gftChris Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 I will stay home if Hillary and Cruz end up being the two chosen to fight over the presidency. And potentially consider relocating to Canada... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 And potentially consider relocating to Canada... Nah I am not one of those whiners. I will just crab about it for four years and hope the next run of candidates aren't dog shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Romeny didn't really care for... But I hate Hillary, won't vote for her, if she is the dem candidate I may vote rep(depending who they end up throwing on the ticket). Oh I just meant that it seemed like the left preferred him before he got the nomination. Like they seemed to prefer John McCain. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Posted Today, 10:06 AM Romeny didn't really care for... But I hate Hillary, won't vote for her, if she is the dem candidate I may vote rep(depending who they end up throwing on the ticket). Sad ****************************************** Well, crap, now i have to go back and cross you off my "liberal" list again. dammit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 If it's Cruz vs Hilary, Hilary will win, IMO, and probably for the reasons that some people suspected Obama won. Whereas Obama won because he was a 'fresh' candidate (again, IMO), rather than for being black, there's nothing fresh about another Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Posted Today, 10:06 AM Romeny didn't really care for... But I hate Hillary, won't vote for her, if she is the dem candidate I may vote rep(depending who they end up throwing on the ticket). Sad ****************************************** Well, crap, now i have to go back and cross you off my "liberal" list again. dammit. I'm sure you'll disagree with him on something soon enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Posted Today, 10:06 AM Romeny didn't really care for... But I hate Hillary, won't vote for her, if she is the dem candidate I may vote rep(depending who they end up throwing on the ticket). Sad ****************************************** Well, crap, now i have to go back and cross you off my "liberal" list again. dammit. I was worried for a second....then I remembered the date today... you almost got me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Hey now, that wasn't an April fools thing, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 If the world somehow turned upside down and James Webb got the Democrat nomination it would be worth the gas to drive to the polls. As far as Republican candidates perhaps Rand Paul If Jeb Bush gets the Republican nomination expect another beatdown - Unless it's Hillary and she turns even more unlikeable and shrewlike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Is Free Market Capitalism an oxymoron? In terms of today's (or past for that matter) capitalism I would say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Is Free Market Capitalism an oxymoron? In terms of today's (or past for that matter) capitalism I would say so. Oxymoron, not having some sort of check and balance(regulation) usually has a period of growth, large monopoly(ies), and then a collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Could we say that the War Between The States switched the nation from an agrarian/free market economy to a much more industrialized capitalist system? And did WWII do the same thing to an even greater degree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Could we say that the War Between The States switched the nation from an agrarian/free market economy to a much more industrialized capitalist system? And did WWII do the same thing to an even greater degree? Not really that would imply that the States were primarily following the Jeffersonian(mostly found in the south) agrarian principals and not the Hamilton(North) industry\trade which was one of the reasons for the civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 Not really that would imply that the States were primarily following the Jeffersonian(mostly found in the south) agrarian principals and not the Hamilton(North) industry\trade which was the main reason for the war, along with taxes.... True, but look at how things "exploded' after the war, with heavy industrialization, railroads, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 1, 2015 Report Share Posted April 1, 2015 True, but look at how things "exploded' after the war, with heavy industrialization, railroads, etc. But only really in the Northern states, which was less a change in ideology post civil war, and more of an indication of the large influx of immigration, railroads\canals connecting the area now called the "bread basket" to the urban east, etc. The south sightly changed their ideals from agrarian to sharecropping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 2, 2015 Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 I would also add that had we followed agrarianism we would be closer to communism then capitalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2015 Under the topic of "there is always something I can learn" "Here are a couple of simple truths, unknown to presidents and Supreme Court justices. Before the War Between the States, “United States” was always a plural in every legal document and public discussion. The United States are, not the United States is, was the universal usage, as in the Constitution itself. Second, nobody today ever calls the Constitution by its correct name, which is, as it says, “a Constitution for the United States”—not “the U.S. Constitution” or “the Constitution of the United States.”" - Prof. Clyde Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 Jefferson in his 1st Inaugural in 1801 addressed the machinations of Pickering, Ames, Cabot, Wolcott and the rest of the Junto aching for secession. He proclaimed they could leave without threat of military opposition and he would wish them well. For Jefferson was the true federalist, not them. And in years to come, 1804, 1807, 1812, and 1814, out of their inbred sense of superiority, spiritual privilege and strident parochialism expressing as nationalism, the Junto would grow an inspired movement for secession to create a Northern Confederation. This Junto, formidably experienced leaders with a following in and outside New England, rose from the political, social, economic and religious foundations of New England, to make her the True Mother of Disunion. http://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/review/a-sympathy-for-disunion/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 I would also add that had we followed agrarianism we would be closer to communism then capitalism. You could draw that conclusion, but I wouldn't. If one followed Early Kentucky's system I could envision a combination of democracy and soft socialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 8, 2015 Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 You could draw that conclusion, but I wouldn't. If one followed Early Kentucky's system I could envision a combination of democracy and soft socialism. We would have basically been what china was 30-40 years ago economically, large agriculture with little industry, we could have still had a democracy under a not quite communistic economy(it would not have been true communism since land would have stayed with the farmer and not gov't). One of the Ideals of Agrarianism is the thought that for a person to be free, that person would be someone who is self sufficient growing enough food for themselves and taking the extra to market. Though without a stronger Federal government we would never attacked Mexico, and Texas would have either stayed a part of Mexico or an independent nation. Not sure where you were trying to go with your other post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 The north and midwest would have industrialized whether or not the South followed an agrarian path. The piece from Abbeyville is independent of this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sadbrownsfan Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 The north and midwest would have industrialized whether or not the South followed an agrarian path. The piece from Abbeyville is independent of this discussion. I was going more if the whole country followed an agrarian path instead of following the path it did, more industry in the north, agrarian in the south, pre-civil war to mostly industry through out post civil war. Makes sense then...was trying to fit it in with more of the discussions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 Ah! The differences between the world that should be and the world that is. an Example http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-same-sex-marriage-should-be-constitutional-right-n342131 Hillary Clinton: Same-Sex Marriage Should Be a 'Constitutional Right' In an apparent shift from comments last summer, Hillary Clinton is urging the Supreme Court to rule to allow same-sex couples nationwide to marry, calling it a "constitutional right." If one bets on SCOTUS cases, put your money on SCOTUS using an ever broader interpretation of the 14th amendment to grant this as an equal right and privilege. Will any of the SCOTUS justices perform a word search for the word "marriage" in the constitution, and when it is not found then apply the 9th and 10th amendments? Don't hold your breath..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted April 16, 2015 Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 Fill in the blank: The _ _ _ _ _ were the first slaves brought en masse to the America's by the Europeans. http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian-hercules/the-irish-slave-trade-forgotten-white-slaves/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Baltimore Prior to Cromwell, the Brits were not the only ones in on the Irish Slave Trade http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Baltimore Algerians? Perhaps Africans or African Americans owe reparations to the Irish? Or should we perish the notion of reparations as punishing the sons for the sins of the fathers? A note - Baltimore and other Irish cities, raided for slaves became nearly unpopulated for a long time afterwards. (over a Century according to some sources) and people here belittle Obama for his "anti colonial" leanings. If you take the time, even just 10 or so minutes, to read about the old empire....you can't help but despise and loathe them "if" you have any decent bone in your body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 I judge Obama for his actions and the things he says. It has little or nothing to do with the dreams of his father. And once we divested ourselves of Great Britain, why should their colonial actions matter? From that point on it would be 'Murricans charting their course, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted April 16, 2015 Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 I judge Obama for his actions and the things he says. It has little or nothing to do with the dreams of his father. And once we divested ourselves of Great Britain, why should their colonial actions matter? From that point on it would be 'Murricans charting their course, right? So long as we're not repeating their "colonial mistakes" right? There was a certain way that the old empire viewed people around the world...that they knew what was best for them. Sound familiar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 16, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 I would say that Obama acts based on his opinion that he knows more about what is best for you than you do. That's not exclusive to colonialism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted April 16, 2015 Report Share Posted April 16, 2015 I would say that Obama acts based on his opinion that he knows more about what is best for you than you do. That's not exclusive to colonialism. I don't know about that but maybe you're right. What I do know is that the U.S has launched wars that cost countless lives based on the notion that they knew what was best for another society than those people themselves. Even the British, long past their empire days, still thought that way...look at how they arbitrarily created Iraq and Syria with "zero" deference to the demographical makeup of the people. They just though arabs are arabs who cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Every time I watch Escape From New York on late night TV I ask myself "Why not do this in parts of Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland and the entirety of Washington, DC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted April 24, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Every time I watch Escape From New York on late night TV I ask myself "Why not do this in Ferguson, Missouri and parts of Detroit, Chicago, Cleveland and the entirety of Washington, DC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.