So like many other liberals in this country, you enjoy the history of the founders, and admire their words, but in the end unless you can use it to liberal/progressive ends, then they are just outdated victorian thought that has no place in the modern world. Liberals would only cherry pick the constitution when it suits their needs, and when it doesn't then throw it in the trash.
Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville
I mean, even the founders disagreed with each other and strayed from their own professed orthodoxy at times in the course of governance.
If your ideas weren't snuggled up so close to his ideas (Radical Karl's ideas really) we would have an easier time of it. - 23 words. Probably too long.
When the differences are really more about the means rather than the ends what are we to think? - 18 words. Nope. About right.
And should you tell me only the fundamental ideas of Marxism inform the liberal elites while they leave out the crackpot ideas am I supposed to be relieved or simply duped? - 31 words. Well yeah. You got me. This one is way too long for a liberal to understand.
Obama will not be the downfall of the Republic. The full-blown dumbass idiots who support him will be.
Last edited by AdamT; 04-15-12 at 11:43 PM.
"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
-- Adam Smith