by BurnTheShips 55 Replies latest jw friends
Stilla,
Judging from the reactions of Republicans on thisBoard, it is because they never let a fact get in the way of a decent rant.Bit of a sweeping statement HS even by your standards
Really. Perhaps you are right. Sweeping statements are often very close to the bone, but if you would like to prove me wrong you are welcome. ;)
HS
Really. Perhaps you are right. Sweeping statements are often very close to the bone, but if you would like to prove me wrong you are welcome. ;)
I know better than that HS
IF I hadn't had to work this afternoon I would have been here sooner, and thus beat Nvr to
Ignorance is bliss
I've linked Washington's farewell address and pointed out the part where he talks about the problems with the "spirit of party", and it was ignored just as well as your talking about Federalist #10, Dawg, but what the heck I'll link his farewell address again.
Washington's 1796 Farewell Address
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
I think Ann Coulter is THE PERFECT example of a Republican.....AND a cross-dresser! (Check out her Adam's Apple)
Interesting! Any ideas why?
PRINCETON, NJ -- Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats or independents to rate their mental health as excellent,
Because Republicans are stupid and full of shxt.
There spokesman is Rush Limbaugh and their hero is George Bush.
INdependent is the way to be.
Republicans perceive having mental problems as a weakness. They are afraid of going insane.
Republicans Report Much Better Mental Health Than Others
Yes, but what do the mental health professionals say in their reports about Republicans?
Cog
I was reading a book earlier today that said 'compassionate conservative' was first used by Orrin Hatch around '81 and that Bush used the phrase strictly for the alliterative effect and the facade it gave that he supported the religious conservative base he needed to get elected.
The same book went on to say that former liberals formed the basis for neo-cons. As in Irving Kristol and Rupert Murdoch. I had to put the book down and think about that one for a while because it messed with my head a bit. That's almost like someone being in an ultra-conservative religion and then through some sort of change turning into a liberal atheist. It just can't happen.
I may need a mental health pro to help me finish the book.
That's almost like someone being in an ultra-conservative religion and then through some sort of change turning into a liberal atheist. It just can't happen.
Oh really? I think that it can!
Cog
