More of the public schools trying to indoctrinate young

minds to the government propaganda and trying to stop any free speech.

Another dumb *****:

(05-22-2012 07:46 AM)Rebel Wrote:  Another dumb *****:

I'm guessing daddy wasn't too happy when he saw this video.

(05-22-2012 07:41 AM)liberty1959 Wrote:  

I, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

T-Monay you gotta change that signature picture, or at least change the wording of it, because it's clear you don't remember it's orgins, or that the right wing supported the monarchy while opposing the creation of a republic. It literally could not be less correct lol.

(05-22-2012 10:25 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  T-Monay you gotta change that signature picture, or at least change the wording of it, because it's clear you don't remember it's orgins, or that the right wing supported the monarchy while opposing the creation of a republic. It literally could not be less correct lol.

And it's ironic that the left wing is trying to make a king out of the presidency again....

picking nits about right and left wings is pretty stupid they change over time and are different between different societies, even contemporary societies.

(05-22-2012 10:25 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  T-Monay you gotta change that signature picture, or at least change the wording of it, because it's clear you don't remember it's orgins, or that the right wing supported the monarchy while opposing the creation of a republic. It literally could not be less correct lol.

i could be wrong, but I believe it's stating that by today's standards the founding fathers would be considered right win extremists

(05-22-2012 10:37 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 10:25 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  T-Monay you gotta change that signature picture, or at least change the wording of it, because it's clear you don't remember it's orgins, or that the right wing supported the monarchy while opposing the creation of a republic. It literally could not be less correct lol.

And it's ironic that the left wing is trying to make a king out of the presidency again....

picking nits about right and left wings is pretty stupid they change over time and are different between different societies, even contemporary societies.

You really can't just not post needlessly partisan rhetoric, can you? Like, it's against your programing, even when my post has no partisan rhetoric in it like the one you just commented on. It's all about your team winning, and mine losing, f*ck even worrying about the US.

And this isn't nitpicking, it's historically as inaccurate as you can get with the express desire to co-opt our founders into something they weren't. Our entire constitution was based on writings from the Left Wing movement, they were the revolutionaries, and ignoring that is just idiotic. Especially when it could easily be changed to something along the lines of "Libertarian Revolutionaries" and be completely accurate.

(05-22-2012 10:43 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  even when my post has no partisan rhetoric in it like the one you just commented on

Your post has no partisan rhetoric? WTF are you talking about?

Quote:Especially when it could easily be changed to something along the lines of "Libertarian Revolutionaries" and be completely accurate.

We agree on this. Was actually going to post a longer response to work through that, but this summarizes it nicely.

(05-22-2012 10:40 AM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 10:25 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  T-Monay you gotta change that signature picture, or at least change the wording of it, because it's clear you don't remember it's orgins, or that the right wing supported the monarchy while opposing the creation of a republic. It literally could not be less correct lol.

i could be wrong, but I believe it's stating that by today's standards the founding fathers would be considered right win extremists

You're not wrong at all. Even the war hawk, tax-cutting, America-loving John F. Kennedy would be considered right-wing today.

BTW, if you want to compare "wings" of today with "wings" of then, it would be the left-wing that most resembled the "loyalists". All they wanted was to be taken care of and have security provided for them. Honestly, I can't see how anyone is dumb enough to believe the founders have anything in common with today's Progs.

(05-22-2012 11:00 AM)Rebel Wrote:  BTW, if you want to compare "wings" of today with "wings" of then, it would be the left-wing that most resembled the "loyalists". All they wanted was to be taken care of and have security provided for them. Honestly, I can't see how anyone is dumb enough to believe the founders have anything in common with today's Progs.

I have heard exactly zero liberals I know espouse those beliefs, so maybe that's why you think that?

(05-22-2012 11:11 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:00 AM)Rebel Wrote:  BTW, if you want to compare "wings" of today with "wings" of then, it would be the left-wing that most resembled the "loyalists". All they wanted was to be taken care of and have security provided for them. Honestly, I can't see how anyone is dumb enough to believe the founders have anything in common with today's Progs.

I have heard exactly zero liberals I know espouse those beliefs, so maybe that's why you think that?

Then you are deaf.

(05-22-2012 11:13 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:11 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:00 AM)Rebel Wrote:  BTW, if you want to compare "wings" of today with "wings" of then, it would be the left-wing that most resembled the "loyalists". All they wanted was to be taken care of and have security provided for them. Honestly, I can't see how anyone is dumb enough to believe the founders have anything in common with today's Progs.

I have heard exactly zero liberals I know espouse those beliefs, so maybe that's why you think that?

Then you are deaf.

I'd find it far more likely that I have a better handle on the pulse of the average liberal than you do, but maybe that's not the case.

(05-22-2012 10:43 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  You really can't just not post needlessly partisan rhetoric, can you? Like, it's against your programing, even when my post has no partisan rhetoric in it like the one you just commented on. It's all about your team winning, and mine losing, f*ck even worrying about the US.

Ok you accuse me of injecting politics where there is none and then go with this?

Quote:And this isn't nitpicking, it's historically as inaccurate as you can get with the express desire to co-opt our founders into something they weren't. Our entire constitution was based on writings from the Left Wing movement, they were the revolutionaries, and ignoring that is just idiotic.

My point, you nit, is that the left wing of the 18th century *is not* the left wing of today. They were fiercely advocating a small government as opposed to the over powerful big govt of England.

Quote:Especially when it could easily be changed to something along the lines of "Libertarian Revolutionaries" and be completely accurate.

Libertarians, on the American Political Spectrum, are pretty much perceived as right wingers... True they hold some left wing impulses but their view on the size and scope of the federal government go way against the left wing...

(05-22-2012 11:13 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:11 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(05-22-2012 11:00 AM)Rebel Wrote:  BTW, if you want to compare "wings" of today with "wings" of then, it would be the left-wing that most resembled the "loyalists". All they wanted was to be taken care of and have security provided for them. Honestly, I can't see how anyone is dumb enough to believe the founders have anything in common with today's Progs.

I have heard exactly zero liberals I know espouse those beliefs, so maybe that's why you think that?

Then you are deaf.

or dumb... I vote dumb!

They want free school, cradle to grave health care, guaranteed jobs, a "living wage" enforced by the govt, .... but no they don't want to be cared for...

Every damn liberal on this board demands bigger government to provide for them. It's one of the MAIN topics we discuss on a daily basis and have discussed for years. It's the one topic that brings Republicans, Libertarians, and fiscally conservative independents together here. Again, either you are deaf, can't read, or your comprehension skills flat out suck. you want to know what type of "liberals" the founders were? Google "classical liberalism". It is no where NEAR where these neo-lib Progs stand today.

It's amazing to me the short sighted reprehensible view conservatives have of Democrats. They just want to be taken care of. It's all selfish in nature. Nothing about caring for our fellow man. Nothing about safe guarding the middle class. I'm just looking out for número UNO when I cast my vote!

(05-22-2012 12:13 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's amazing to me the short sighted reprehensible view conservatives have of Democrats. They just want to be taken care of. It's all selfish in nature. Nothing about caring for our fellow man. Nothing about safe guarding the middle class. I'm just looking out for número UNO when I cast my vote!

Caring for your fellow man doesn't equate to getting government to steal from one person to give to another. It's dipping your hand into your own f'n pocket and whipping out your own money, otherwise known as charity.

BTW, do you want to know who's more charitable between conservatives and liberals?

(05-22-2012 12:13 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  It's amazing to me the short sighted reprehensible view conservatives have of Democrats. They just want to be taken care of. It's all selfish in nature. Nothing about caring for our fellow man. Nothing about safe guarding the middle class. I'm just looking out for número UNO when I cast my vote!

It's amazing to me the short sighted reprehensible understanding liberals have of Conservatives. They just want poor people to die. It's all selfish in nature. Nothing about caring about peoples rights. Nothing about safe guarding our children's liberty. They are just looking out for número UNO when I cast my vote!

Cuts both ways Mach

The difference is I can say I don't think the government, especially the federal government, should be involved and contribute personally. I can also pick and choose what I support.

Under no circumstances is paying for someone college "supporting our fellow man" and make no mistake those kids taking out 200K in loans for their lesbian gay french cooking degree will not pay back anymore than a fraction of that loan.

If Minnesota wants to support it? well that's up to people in Minnesota.