On this, the most quintessential of American Holidays, I wish to delve a bit into the subject that is the Declaration of Independence. It was penned by the great Thomas Jefferson when he was but thirty three-years old. He was one of a committee of five that were formed to bring forth the reasons for our separation from Great Britain. The committee members were (in no particular order):
Thomas Jefferson
John Adams
Benjamin Franklin
Robert R. Livingston
Roger Sherman
A vote was taken by the committee as to who would draft the statement and Jefferson came in first followed by Adams. An interesting footnote is that Adams presented Jefferson with his reasons as to why he ought to be the one to pen the document.
“Reason first—You are a Virginian, and a Virginian ought to appear at the head of this business. Reason second—I am obnoxious, suspected and unpopular. You are very much otherwise. Reason third—You can write ten times better than I can.”
Jefferson wrote the document in his residence where he occupied the entire second floor of a three story house owned by a bricklayer named Graff. It was said that after Jefferson’s death the baby infant of Graff was consistently told that he had often sat on a great man’s knee.
The writing itself took place in the parlor of Jefferson’s domicile on a desk that contained a small writing box that was of Jefferson’s own design. He had previously rented from a cabinet maker who constructed it from drawings made by Jefferson. During the last year of his life, he gave it to the husband of his favorite granddaughter, Ellen Randolph. He was to have said about the box, “It claims no merit of particular beauty. It is plain, neat, convenient and, taking no more room on the writing table than a moderate quarto volume, it displays itself sufficiently for any writing.” (Quarto volume is what we recognize as a middle-sized hardbound book.)
Jefferson never claimed originality of the idea of governance, “of the people, by the people and for the people,” instead he remarked that he was only distilling “common sense” on the subject. True the idea of democracy dates back to the Romans and the Greeks, but in Jefferson’s time, it was a very hot topic. Jefferson expounded on the idea of natural law and the nature of government.
In the second paragraph, Jefferson articulated an entire system of philosophy with his theory on that natural law and governance issue. It stems from property rights and builds upon that. Jefferson did not separate property rights from political rights. For he felt that if one is denied property rights, then one cannot truly have political rights. Property is of course more than just what one owns, it goes to what one does to obtain property. Therefore property, as expressed by Jefferson is one’s individuality. If a government takes 40 or 50% (or more) of a person’s income (property), then that person is not truly free. For when half of one’s work goes to the government, it ceases to belong to that person.
This idea is expressed in what is possibly the most famous sentence in the American lexicon:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
But when presented to Congress, over twenty five percent of Jefferson’s original document was deleted. In what was at the time, a controversial move, Congress struck out what they viewed as a scathing indictment of the slave trade. Of course, Jefferson resented the changes and said that the passages were “struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves & who on the contrary still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe, felt a little under those censures; for tho’ their people have very few slaves themselves, yet they have been pretty considerable carriers of them to others.” Congress also got rid of passages that conveyed a censure on the people of England. Jefferson’s reaction? “…the pusillanimous idea that we had friends in England worth keeping terms with still haunted the minds of many.”
At least Congress left the ideas of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. However, they did change it from “We hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable…” to “We hold these truths to be self-evident…”
Lastly, Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence wasn’t really a declaration of independence at all. Rather it was an explanation of the actual declaration formally approved by Congress two days before, on July 2, 1776. That declaration was written by Richard Henry Lee, an active and respected patriot of Virginia’s congressional delegation.
It was titled: “A Declaration by the Representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in General Congress assembled.” Therefore our actual declaration of independence wasn’t even called that. And ironically, John Adams was known to have said in a now-famous letter to his wife that future generations of Americans would celebrate America’s independence from England on July 2nd and it would become a great American holiday. Of course, as we all know and history has shown, we celebrate our independence on the date that Jefferson’s document explaining our reasoning behind our declaration of independence was announced, July 4th.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
A very nice and appropriate post.
Might I also add that today marks the anniversary of Jefferson’s passing (a couple of hours before Adams, wasn’t it?).
The sad thing is that today the citizens of the United States are so alien to the Americans who took up arms against the King that it is unreal.
I think most Americans today would side with the torries if they were thrown back to 1776 via a time machine.
Sad.
@Ivan:
It would not matter if they did take up with the Torrie’s being back then there were more Loyalists than were Rebels, which is another fact most are completely unaware of and the very reason the current Tea Party is so potent.
Word correct Jefferson passed a few hours before Adams on July 4 1826. Their correspondance over the years makes for wonderful reading.On his passing Adams is quoted as saying “JEFFERSON LIVES”.Two great patriots who often disagreed but had enduring respect for each other.
@Christopher-Conservative Perspective:
Ugh, yeah, it would matter. When I mean “most”, I mean something akin to 80% of the current US would be Torries. Maybe 10% of today’s US population would actually be “Rebels”.
The vast, vast majority of Americans DEPEND upon a massive government to either feed, clothe or employ them either in a direct or indirect manner.
I dislike this conclusion, but everyone has sold their sold their soul to “The devil”, aka the USG.
Antics, Bravo Sir, a noble effort to celebrate a noble day. Well done, well done indeed.
@Christopher-Conservative Perspective:
I went to a Tea Party Rally in Santa Fe on April 15th of this year. Turnout: EPIC FAIL.
I read of similar reports of other Tea Party events across the nation on that day.
Let’s stop kidding ourselves, okay?
@Ivan:
I believe that your percentages are off a bit. Only 10%? I’d say more like 20-30%, but then, it is only a guess on both our parts. You are correct, though, that most would support the status quo, and that is a sad fact considering the number of violations of the Constitution, and the sheer number of encroachments upon our freedoms and liberties, by politicians of both parties.
I think your minimilizing of the TEA Party is incorrect. Remember, during the revolution the numbers of people considered ‘rebels’ was quite small compared to the populace as a whole, yet they were very effective nonetheless. On top of that, movements have to start somewhere. I have not heard of a movement starting with massive support right off the bat, have you?
A good piece, anticsrocks, but you leave out a very important historical point: when Jefferson composed his very first draft, he wrote: life, liberty and “property.” Franklin objected to the use of the word “property” for a number of reasons, one being that it could be construed by the southern states to mean the ownership of slaves, and that property could be taxed. Taxation on property removes some of the owners rights as the government then becomes part owner of that property with the ability to tax it.
So Jefferson, under the advise of Adams and Franklin, changed the wording so that his original draft, presented for approval, read “life, liberty and the persuit of happiness”. A government cannot tax a person’s persuit of happiness.
This is a very important issue, because at the time, only freemen, all across the world, were allowed to own property.
What is ironic is that at the time of the signing of the DoI, Jefferson complained how his original document had been rewritten and parts of it eliminated totally. It was only after the years proved how valuable the document had become to the American people, that Jefferson decided to quit complaining and rested on his laurals as the sole author of the DoI.
What is equally important is the hardships that our Revolutionary Army were suffering under as a few men gathered to write the DoI. Without proper food stocks, lack of shoes and protective clothing, no pay for months and years on end, and often not even possessing a weapon of their own, our soldiers persevered to give us the nations that we now watch those, who are tasked with the continuence of this nation, tear it down. Are we again reaching the point where those political bands should be desolved, and a new govenment formed to reture, one again, to the government brave men gave us?
It was not an easy decision to take sides in those early days. Many colonists had family and property in England. Within the colonies people had family members on both sides of the fence. The general population had a high percentage of illiteracy; being able to understand the concepts was difficult and newspapers were most likely nothing more than notices on tavern walls.
People on the frontier in places like Western Virginia, Western Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Ohio actually depended on the protection from Indians afforded by fear of the Red Coats. If communication was slow on the coast, relying on sail boats, horse and wagon, and moccasins; it was ten to twenty times slower on the frontier, if it functioned at all.
We pitted a rag tag group of militias with political appointees as officers and with no supplies or armament except what the men brought from home, against the most powerful and well trained army in the world.
We won our independence against all odds, with a spirit of freedom and individualism that is only now being looked upon as being politically incorrect and taught to be a negative trait in our public education system. None the less that spirit is alive and will only die when the last patriot is hanged.
Happy 4 th!
@johngalt:
The “Tea Party” gave Republicans great victories in November! What did that get us with the Budget passed by the Republicans this spring?
The largets deficit in the history of the Republic.
You see, John, you’re more interested in intent, I’m more interested in “results”. Epic fail buddy, epic fail.
.
John, get real: 30% Rebels in the Revolutionary war. It took them 7 years to defeat England.
Do you honestly think Americans of today could fight 7 months let alone 7 years with friggen predator drones, chemical weapons, spy-sattelites, Arc-lites, etc., to win our independence from today’s tyranny????
If you say,”yes,” you’re the first one I know who thinks that.
Nothing short of a military coup will save this Republic.
Take the Red pill Johh, not the blue pill.
Ivan, the patriots were only a small segment of the population at the time. It is estimated that 1/2 of the population did not care one way or another as they felt one oppressor was equal to another. Of the remaining half, only 30 percent supported independence.
But people now are beginning to wake up. They, the productive of our society, understands that we have so far removed ourselves from the original intent of the DoI and the Constitution that we have become a society where half are willing to forefeit those guaranteed rights in order to be taken care of. Cloward & Piven have overtaken Jefferson, Adams, Washington and Franklin.
Much is the pity.
Ivan, and what budget do you recall being passed? The one the Democrats failed to pass while they were the party in power and could pass any budget they wanted since they held both Houses and the Oval Office. We still have no budget, and we won’t as long a Democrats subscribe to the confiscation of property as a political tactic.
And yes, it took seven years to defeat the British army, considered to be the mightiest army in all the world at that period in time. A bunch of ragged, shoeless, backwoodsmen defeated the mightiest army in the world.
Tyranny no longer comes with a gun. Now it comes in the form of men who seek to reduce our very inalienable rights. Rights not granted by any man, or any government. The enemy is now within, not without.
@Ivan:
You leave out the complicity of the Democrats, and their obstinate refusal to engage in any cuts. You cannot lay the blame upon one group while completely forgetting the other, Ivan.
I mean today, not then, Ivan. And you discount the percentage of people who know something is seriously wrong, but have not been given the information to decide how to respond.
I don’t believe that, and that would be nearly as bad as letting the liberal/progressives have their way. Info and ideas, promulgated to the people, is the way to combat, and save, our Republic, and many people, including some here, are doing their part, including, if I may say so, you, yourself. You are correct that solely concentrating on the Democrats is wrong. You are wrong, however, to assume that by people here supporting conservatives that that means they support the Republican party entire. They don’t. I, for example, discuss the negatives of liberals/progressives, of which many of those reside within the Republican party.
@retire05:
Yeah retire, we’re way, way below the “30% threshold” you quote.” I’d say only 10% would man-up today.
Really? How do you define “wake up”? Voting Tea-party?
Nice, feel-good comment you made there. Where are these “productive memmbers of society” you wax on so eloquently about? They taking to the streets today? They taking to the streets in protest today? I don’t see them doing anything other than being “good citizens” and feeding the beast.
Agreed. The true “revolutionaries” of our day are from the left. The “right” is in a comma.
@Ivan:
And you are buying into the rhetoric from the leftist media that is proclaiming that very thing. Meanwhile, other people are trying as best they can to fight against the further encroachment of the federal government, and not only having to fight the liberal/progressives from the Democrat Party and GOP, but people such as yourself who denounce their movements as somehow being too little too late. You don’t realize that instead of fighting the machine of government, like you proclaim, that you are helping them to influence those supporting the TEA Party to just drop it. That, more than anything, is why people here get so confrontational with you, even if some of what you say, or believe, about the GOP is true.
@Skookum:
And you think it is easier today?????? Today, Americans rely upon “uncle suggar daddy” far more for their livihood than back then.
And the illiteracy thing you talk about? That actually aided the revolution as it made them immune to English Propaganda. Today, we celebrate how “educated” our nation is with so many “college” graduates who are nothing more than indoctrinated wards of the state.
Wrong. The people today are far, far more dependent upon the “state” than at any time in our past. People on the frontier back then were much, much more tougher than you make them out to be (shame on you). They mostly worked with each other to defend themselves than relyed upon the “red coats” to protect them.
Revisionism sucks dude, don’t engage in it.
And it took the US partiots 7 years to defeat England. Patriots of today would last less than 7 months due to advancementts in US techonology.
.
Best line you’re written in a long time. Keep it up! ;->
How does that “blue pill” taste as it goes down your esophogus? Just curious.
You too!
@retire05:
Phuck, get real. Most “American” can’t tie their shoe without permission from “Uncle Sugar”.
And you expect them today to rise up against the tyranny from Washington????/
Dude, whatever your smoking lay off of it.
;->
Ivan, I am a little taken aback by your disgust for your fellow Americans. Also, I never said the patriots were 30%, I said the were 30% of half of the population. Perhaps a reading comprehension course would serve you well. That 30% of half, actually was about 15% of the total, yet they kicked the ass of the finest army in the world who had access to the most modern weapons of the time.
There is no “voting” TEA Party as the TEA Party is not an offical political party. There is voting for those who subscribe to the TEA Party platform of Constitutionalism, small limited government and taxation that is not oppressive. The productive members of our society are those that actually pay taxes, not seeing April 15th as pay day because of zero liability of taxation. If you are not contributing to the financial support of the federal government, because you get back all of what you paid in, or in many cases, more than what you paid in, you should not be considered a “productive” tax payer.
Just because you seem to be surrounded by those that cannot tie their shoes without the help of Nanny government, that is not representative of the Americans I know. And yes, if government every becomes totally oppressive, not stealing our liberties one by one in stealth ways, you will see an uprising like never before. You see, Ivan, honorable people would rather die on their feet than live on their knees.
Ivan, there was no propaganda used by the English that I know of, perhaps you can cite an example. Unless, the threat of hanging for sedition is considered a form of propaganda.
There was no welfare state and there was no protection of frontier people only the threat of war and the presence of an army to resist incursions by the French and to hand out punishment after depredations had been committed. I have perhaps the greatest appreciation of anyone on this blog of what it takes to survive in primitive conditions.
The presence of forts every two or three hundred miles hardly comprised a police force, but it was a deterrent on the frontier.
If you notice my #10 was not addressed to you personally and was not meant as some sort of political comparison to the present or to Democrats and Republicans.
Perhaps you can explain how the average colonist was aware of the political situation in Philadelphia and how that information was communicated through colonies where the mail system was nonexistent and travel was compromised by mud and lame horses. Perhaps you can share your insight on how communication was facilitated over vast distances when most Americans spent their whole life within a few miles of their birthplace. Please enlighten us with your vast knowledge of these early days and I will refrain from calling you a moron.
For it is easy to make wild claims and assertions while relying on suppositions that support your argument, what ever that may be. Unfortunately, you the perennial Conservative who hates any opposition to Liberalism leave us more than a little confused with your unsubstantiated rants and babble. It is only reasonable that you are nothing more than an agent provocateur with no particular agenda but to confuse and disorient with your witless babbling.
So rather than worrying over the color of pills or accusing people of using drugs, a diversion you seem much more likely to pursue than the people who participate in this blog, why not concentrate on writing concise opinions with backup that stay within the boundaries of sanity and lucidity.
Now if you decide to attack me personally or any others on this blog, I will remind you that I can shit can you in the blink of an eye.
Unlike you, my point was that it was not an easy decision to decide whether to be part of a revolution or a tory, not how it compares with decisions today. You have taken a few observations and applied them to some vague point you are trying to make with insults and venom; unfortunately, you accomplish nothing, except venting your own feelings and alienating everyone.
I have no idea of the pills you speak of, the strongest drug I use is aspirin. So the childish insults lose any meaning if they had meaning.
@johngalt:
We all know the role of the proto-marxists, aka the Democrats, in helping destroy our nation. Doesn’t it go without saying? Or are you so insecure that if one mentions the treason of the Republian Party you demand equal time to slander the Democrats?
Sorry, John, the knife in the front is understandable, it is the knife in the back that really frosts me.
Too bad you lack the same outrage over the knife in the back.
@Skookum:
Deterence was and is not reliance. The frontiers people relied MORE on each other for protection than they did King and Country.
Just admit you are wrong and we’ll drop it.
@retire05:
Hey Retire, ever live in a big city? I have, and do part of the year. The other part I’m in the country, less than 1000 people live in my new home town.
I can tell you, the “big cities” are the political power in this nation, not the small towns and communities you and I prefer.
Sorry, but we’re all held hostage to the scum of the big cities. It sucks, but it is reality.
I’m with you, Retire. Since you have the military experience, are you volunteering to lead us against the evil that has their boot on our throat?
;->
@johngalt:
I saw a spark of “hope” in 2009 when the TP came to life and took over the reflecting pond in DC! Great day. Ditto with November of ’10. Another great day!
Since then, though, its all be down hill for the “conservatives”.
They failed to get upset when the GOP plunged the knife in their back and cut a deal with Obama. They stood down on April 15th. AWOL.
And when the Republicans last week in NY state vote for gay marriage? Where were the “conservatives” then? ZZzzzz….zzzzz. Apparently narry a demonstration of protest.
Sorry, I’m not as easily impressed by tokenism as you are. Perhaps you are right and I am wrong, but you have no proof other than nice words that things are going our way.
I need more than that.
Here is hoping you’re right and I’m wrong.
@Skookum:
,
That took balls to admit your ignorance on this subject.
@johngalt:
Yeah, John, people are “pissed”, we all know that. They pissed off about it more than “voting” for the other guy?
NO.
Or maybe you know something I don’t. Some million man/woman march on DC coming up? A tax protest in the works?
I’m all ears, buddy.
antics: Great post. Thank you. Today I flunked the How well do you know the Declaration of Independence? quiz. I’m so ashamed…
Ivan: It figures that you live in the hippie commune of Santa Fe.
Excellent post antics.
Might I add that the men who signed the document were, in reality, signing what could very well have been their death warrant had the Revolution been unsuccessful. The penalty would have been hanging, then being drawn and quartered. Barbaric stuff.
There was an unbelievable amount of courage and conviction that went into the signatures on that document.
When Hancock affixed his famous signature, someone asked him why he signed it in such a large, flourishing manner. His answer was that he wanted King George to be able to read his name without his spectacles (eyeglasses). Hancock, at that time was the wealthiest man in the colonies and, perhaps, the most famous as well.
This group of ordinary, yet most extraordinary, men changed the course of human history that day.
They realized that they would be confronting the most powerful army and navy in the world, yet they affixed their signatures and took a stand for what they felt was right.
Some 235 years later it is difficult for us to grasp what went on in that room at Independence Hall.
anticsrocks, thank you for a marvelous twist and reminder of our roots today. I’ve always liked this stuff.. and truth be told, have kept this 4th of July to myself, catching up on chores, and now settling down (odd timing with your post) to watch the John Adams HBO mini series in my own quiet celebration.
So I thank you for your post, and uplifting perspective. It’s too bad it gets soiled with whiny little man, hateful Ivan (with 13 out of 30 comments at this point), and his negative ‘tude towards all things American and Americans in general.
This is a day I like to honor our veterans who continue to safeguard what freedoms Congress hasn’t yet absconded, and of course the concept of our founding. These days, there are few that have uplifting news. Too bad we have losers like Ivan that need to take everything in the toilet.
Santa Fe and Tea Party… LOL! Right… “southwest LA” aka Santa Fe and Taos – are so likely to harbor *lots* of tea party members…. /sarc
Ivan, yes, I have lived in a big city (Houston, St. Louis) and yes, the attitude is different in large cities than it is in small towns. But don’t discount those who are conservative that live in large cities. Now all cities are like New York or Los Angeles.
I am not a hostage to anyone, Ivan. Being a hostage would make me a victim and therefore helpless. Sorry that you feel so very helpless to the machinations of large metropolitan areas, but I don’t. As a matter of fact, if the world went to hell in a handbasket tomorrow, I would survive quite nicely, thank you.
Also, I wonder where you get some of the ideas you have. I have NEVER spoken of military service on this blog, nor do I intend to. But if it is a volunteer that you need to lead you back to the way of the Constitution and to stop feeling helpless in the tyranny of large cities, I’m your huckleberry. But I won’t buy your ammunition or provide you with food stocks. You will have to learn to take care of yourself.
It would be interesting to know what state you live in that causes you to feel so oppressed.
Keep in mind that during the Revolution politics in the Colonies was still very localized. In a number of instances, there was no active support for the Revolution until after the Brits came into that particular area. Pennsylvania and South Carolina would be two good examples. As for war strategy, it was the original intent of the Brits to occupy the port cities so they would have access to their navy and then get loyalists, Indians, and slaves they convinced to escape, to do the actual fighting. Washington’s strategy was to lure the Brits out the port cities into the countryside and then avoid battle with them. In due time it would wear the Brits down and they would give up, which is what happened. Washington fought something like 9 major battles and lost 6.
As for how many today would follow in the steps of our forefathers, I seriously doubt we would do much better percentage wise than they did with all of the sheep out there. We seem to have a good percentage of people who would rather trade their rights and the rights of the rest of us for a nanny state.
Mata, Aye, Skookum, John Cooper, Retire and Wordsmith: Thank you all for your kind comments. I enjoy history much, much more now than I did when I was in school – unfortunately.
And Mata, I agree with you. It is sad that on this great day in our country’s history Ivan is unable to refrain from bad mouthing his country or fellow countrymen.
@anticsrocks:
Ivan believes that we, here, who criticize Obama and the liberal/progressive left in this country are somehow giving a pass on the right. He could not be more wrong. I have witnessed numerous posters here, whom Ivan has criticized and lambasted, criticizing the right for actions and legislation that furthers the liberal/progressive agendas, or their lack of action to prevent it.
They certainly recognized that they had a unique situation before them. What nation in history, at that time, ever had the opportunity for citizens to create their own structure of governance? Now, of course, it’s happening in other countries… Iraq is one prime example of a nation that had their “founding fathers and framers” opportunity. And, in some ways, they had the advantage of a rough template of ideas that was created by the Continental Congress 235 years ago.
@Ivan:
You continually misrepresent my positions, on the differences in the two major parties, and on government in general. You are, in effect, Greg, from the opposite spectrum. Your assertions of me, and many others here, as somehow supporting Republicans, without any reservation of their policies and stated goals, is entirely inexcusable.
I have stated to you, many times, that I hold liberal/progressive leaning Republicans at fault for the direction of the country, just as I do the Democrats, yet you continue to argue as if I, and others here, blindly support the Republican proposals simply because the majority of articles and comments here on FA are decidedly anti-Obama, or anti-Democrat.
You are not telling us something we do not know, Ivan. The only reason that we confront you on your comments is that they are aggressively confrontational when there exists no reason for them to be.
Here is just an example of a comment of mine, to Greg, on his misrepresentation of conservative principles;
I would suggest that you get off your high horse that you continue to attempt in riding roughshod over us conservative voices here, and engage in productive debate, rather than continue to criticize the very people who are attempting, in our own small way, to inform the people. Criticism of the Republican party is ok. Assuming that the conservative voices here are blind to it is not, particularly when we’ve shown, by numerous posts and articles, the contrary of your assumption.
anticsrocks wrote: “It is sad that on this great day in our country’s history Ivan is unable to refrain from bad mouthing his country or fellow countrymen. ”
It’s a clear case of Oikophobia
@johngalt:
Sorry we disagree. If you don’t like my analysis than I don’t know what to say. I don’t impress you, you don’t impress me. BFD, I could care less that I don’t float your boat.
But that doesn’t change the fact that I’m underwhelmed by your lack of outrage due to the treason perpetrated upon us by the very people we elect to carry our water on Capital Hill.
I don’t know nor care who Greg is. What I do find telling though is how threatened you are by my comments on you, a man of the center.
I’m Cleon, you’re Pericles.
I suggest you read up on how things worked out for Athens under Pericles’ generalship.
Most of you here are Pericles. Sorry, if the shoe fits, wear it.
Have a good night.
@Ivan: Maybe you ought to stop drinking the Hater-ade Ivanski. I mean you come on here on a post that I wrote to celebrate our great country’s independence and you started, and then continued to pretty much insult not only the folks here, but your fellow countrymen.
You are a sad little man.
@johngalt:
Here, let me help you out on this, or shall I say let me connect the dots with the bovine fecal matter I see.
On a different thread some poster-in the originial thread-discussed how Obama was pushing Socialism down our throats and pointed to the Stimulus, Bailouts and TARP.
Guess what, John, TARP was BUSH’S BABY!!!!! Yes, Obama voted for it as a Senator, but give me a phucking break on that point; BUSH helped push that socialist AGENDA down our throats in the late summer/early fall of 2008.
Yet some how, in some magical manner, the original poster of the thread neglected to mention that BUSH GAVE US THE BANK BAILOUT.
Too me it was just another in a long string of neo-con, Rino-apologists re-writing history.
Sorry, when my BS detector goes off I point it out. You don’t like it, John? Well I guess you can complain to Curt about my pointing out that the king has no clothes, but aside from that I’m not going to stop correcting the vile revisionism that I frequently see on the web.
Have a good night, John.
@anticsrocks: Sorry, care to point out where I’m wrong? Start with response #2.
Btw, when my “fellow countrymen” are wrong, or not manning-up, I’ll point it out.
You got a problem with that? Or is it only “okay” to rag on the moronic Obama voters, but not our “republican allies” from the great state of New York?
Go ahead, try and “reach across the isle” with them and grow that “big tent” all night long.
@anticsrocks:
Can I quote you on that? You ever ragged on your “fellow countrymen” for electing someone you didn’t like?
Everyone here does it day-in and day-out. Please, spare me.
@Ivan:
*hands Ivan a crying towel*
Grow up…
@anticsrocks:
Well, you seem to be full of ad hominem attacks tonight. Why not go after my comments starting with post #2.
Attack the argument, not the man. Or can you not refute my arguments? I think not!
@Ivan: I did attack your argument. You took a piss all over your fellow countrymen and, as I said many of the folks here on FA, and I called you on it.
You said, [emphasis mine]:
Okay, let me educate you.
First of all, you are giving your opinion when you say, think. Hard to refute an opinion.
Secondly, you assert most American would side with the “torries.” (your horrid spelling, not mine) This is a false statement. What it seems like you meant was that most Americans would side with the Brits, thus making them Tories.
Lastly, I will not even begin to address the use of a fictional device used to transport 300 plus million people from 2011 to 1776.
Telling you to grow up is not an ad hominem attack. It is an instruction that you might pay attention to.
Can I clear up anything else for you tonight?
@anticsrocks:
Sorry to disagree with your “naration” of events, but they are wrong. All I said was that there was no way we could muster the same outrage against a tyrannical government that we did in the past.
Did I take umbrage against **some** of my “fellow countrymen”, YOU’RE DAMN STRAIGHT I DO. But not all.
Now, try to attack my argument, not me.
Hear, let me be crystal clear for you: I’d say only the current military and former military are worth a spit to our Republic.
I have little opinion of the rest.
For Goodness sakes, I had no idea Ivan was a Greek scholar; but who would guess with such harsh euphemisms, an obvious contradiction of the usual euphony of a classic Greek scholar whose sounds within prose are so pleasing to the ear, certainly he has no knowledge of the meiosis so admired and appreciated in Greek discourse; indeed, Ivan relies almost excessively on the epiplexis form of argument, meant to shame an opponent, but to be effective, the user must have a fair command of the material; otherwise, he portrays himself to be but a boor or a fool.
Ivan has selected the world as his antagonist and he as the protagonist of limited letters. His protasis is thrust upon us non-Greek scholars with a periphrasis that astounds us not with intellectual preconceptions, or the Latinistic syntax of Milton, or the psedo-biblical rhythms of Hemingway, or informative archaisms of Melville; no not at all, our Greek scholar entreats us with his own idiosyncratic element of style. It is the “Call me Ivan” in your face antagonism of the mob. A mob of thousands is frightening, a mob of one is laughable.
@Ivanski: Odd how you are silent on your #2 post. I guess its no fun when your main point gets blown out of the water like that.
Poor fellow.
@Skookum: Your eloquence at elucidating the tactics of our resident troll is a pure joy to read. Ivanski is seen as both a boor and a fool. He makes fantastical claims that he cannot back up, and then hides behind the argument that it is his opinion and we should deal with it.
The way he attacks fellow conservatives reminds me of a David Brooks, who is basically a useful idiot of the left. Ivan fits right into that mold quite nicely.
.
.
@Ivan:
Typical answers that I’d expect from you, Ivan. Again, you misrepresent my positions, and instead get back on your high horse of lecturing me against the evils of the Republican party. Did you not read my linked comments from #36? Apparently not, as you then insist that I don’t show enough outrage. Sorry that my attention in the recent years has been taken up by the liberal/progressives in charge, instead of the “other party”.
Once again I ask that you not misrepresent my positions, by stating things that I have not said, or even hinted at. Doing so simply shows that you are more concerned with being confrontational, rather than having a serious debate.
@Ivan
I have to admit that I am at a loss to understanding your intent in your postings here on FA. It seems to be mainly diatribe declarations that (to paraphrase) “few conservatives are conservative enough for you, and that because of that, they might as well be progressives. Because, by not meeting your unspecified, intractable, idealistic, conservative, dogmatic, positions, they do not measure up and are thus, complacent enablers. ”
Perhaps instead of attacking everyone, you could instead clarify what you consider as important in the embodiment of your conservative ideal. Does any current conservative meet your standards?
I hold that the only way to defeat the progressives, is to join together in a common purpose to restore the America envisioned by the best of the founders. Striking out at everyone who doesn’t quite measure up to your standard, thwarts the main purpose and is completely counterproductive.
On the other hand, perhaps that is exactly why you are here. To create friction amongst those who would band together.