Current Topics
If ISIS does the unthinkable...
by chunkstyle
0 seconds ago
Are both "sides" equally corrupt?
by chunkstyle
50 minutes 38 seconds ago
The Impeachment of Donald trump
by NW Ponderer
Today at 11:34 AM
What is "old"?
by Greger
Today at 03:32 AM
The Trump/Biden/Ukraine thing
by chunkstyle
Today at 01:29 AM
RoundTable for Fall 2019
by Jeffery J. Haas
Yesterday at 07:55 PM
Hyper-partisanship and irrationality
by logtroll
Yesterday at 06:49 PM
Never-Before-Seen Trump Tax Documents Show Major Inconsistencies
by Greger
Yesterday at 05:44 PM
The Departed - 2019
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 01:12 PM
Where have all the conservatives gone?
by perotista
Yesterday at 12:58 AM
Why do humans fight so much?
by Greger
10/15/19 02:13 PM
Global warming predictions
by logtroll
10/13/19 08:47 PM
Turkey's Erdogan threatens to release millions of refugees into Europe over crit
by pdx rick
10/12/19 07:35 PM
Partisans' Trust in Legislative Branch Has Shifted in Past Year
by perotista
10/11/19 03:37 AM
Trump unleashes ISIS in Kurd Country
by Greger
10/10/19 05:31 PM
SF Board of Supervisors declare NRA a domestic terrorist organization
by NW Ponderer
10/09/19 03:08 PM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by chunkstyle
10/07/19 02:44 PM
NRA acted as "foreign asset" for Russia ahead of 2016 election, Senate report cl
by Greger
10/07/19 02:19 AM
Roe v. Wade Is Under Immediate Threat
by jgw
10/06/19 08:05 PM
Quinnipiac Loves Liz Warren
by perotista
10/03/19 02:46 PM
Forum Stats
6282 Members
59 Forums
16712 Topics
290859 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 35 of 44 < 1 2 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43 44 >
Topic Options
#314716 - 09/02/19 07:55 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
Jeffery J. Haas Offline

It's the Despair Quotient!
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 08/03/04
Posts: 14315
Loc: Whittier, California
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Another lecture. This one is to hide that you are wrong about the fact that our Constitution created a limited government. Since lectures seem to be your modus operandi to avoid admitting you are wrong I have little or no reason to believe anything you say.


Try responding to the points made in said "lecture" instead of objecting to the fact that someone is lecturing back at you.
After all, the whole coin of the realm in a political debate forum is lecturing. One delivers a lecture, which is an educational talk to an audience, to support one's points, one's arguments.

So now you, after lecturing voluminously on Madison, object to the coin of the realm in a debate forum, and now you "have little or no reason to believe anything you (NW Ponderer) says?

Since when did that become a valid debate tactic?
That's just saying "I don't like the way you talk so I'm taking my ball and going home."
_________________________
The only people pushing the Athenian Straw Man Nonexistent Threat of Slippery Slope Windyfoggery (ASMNSSW) RE DEMOCRACY are people who have a misunderstanding/problem or hatred of democracy. (See AUTHORITARIANS)

Top
#314730 - 09/03/19 01:12 AM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1596
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
[quote=Senator Hatrack]To put it politely you are full of snit! You cannot accept the fact that you are wrong. A government whose powers are "few and defined" is a limited government. You are not the freaking expert know it all that you think you are! Whether or not you want to believe it our Constitution was written to limit the size of our government. Here is another quote from Madison that proves our Constitution created a limited government. "If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Sometimes, my friend, you make me feel like a parent dutifully following their child around with a bucket and sponge to clean the crayon off the wall. I won't take the crayon away, because I fully support and encourage free expression. But, I can't put the bucket away, either...

Could you be any more obnoxious or condescending? You are not my freaking parent and you are not as smart as you think you are! So quit being so obnoxious and condescending. Your smug conceited attitude is real pain in the arse and a definite impediment to a discussion with you.

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
I'll note first, that you have never cited your source for these Madison quotes. I know why, because I know where they come from - out of context and everything. You seem to think I don't follow links or read contrary opinions. I do it all the time, so I recognize the quotes and their source. I'll leave that to you.
What is the source of my quotes?

Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
As I said, Madison's views changed radically over the course of his lifetime and political career. When he co-wrote the Federalist papers with Hamilton, they were largely in accord. It was his design for a strong central government. It was later, under the influence of Jefferson and other "agrarian philosophers" that he changed his views to become quite restrictive, and oppositional to Hamilton. He changed his views again when he became President. He again became a proponent of a strong central government, and even presided over the creation of the Second Bank of the United States - something Hamilton had promoted and Jefferson had opposed.

I know that Madison's views changed over time. Everyone's does. My quotes of his are chosen because when he said them they back up the point I am making.
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
There is a reason I don't claim to be wrong - I'm not. Contrary to your denigration, I am a "freaking expert know it all".
No, you are not. In your own mind you might be but that is the only you are!
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
This was a large part of my life's work. Moreover, I have the ability to distinguish between "size" and "purpose". The Constitution created, I readily acknowledge and have often stated, a central government of "enumerated powers". Nowhere, anywhere, in the Constitution does it say "but the government can only be so big." Where those powers are delegated to the federal government they are, largely, plenary. That is the point of the Supremacy clause. That very point was the central issue in the Civil War.

The purpose of our Constitution was to create a limited government as the quote from Madison said. (Where did he say it and when?) Of course our Constitution does not directly say "but the government can only be so big." I never said it did. As a structure for our government our Constitution does limit the size of it. Our Constitution is like a house. Just as a house limits a person's movement our Constitution limits the movement of our government. The X Amendment and that the powers of our government are given to it by the people of the country are limitations on the supremacy clause. The supremacy clause was not the central issue of the Civil War. It was a contributing issue to the Civil War but it was not the central issue.
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
What you are also ignoring, deliberately I suspect, is that the tenor of the balance between State and federal authority changed substantially as a result of the Civil War and the Amendments enacted after it. The federal government gained a great deal of additional authority, and the State governments were consequently greatly constrained, thereafter. Much of what you are espousing follows, faithfully, the tenets of "Lost Cause" mythology. I don't know if that is deliberate, or just a consequence of being rabidly "conservative" in your viewpoint, but it is not realistic or consistent with where the country is, now, or has been for over a century.
Your assumption that I am ignoring the changes to our government after the Civil War is erroneous to say the least. Asinine to say the worst. But then that is what one is to expect from a "know it all." My desire to reduce the size of our government has not a goddamn thing to do with the "Lost Cause." The shift to a larger and more powerful central government might have been started shortly after the Civil War but the real growth of it occurred when the so called Progressive movement took control of our government during the administration of Woodrow Wilson*, he was a supporter of the "Lost Cause" whose favorite movie was The Birth of a Nation. A movie whose heroes were members of the KKK. The growth of our federal government, at the expense of the states, greatly increased during FDR's administration and the New Deal. A basic premise of the "Lost Cause" was the egregiously mistaken understanding of states rights. States rights do not trump human rights, especially the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That you conflate my conservatism with the "conservatism of those who wanted to perpetuate slavery or failing that keep blacks as second class citizens is an insult. Had you said that to me in person, back when I was drinking, it would have difficult for me to not punch you in the face! That you make such a stupid, asinine, and insulting comment is proof positive that you nowhere near as smart as you think you are. Then you compound the insult by suggesting that I am living in the past.
* Woodrow Wilson Godfather of Liberalism
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314737 - 09/03/19 02:33 AM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17100
So, now that you know what smug and condescending looks like, will you stop applying it to everything you disagree with? Or do I have to keep my bucket handy?

Top
#314740 - 09/03/19 03:05 AM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1596
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
So, now that you know what smug and condescending looks like, will you stop applying it to everything you disagree with? Or do I have to keep my bucket handy?

You are the only one I have applied it to. The comment about the bucket is a big reason I say it about you.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314744 - 09/03/19 04:59 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17100
Setting the bucket down... [When you asked "Could you be any more obnoxious or condescending?" I assure you, I can. I was the youngest of six (not counting my twin). Verbal jousting was the coin of that realm.] A Truce.

I ask, my friend, that you read carefully what is written. I recognize you have your back up because you feel surrounded by ... what? Let's just say, "less-conservatives". It gives one a feeling of persecution. But, please focus on the argument. That's all I'm asking.

I tend to use words carefully. We could have a really good discussion of the roots of the Civil War, or the basis for various elements of the Constitution, if we assume good faith.

Top
#314745 - 09/03/19 06:07 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Greger Offline

Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 11/24/06
Posts: 15475
Loc: Florida
Quote:
I tend to use words carefully.

I don't. I toss them around like cordwood.

I don't imagine we will ever escape the tyranny of capitalism. Because, by nature, humans are capitalists. Traders and investors by our very nature. Out to make a profit, an easy buck, and if you get lucky once in a while...a killing! Evolution(or god) made us hoarders and made us greedy. Because survival.

I don't know why we struggle so hard to find any common ground.

Would a living wage make us more socialist? Workers have a product to sell and an overhead to meet too. Shareholders at home that need a slice of the pie. We're all capitalists here after all.

Subsidized healthcare? Medicare is a state program that works with federal assistance. A no-brainer for them that wants it de-centralized. The ACA keeps pretty much everything private, but it spreads out the costs a little better. We're slowly zeroing in on an equitable healthcare system. We aren't becoming "socialist" because of it.

Subsidized education. I'd like to see huge investments into education because the un-educated fall farther and farther behind every year.

I just don't rightly see any of that as being "socialist" in the least.
_________________________
"Be yourself; everyone else is already taken."— Oscar Wilde

Top
#314746 - 09/03/19 06:10 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1596
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Setting the bucket down... [When you asked "Could you be any more obnoxious or condescending?" I assure you, I can. I was the youngest of six (not counting my twin). Verbal jousting was the coin of that realm.] A Truce.

I ask, my friend, that you read carefully what is written. I recognize you have your back up because you feel surrounded by ... what? Let's just say, "less-conservatives". It gives one a feeling of persecution. But, please focus on the argument. That's all I'm asking.

I tend to use words carefully. We could have a really good discussion of the roots of the Civil War, or the basis for various elements of the Constitution, if we assume good faith.

To have a good discussion an apology for even thinking that my conservatism is in any way similar to the southern Democrat conservatives who wanted to bring back slavery or supported segregation. I have a website 272-words.com. The name of the website comes from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, which is 272 words long. Someone who is a Lincoln fan like I am would not be a southern Democrat Conservative or a supporter of segregation. Those southern Democrat conservatives were very helpful in getting FDR's New Deal programs passed by Congress. That leaves the very odious stain of segregation on the New Deal.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314747 - 09/03/19 06:18 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17100
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
So, now that you know what smug and condescending looks like, will you stop applying it to everything you disagree with? Or do I have to keep my bucket handy?

You are the only one I have applied it to. The comment about the bucket is a big reason I say it about you.
I wish that were true.
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#314748 - 09/03/19 06:29 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: NW Ponderer]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1596
Loc: MN
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
Originally Posted By: NW Ponderer
So, now that you know what smug and condescending looks like, will you stop applying it to everything you disagree with? Or do I have to keep my bucket handy?

You are the only one I have applied it to. The comment about the bucket is a big reason I say it about you.
I wish that were true.

Okay, I probably did say that to some other people here on the Rant. But to me your comments were the most condescending. If you were as smart as you are condescending you would be the smartest man in the world.
grin
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#314752 - 09/03/19 07:13 PM Re: The Debate: Is America’s future capitalist or socialist? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 17100
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
To have a good discussion an apology for even thinking that my conservatism is in any way similar to the southern Democrat conservatives who wanted to bring back slavery or supported segregation. I have a website 272-words.com. The name of the website comes from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, which is 272 words long. Someone who is a Lincoln fan like I am would not be a southern Democrat Conservative or a supporter of segregation. Those southern Democrat conservatives were very helpful in getting FDR's New Deal programs passed by Congress. That leaves the very odious stain of segregation on the New Deal.
Okay, that's a start. Please explain how your conservatism is different.

I am a huge Lincoln fan, too. He was the first good Republican, but not the last. But they have become awfully rare...

Go back, again, and read the sentences you are responding to critically. I didn't say you were an unreformed segregationist, or anything like that. What I said was
Quote:
Much of what you are espousing follows, faithfully, the tenets of "Lost Cause" mythology. I don't know if that is deliberate, or just a consequence of being rabidly "conservative" in your viewpoint, but it is not realistic or consistent with where the country is, now, or has been for over a century.
The paths are parallel. I explicitly did not say they were the same thing.

My point, really, is that the United States before, and after, the Civil War was and is a very different country than at the time of its founding. The "Lost Cause" mythology pretends that the war was about "states' rights", rather than slavery, to give it a "noble" feel. Adherents spend a good deal of time selectively quoting (anti-federalist) founders about how the central government is "limited" and real power remains with the individual States - when that has not been the case since 1790, or 1800 (consider the Louisiana purchase), or 1812, or 1846, or 1860... but that reality was made explicit with the 13th-15th Amendments. So, the desire to "go back" to the "good old days" is based upon something that never really existed.

It is that yearning for a past that doesn't exist that creates what I consider the parallels between the "lost cause" and "libertarian"/"conservative" arguments. The labels are particularly instructive - preferring "constitutional republic" to "representative democracy", as if they were different things; identifying as "classical liberal" instead of "conservative". As is the argumentation - pretending that "the founders" were not motivated to create a strong central government, while ignoring the Supremacy clause and its implications (and all of the federalists among the founders); arguing that a "small government" was their goal, but ignoring the growth of the government from its inception. Federal Government Growth Before the New Deal (Foundation for Economic Education). The nation's population is 100 times what it was in 1790 and the land mass has more than tripled. How small a government can regulate such a situation?

Top
Page 35 of 44 < 1 2 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 43 44 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 41 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Snarky_Politics, Moot, Ikari, perotista, ttwtt78640
6282 Registered Users
A2