I have no interest in "health care" that fails while being "free". I want to keep my guns, I want to continue living my life for me. There is no "we".
The idea of Hitlery being president for another 8 years bothers alot of people. The only people who like her commonly refer to themselves as "marxists", "anarchists", "social democrats", "communists", "maoists", etc... She is the new extremist candidate who intends nothing good for those not in her camp.
fuck her
youssef55555 3 years ago
HILLARY DOES'NT STAND A CHANCE!!
WCD73 4 years ago
the one at 1:18 is the definition of communism.
LongDriveChamp03 4 years ago
By the way, liberals: When you're told to "question authority," does it NEVER occur to you to include the ones pointing their fingers? Or are you simply blindly swallowing that Jews are vermin, I mean, conservatives are bad?
ravenhairedmaid 4 years ago
Raven: First I went to some of the best private schools in this country, not that public schools properly funded don't provide good educations, just to show that you leap to assumptions. Second Rome was about as conservative as you can get or do you know nothing of the patricians, plebs, slaves and class structure that was both Republican and Emprial Rome.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
The abolitionists may have been capitalists but they were none the less liberal in the political and remember this was before corporations had be devised. Yankee industrialists also gave rise to New England free thinkers, Unitarianism, Emerson and Walden Pond. Pretty Liberal even from today's perspective. And since I come from that tradition I think I know what I'm talking about.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Your logic is flawed: liberalism in the past become the conservative thought of today and that means conservativism has prevailed. Whatever non-public school education you obtained short changed you on logical thinking. Liberalism of yesterday becoming the conservatism of today means liberalism prevailed. I can follow a premise quite well, thank you. Keep reading Coulter, Limbaugh, Riley, et al and you will develop the logic of Carroll's Alice.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Sorry (notso)sharp, but history proves you wrong. In the long run conservatism always fails. King George III was conservative, the Founders were liberals; slave holders were conservatives, abolitionists were liberals; etc. Progress and expanded thinking can never be held back for long. Liberal thoughts of 100 years ago are the conservative philosophy of today. You'll never win. BTW the intelligencia has always been predominately liberal throughout history.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Boy, I sure can tell you went to public school! Abolitionists were staunch, industrial capitalists, and according to your own statement that "liberal thoughts 100 years ago are the conservative philosophy today" ...
ravenhairedmaid 4 years ago
that means the "liberal" (now conservative) philosophy is the one that will prevail. I guess you couldn't keep track of your own premise :))
Rome was the acme of current liberalism, and we all know how that ended :))
ravenhairedmaid 4 years ago
SpkTruth2Power 4 years ago
What the Founders did was brilliant. They created a document that was vague and expansive enough that it could grow and evolve (as is natural under English Common Law) to meet the needs of a backwater country in 1789 and also those of a mighty power that they knew would inevitably stretch from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Spk: Your list is not quite accurate it should have said:
1. They believed in owning guns if a militia were necessary.
2. They believed in a federal system where local/state matter were handled on a local/state level. National concerns would then be addressed national by the federal government.
3. They believed in taxes being imposed only by a body elected by the people.
and finally #4, to be cont'd.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Way off target, the militia was defined as "the whole of the people", its intent was control over ones government. The militia never stops being needed for as long as government exists. Their view on taxes did not allow for socialist robbery either. It sounds like you had some biased teachers. If you far leftists hate being armed simply refuse to buy a firearm and be done with the issue.
jackbelias 4 years ago
Spk cont'd.:
4. They believed in Freedom and since then it has spread to freedom for slaves, freedom for women to have voting rights, freedom for women to conrol their own bodies; there is still lots of room for freedom to grow and thanks to the Founders we have a Constitution that grows with our needs. That's what a common law system is all about. That's why the Founders chose it. Try studying and learning the truth not con-pap history.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
They believed in freedom of speech too. Democrats today call any disagreeable speech "hate speech" and dont seem to think it protected. While allowing women rights democratic states also allow public funding and public schools to spread Islam. How many rights will they have under Islamic law when the constitution "grows with our needs" under majority vote?
jackbelias 4 years ago
Spk: cont'd
4. They believed in Freedom and since then it has spread to freedom for slaves, freedom for women to have equal rights, freedom for women to conrol their own bodies; there is still lots of room for freedom to grow and thanks to the Founders we have a Constitution that grows with our needs. That's why the Foounders chose a common law system for us.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
You think of total reversal as growth? The far left seems to define freedom as the right not to feel offended, thus many cry for limits on speech. Your definition of freedom is not shared by all, which means "grow with our needs" actually means that it gets reworded with your whims. The founders never chose socialism, or big government, or NAFTA, or open borders, or socialized health care. You did.
jackbelias 4 years ago
Huh? The founders were not liberals in the way you are defining it. They werent marxists, they didnt think stealing a neighbors money was ok. You say the radical left cant be held back? Given the fact that they took over our "educational system" you are right. We are all headed for a bloodbath if you get your way as the traditional minority wont want to surrender property, guns, speech rights, or individual freedoms. Desperation and total lack of representation leads to violence and war.
jackbelias 4 years ago
You are a gigantic flaming douchebag.
ManuelHung 4 years ago
Fucking retarded, lowest common denominator level of dialog... Go suck Coulter's dick.
ManuelHung 4 years ago
At least it can be argued that she possesses one, which is more than one can say about you :)))
ravenhairedmaid 4 years ago
sharpnova: you are delusional, the Bush diverted our military action away from the terrorists and instead attacked Iraq, and if you can't see that, then I understand how you can think Bush is awesome, what a deluded fool you and your ilk are
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Imagine this party boy, your holy savior voted for the Iraq war and helped to spread the word that Saddam had WMDs. She went along with Bush, then changed her mind and denied everything. I am a New Englander myself and I cant imagine what makes this holy savior of the far left so amazing. Her first 8 years as president sucked, it wont be better next time. She just wont have Bill standing in front of her while she makes policy.
jackbelias 4 years ago
This video is brilliant! There's no difference between Hillary and Bush. The great visionary candidate in the race is Kucinich, not Clinton.
vigorbrasil 4 years ago
You are confusing philosophy with politics. Please live in the real world and remember that the perfect is the enemy of the good.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Agrees about Kucinich... Democrat / republican - the only difference is that the republicans will boldly lie to your face, and the democrats are better at covering their tracks.
ManuelHung 4 years ago
It's killing all you right wing nuts, but she is going to be the next President of the United States. That she is savy, articulate and competent (unlike the present occupant of the Oval Office) only make you even more crazy. We've be lost on the right for too long and welcome a left turn.
shadowlawn3761 4 years ago
Oh look another "we". I belong to no party and I believe in no invisible god, but something tells me that "we" doesnt include me. I have no interest in further helping the KLA exterminate Serbs and take land. I have no interest in "health care" that fails while being "free". I want to keep my guns, I want to continue living my life for me. There is no "we".
jackbelias 4 years ago
The idea of Hitlery being president for another 8 years bothers alot of people. The only people who like her commonly refer to themselves as "marxists", "anarchists", "social democrats", "communists", "maoists", etc... She is the new extremist candidate who intends nothing good for those not in her camp.
jackbelias 4 years ago
stupid.
xbeautifulxsuicide 4 years ago