Executive Power and Immunity

[Ivytalk]

I see. So democrats are NOT interested in consolidating and retaining power? Its not part of their ideology?

Hint: It’s a tradition value of POLITICIANS.

You’ve gone full retard.

I was replying too JSO's remarks regarding conservatives hence my Edmund Burke comment who thought it a great harm to allow the commoners the right to vote. He was OG conservative.

If you'd like another example it would be the Loyalists who supported the consolidated power of the British Monarchy (although not always eye to eye with Burke they were conservative)

During much of the 20th century, Republicans were known as the party of big business.

Of course both sides seek power, dummy. Many Democrats are not truly liberal as a result. Remember, Jefferson helped found the Republican Party which later became the Democratic Party but he was also opposed to centralized power.

You mock Burke, but his writings articulate some profound truths that resonate today. Have you read Speech to the Electors at Bristol? It contains one of the best descriptions of the ideal political representative that you’ll find anywhere: a person who listens to but does not slavishly pursue the whims of his or her constituents, and who exercises wisdom and independent judgment. Burke certainly was skeptical of democracy, and rightly so: the tendency to demagoguery, the likelihood of oppression of unpopular groups, and emotional/uninformed voting. We see that all around us in 2019. I have a copy of his Reflections on the Revolution in France in my permanent collection.

[kalm]

I was replying too JSO's remarks regarding conservatives hence my Edmund Burke comment who thought it a great harm to allow the commoners the right to vote. He was OG conservative.

If you'd like another example it would be the Loyalists who supported the consolidated power of the British Monarchy (although not always eye to eye with Burke they were conservative)

During much of the 20th century, Republicans were known as the party of big business.

Of course both sides seek power, dummy. Many Democrats are not truly liberal as a result. Remember, Jefferson helped found the Republican Party which later became the Democratic Party but he was also opposed to centralized power.

You mock Burke, but his writings articulate some profound truths that resonate today. Have you read Speech to the Electors at Bristol? It contains one of the best descriptions of the ideal political representative that you’ll find anywhere: a person who listens to but does not slavishly pursue the whims of his or her constituents, and who exercises wisdom and independent judgment. Burke certainly was skeptical of democracy, and rightly so: the tendency to demagoguery, the likelihood of oppression of unpopular groups, and emotional/uninformed voting. We see that all around us in 2019. I have a copy of his Reflections on the Revolution in France in my permanent collection.

Anytime you run an organization, you realize the selfishness of others, the pitfalls of democracy and the benefits of authoritarianism.

Tough to disagree with this. Good stuff.

"Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests; which interests each must maintain, as an agent and advocate, against other agents and advocates; but parliament is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole; where, not local purposes, not local prejudices, ought to guide, but the general good, resulting from the general reason of the whole. You choose a member indeed; but when you have chosen him, he is not member of Bristol, but he is a member of parliament. If the local constituent should have an interest, or should form an hasty opinion, evidently opposite to the real good of the rest of the community, the member for that place ought to be as far, as any other, from any endeavour to give it effect. I beg pardon for saying so much on this subject. I have been unwillingly drawn into it; but I shall ever use a respectful frankness of communication with you. Your faithful friend, your devoted servant, I shall be to the end of my life: a flatterer you do not wish for."

[Ivytalk]

You mock Burke, but his writings articulate some profound truths that resonate today. Have you read Speech to the Electors at Bristol? It contains one of the best descriptions of the ideal political representative that you’ll find anywhere: a person who listens to but does not slavishly pursue the whims of his or her constituents, and who exercises wisdom and independent judgment. Burke certainly was skeptical of democracy, and rightly so: the tendency to demagoguery, the likelihood of oppression of unpopular groups, and emotional/uninformed voting. We see that all around us in 2019. I have a copy of his Reflections on the Revolution in France in my permanent collection.

Anytime you run an organization, you realize the selfishness of others, the pitfalls of democracy and the benefits of authoritarianism.

Tough to disagree with this. Good stuff.

"Parliament is not a congress of ambassadors from different and hostile interests; which interests each must maintain, as an agent and advocate, against other agents and advocates; but parliament is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole; where, not local purposes, not local prejudices, ought to guide, but the general good, resulting from the general reason of the whole. You choose a member indeed; but when you have chosen him, he is not member of Bristol, but he is a member of parliament. If the local constituent should have an interest, or should form an hasty opinion, evidently opposite to the real good of the rest of the community, the member for that place ought to be as far, as any other, from any endeavour to give it effect. I beg pardon for saying so much on this subject. I have been unwillingly drawn into it; but I shall ever use a respectful frankness of communication with you. Your faithful friend, your devoted servant, I shall be to the end of my life: a flatterer you do not wish for."

Perfect! And Burke is sometimes misrepresented as an apologist for absolute monarchies, when the truth is that he believed in constitutional limits to royal power. He wasn’t a republican by any means, but his theories are more correct than not IMHO.

But you don’t vote for kings!

[CID1990]

If you truly believe your first sentence is purely a conservative approach, then you’ve lost all credibility with me.

And please define “serious issues”. This country has never been healthier. But I’d love to hear what these horrible issues are that are so bad that the left is willing to discard a system that’s worked for 250+ years for one that’s been tried and failed dozens of times across the globe in the past 120 years.

Pissing away blood and treasure to fight wars in half a dozen countries for twenty years?

Borrowing from China to make it continue indefinitely?

I was looking back for your posts making the same criticisms when we decapitated Libya and I oddly can’t find them

How many new adventures have we begun under Trump again? Maybe I missed one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GannonFan]

I see. So democrats are NOT interested in consolidating and retaining power? Its not part of their ideology?

Hint: It’s a tradition value of POLITICIANS.

You’ve gone full retard.

I was replying too JSO's remarks regarding conservatives hence my Edmund Burke comment who thought it a great harm to allow the commoners the right to vote. He was OG conservative.

If you'd like another example it would be the Loyalists who supported the consolidated power of the British Monarchy (although not always eye to eye with Burke they were conservative)

During much of the 20th century, Republicans were known as the party of big business.

Of course both sides seek power, dummy. Many Democrats are not truly liberal as a result. Remember, Jefferson helped found the Republican Party which later became the Democratic Party but he was also opposed to centralized power.

Jefferson wasn't opposed to centralized power, he was opposed to other people having centralized power. He was perfectly fine wielding that power when he got to pull the levers.

[kalm]

I was replying too JSO's remarks regarding conservatives hence my Edmund Burke comment who thought it a great harm to allow the commoners the right to vote. He was OG conservative.

If you'd like another example it would be the Loyalists who supported the consolidated power of the British Monarchy (although not always eye to eye with Burke they were conservative)

During much of the 20th century, Republicans were known as the party of big business.

Of course both sides seek power, dummy. Many Democrats are not truly liberal as a result. Remember, Jefferson helped found the Republican Party which later became the Democratic Party but he was also opposed to centralized power.

Jefferson wasn't opposed to centralized power, he was opposed to other people having centralized power. He was perfectly fine wielding that power when he got to pull the levers.

I doubt he was perfect and everyone gets power drunk with authority. But on the whole are you saying he’s a poor example of the fear of centralized power? Doesn’t some of it have to be chalked up to realism? He struggled mightily with the Louisiana Purchase but it was such a good deal...

[GannonFan]

Jefferson wasn't opposed to centralized power, he was opposed to other people having centralized power. He was perfectly fine wielding that power when he got to pull the levers.

I doubt he was perfect and everyone gets power drunk with authority. But on the whole are you saying he’s a poor example of the fear of centralized power? Doesn’t some of it have to be chalked up to realism? He struggled mightily with the Louisiana Purchase but it was such a good deal...

Yes, I do think he's a poor example of the fear of centralized power. He was a hypocrite, he literally wore the republicanism on his sleeve (or at least his robe) and then was more than happy to use whatever means necessary to maintain his status and power. The Louisiana Purchase isn't even the best example of that, heck, that was basically just being prudent to accept that Napolean was almost giving the continent away. Jefferson was perfectly content to leave the First National Bank in existence once he got to benefit from it (even to the point that his acolyte Madison revived it as the Second National Bank after the charter expired early in Madison's first term), and you can argue that the Embargo Act was the biggest instance of a cenralized federal power grab in America up to that time. But then again, Jefferson was very adept at saying one thing publicly and then doing the opposite privately, so his open profession of republicanism while holding onto centralized power is not terribly surprising.

[houndawg]

Pissing away blood and treasure to fight wars in half a dozen countries for twenty years?

Borrowing from China to make it continue indefinitely?

I was looking back for your posts making the same criticisms when we decapitated Libya and I oddly can’t find them

How many new adventures have we begun under Trump again? Maybe I missed one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How many countries are we fighting in right now?

[JohnStOnge]

How many new adventures have we begun under Trump again? Maybe I missed one

The most recent "new adventures" were associated with the events of 9/11/2001. Trump hasn't had to deal with anything like that. However, I think he is risking a "new adventure" by virtue of the way in which he is handling Iran.

[AZGrizFan]

Pissing away blood and treasure to fight wars in half a dozen countries for twenty years?

Borrowing from China to make it continue indefinitely?

I was looking back for your posts making the same criticisms when we decapitated Libya and I oddly can’t find them

How many new adventures have we begun under Trump again? Maybe I missed one


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Houndy is on a fishing expedition. He knows damned well those weren’t the kind of “serious issues” the OP was bitching about. He also knows the answer to your question and this his post is a giant straw man.

He really has declined in recent years....sad.

[AZGrizFan]

How many new adventures have we begun under Trump again? Maybe I missed one

The most recent "new adventures" were associated with the events of 9/11/2001. Trump hasn't had to deal with anything like that. However, I think he is risking a "new adventure" by virtue of the way in which he is handling Iran.

You’re right. Appeasement works so much better. Ask England and all of Western Europe.