It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Exclusive - The Vetting - Barack Obama, the First Tea Partier

page: 7
18
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


Progressive is code now? Who made up this code and why do you use it?
I use the dictionary and progressive is a good thing. The opposite of that is regressive.
English is a great language when you learn it.




posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Autumnal
 


You know exactly what I mean....the liberal definition of progressive= socialism....

Or didn't they tell you in DNC youth camp?



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


A lot of the founding fathers harbored socialist ideas and even set up numerous social welfare programs such as the military, public roads, libraries, fire departments, and the postal service. I guess they were un-American and treasonous.


edit on 26-5-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 03:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Autumnal
 


You know exactly what I mean....the liberal definition of progressive= socialism....

Or didn't they tell you in DNC youth camp?



An adjective = a noun?
What world does that work out in?

No, it sounds like you have no idea what progressive means either in the dictionary or in politics.
Go ahead and try again.
edit on 26-5-2012 by Autumnal because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:27 AM
link   

George Washington said: "There is no practice more dangerous than that of borrowing money; for when money can be had in this way, repayment is seldom thought of in time, the interest becomes a loss, exertions to raise it by dent of industry cease, it comes easy and is spent freely, and many things [are] indulged in that would never be thought of if [they were] to be purchased by the sweat of the brow." Read more: www.foxnews.com...



Thomas Jefferson said: "No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Read more: www.foxnews.com...



James Madison said: "That is not just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal liberty is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the less..." Read more: www.foxnews.com...



Alexander Hamilton: If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare… The powers of Congress would subvert the very foundation, the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.



Thomas Jefferson: The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.



James Madison: As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. 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. It is sufficiently obvious, that persons and property are the two great subjects on which Governments are to act; and that the rights of persons, and the rights of property, are the objects, for the protection of which Government was instituted. These rights cannot well be separated


I hope everyone is getting my point here.....the progressive view of taxing and giving to the less fortunate is not supported in fact by our founders or their writings no matters how hard they try to rewrite history.....they are wrong wrong wrong!!!!!reply to post by RealSpoke
 



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


The military is in the constitution....

the libraries etc are state and town issues that are decided on locally not to be done by the big bloated fed....

It would do you well to read the writings of the founders (the federalist papers etc) before trying to speak of knowing what they wanted, because I can assure 80% or more of what you learned in public school or college is wrong. My father was a history teacher and I was appalled at what he was mislead on when i started reading the actual writings.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Autumnal
 





I would be amazed if just one of you uses logic, facts, and honesty to try and make your birther arguments for a change so that it seems sincere.


Regardless you make nothing seem sincere..Whether or not you use logic or facts...You might as well be a ghost writer for all of the other ObamaBots...That is the same arguments they use...Trust me it gets old..



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 04:41 AM
link   

"Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master." Dwight D. Eisenhower



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by timetothink
 


A lot of the founding fathers harbored socialist ideas and even set up numerous social welfare programs such as the military, public roads, libraries, fire departments, and the postal service. I guess they were un-American and treasonous.


Fire departments, public roads, libraries? While they may have sought community support for such, non are called for as a valid function of the Federal Government. Even the post office is suspect. There is a call for funding of postal roads -- doesn't necessarily mean they meant to fund a behemoth of a money pit that is the United States Postal Service.

Libraries and fire departments are inherently a local community issue and has no bearing on the basics of the Federal Government.

Post Script:

Re-reading your post, I may have taken a different view upon what you are saying. As individuals, such persons may have taken up the mantle to establish those services -- but were doing so as individuals or agents of their respective states.
edit on 26-5-2012 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Autumnal
 


After this I am done with you, because I have no patience for those that continuously play dumb to get attention

progressivism = socialism


edit on 26-5-2012 by timetothink because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
reply to post by Autumnal
 





I would be amazed if just one of you uses logic, facts, and honesty to try and make your birther arguments for a change so that it seems sincere.


Regardless you make nothing seem sincere..Whether or not you use logic or facts...You might as well be a ghost writer for all of the other ObamaBots...That is the same arguments they use...Trust me it gets old..


What argument is that? Please show me my stale and tired argument that I am using. I am pretty sure you just type that crap over and over again and really do not know what you are saying. I have not used a single argument in this thread. I have asked you questions.

What gets old is the stupidity of the birther fight and the insane responses they give to simple questions.

Tell me exactly what arguments you are referring to or shut up about that and say something meaningful.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Autumnal
 


After this I am done with you, because I have no patience for those that continuously play dumb to get attention

progressivism = socialism


edit on 26-5-2012 by timetothink because: (no reason given)


Because that is what Glen Beck and Michael Savage tell you? Sorry but I do not take my English lessons from partisan hacks. I have a dictionary. I suggest you get one.

I am wondering why you have not been able to find one progressive who says they are using code for socialism. I thought you would have tons of examples instead of the none you came up with.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by timetothink
 


A lot of the founding fathers harbored socialist ideas and even set up numerous social welfare programs such as the military, public roads, libraries, fire departments, and the postal service. I guess they were un-American and treasonous.


Fire departments, public roads, libraries? While they may have sought community support for such, non are called for as a valid function of the Federal Government. Even the post office is suspect. There is a call for funding of postal roads -- doesn't necessarily mean they meant to fund a behemoth of a money pit that is the United States Postal Service.



Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "To establish Post Offices and post Roads".


What was your source because the constitution says otherwise.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by timetothink
 


It doesn't matter if it is done by the Fed or not, that wasn't the point. The founding fathers supported socialist ideas. You called being socialist, un-American and treasonous, so according to you they are Un-American which is just really silly.

And see the post above mine by Autumnal

edit on 26-5-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


The military is in the constitution....

the libraries etc are state and town issues that are decided on locally not to be done by the big bloated fed....

It would do you well to read the writings of the founders (the federalist papers etc) before trying to speak of knowing what they wanted, because I can assure 80% or more of what you learned in public school or college is wrong. My father was a history teacher and I was appalled at what he was mislead on when i started reading the actual writings.


What would your father have been teaching his students that the significance of the Federalist Papers was? What would he say it is now?



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Autumnal

Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution, known as the Postal Clause or the Postal Power, empowers Congress "To establish Post Offices and post Roads".


What was your source because the constitution says otherwise.


Aye I misspoke and the fingers were ahead of the brain. There was however questions about Article I, Section 8 from the Anti-Federalist papers; the much oft overlooked documents that are just as important as the Federalist Papers.

In Anti-Federalist paper #46, "Old Whig" questions if the clause provides too much power in Congress (not specifically about postal roads and post offices) but more so about "where is the restraint"?

As Congress levies taxes to create post roads or even new post offices, where does it stop? Should the cost of naming a post office after some public figure fall onto the Public?

More so, the Constitution doesn't give monopoly rights to the postal system, just that they will levy taxes to create the offices to facilitate. That is more in line with my statement and thank you for keeping me honest.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


First of all....I found that you stole your reply from an opinion piece on sodahead.com without giving credit.

Second:


Definition of SOCIALISM 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods 2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state


www.merriam-webster.com...

So your stolen opinion comparison is WRONG.....infrastructure and common defense provided for the common good by taxes is not socialism...not even by a long shot, nor were the founding fathers in ANY WAY socialist...they revered private property and private ownership of businesses above all else....again like I said before....study study study.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by LifeInDeath
 


Are you a progressive? Can you give us insight into your view on these things?


"Progressive" is just a rebranding of the word "Liberal," which was done by the Democratic Party simply because the Bush I campaign in 1988 succeeded in making the word "Liberal" an unpopular and dirty word in the political lexicon. Liberals hid themselves from the word for a long time, because to describe oneself as such was damaging with a lot of moderate voters. That's all it is, despite recent attempts by the Right to now cast "Progessive" as an even dirtier word that "Liberal," which I think no longer has the same negative connotations it once had for many. That's all.

To answer your question as to the meaning of those symbols for me, I suspect they mean much the same as they do to you. "Don't Tread On Me" means the same to an OWS protester as it does to a Tea Partier. The colonial military dress means the same to my uncles and grandfather who all served in World War II (all of whom are very liberal) as I'm sure it does to you. It's about freedom and democracy, Liberalism is not about being controlled, despite what you've been told, Liberalism is about personal freedom and helping one's fellow man in society. I'm a descendant on my mother's side from John Morgan, who was the second Surgeon General of the U.S. Army during the Revolutionary War. These things are a part of my heritage as much if not more than most, I could join (and might just yet) the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution, if I wanted to.
edit on 5/26/2012 by LifeInDeath because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Autumnal
 



In light of our analysis above what this should mean, in turn, is that socialism should focus on dispersing the ownership and control of the means of production as widely as possible, so as to promote the enjoyment by the individual of the fruits of his own labor. To put this another way, socialism should promote equity-building capitalism or equity building "laborism". Definition: The term "socialism" properly refers to any economic system, whether capitalistic or "laboristic", that adopts as its objective the greatest economic good of the greatest number. Experience makes it clear that this requires dispersing the ownership and control of the means of production as widely as possible. The opposite of socialism is economic elitism (or degenerate economic conservatism), which is any economic system that seeks maximum good for a tiny elite at the expense of the majority. (This is the system which is in place in the US today.)


www.progressiveliving.org...


Right from the Progressives collective mouths, they are socialists...period.



posted on May, 26 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by LifeInDeath
 


Thank you for the reply...I respect your honesty.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join