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.
Originally posted by POXUSA
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
The world has indeed changed, I'll grant you that. However mankind's struggle for liberty in the face of tyranny is as old as it gets. These founding fathers in their wisdom created the most free system of governance in human history.
Only to be squandered by liberal Marxist's of the Obama regime running roughshod over American liberties.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by POXUSA
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
The world has indeed changed, I'll grant you that. However mankind's struggle for liberty in the face of tyranny is as old as it gets. These founding fathers in their wisdom created the most free system of governance in human history.
Only to be squandered by liberal Marxist's of the Obama regime running roughshod over American liberties.
This began decades ago, but what Obama and the congress he had his first two years did, was put gasoline on the fire. But what makes me so mad is that these Marxist Socialists campaign as right of center moderates and fiscal Conservatives. They don't have a shred of integrity. (And GWB did the same thing). You'll even see big government Republicans like McCain, Graham, and Boehner campaign as strict Conservatives in their respective states. The problem isn't blue vs red, it's Liberty vs Statism.
"Neo conservatives" are mostly former leftists/liberals who converted to conservatism during the '70's and when Ronald Reagan became President. In domestic policy they tend to be moderate "welfare" Republicans. However, their major concern is foreign policy. They strongly favor US military interventions overseas and becoming the world’s policeman. They promoted the First Iraq War and are constantly the instigators for more confrontation with Iraq, Iran, the Sudan, and other Moslem states. They were among the chief instigators of the Kosovo War.
Former neoconservative luminary Francis Fukuyama of Stanford (formerly of Johns Hopkins) compares the neoconservative movement to Leninism. Neoconservatism, according to Fukuyama, is the reincarnation to some extent of both Leninism and Bolshevism.
Fukuyama’s observation makes sense when even Irving Kristol, who founded the movement, proudly admitted that the “honor I most prized was the fact that I was a member in good standing of the [Trotskyist] Young People’s Socialist League (Fourth International).”
And this neoconservative movement, as Jewish writer Sidney Blumenthal has shown, found its political and intellectual ideology “in the disputatious heritage of the Talmud.”
Originally posted by WaterBottle
The American republic was dead from the get go.
The "founding fathers" sold our country to foreign bankers and created the first semi-private central bank.
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 9-4-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)
It doesn't much matter what our founders did, they also owned slaves. It was the idea that survived to modern day, not them.
The constitution and bill of rights are the only documents that hold any meaning.
Originally posted by VivaDiscordia
reply to post by NOTurTypical
Why do people always assume, or for that matter even find relevance in, the thoughts of the founding fathers. They were great men who built a nation, but the world has charged, moving with a speed and complexity they could not anticipate. It's a speculative argument and nothing more. As for Paul, enough with his magic wand babble. His belief that by regressing our behaviors to when we were prosperous we can be prosperous again. Try it in your own life and see the result. If you have kids, only spend money on things you spent money on before you had kids. If you have a mortgage, pay only the amount you paid for your first apartment. Tell me how that works out.
Originally posted by VivaDiscordia
reply to post by NOTurTypical
Why do people always assume, or for that matter even find relevance in, the thoughts of the founding fathers. They were great men who built a nation, but the world has charged, moving with a speed and complexity they could not anticipate. It's a speculative argument and nothing more. As for Paul, enough with his magic wand babble. His belief that by regressing our behaviors to when we were prosperous we can be prosperous again. Try it in your own life and see the result. If you have kids, only spend money on things you spent money on before you had kids. If you have a mortgage, pay only the amount you paid for your first apartment. Tell me how that works out.
Originally posted by HauntWok
The American Republic is alive and well and gently moving away from Social Conservatism. No longer does this nation tolerate bigotry or hate, or discrimination based on aspects of a person that is beyond their control.
This is what Paul hates in the depths of his soul, the fact that this country is at it's heart a socially liberal nation and that social conservatism is what is dead.
you are either ignorant or lying, not sure which
Originally posted by HauntWok
reply to post by Credenceskynyrd
you are either ignorant or lying, not sure which
Neither. Ron Paul is a social conservative. That's not what this nation is about. He opposes freedom for women to have control over their bodies. He wants to force Cannon Law on us all, he even said in his campaign that his decisions come from Jesus and not the will of his constituents. This all comes from his own campaign website.
Why do people always assume, or for that matter even find relevance in, the thoughts of the founding fathers.
quite the opposite, he seeks a retreat of the state, progressives seek an ENCROACHMENT of the state