In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 501
Online now 1630 Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)
The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web
The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts
"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion
"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion
This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion
The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets
For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
This is the first step toward another comound meltdown --> banning.
I must be crazy to be in a loony bin like this.
If I'm wrong about my history, then why don't you POINT OUT WHERE I AM WRONG WITH SOMETHING FACTUAL.
Saying you are "sick of retards going around spewing BS" is not a substantive response. If you're so god damn smart and knowledgable than provide some facts genius.
What is your definition of progressive?
I am using the word "progressive" the same way that people like Woodrow Wilson, Margarat Sanger, George Bernard Shaw, etc, etc used "progressive" before the United States figured out that they were repulsed by "progressives" and they decided to call themselves "liberal". Then people got repulsed by "liberals" and you guys started calling yourselves "progressives"
Do you not like being called a progressive now? It wasn't that long ago that Libs liked to be called "progressives". Tell you what, figure out what you want to be called and stick with it.
On July 23, 2007, CNN and YouTube partnered to sponsor the first Democratic primary debate of the 2008 election cycle. Questions were asked by citizens from around the country by uploading personal videos to the YouTube website.
No, I asked you first. You accused me of spouting "fake history". Disprove what I said before you go asking me questions.
Yes, you said that my version of history is wrong. Is somebody else more progressive? You said I am wrong. What were you referring to that I am wrong about? It sounds like you don't even know.
8 more posts from the OP. Things must really be going south for him.
How long before another meltdown/"vacation"?
This post was edited by GRR Spartan 2 years ago
Since you are obviously struggling to have an honest debate here, I'll throw you a life preserver even though you have yet to answer my questions.
My definition of "progressive utopia" is this bullshit belief that government can solve our problems. This idea that if only we give government more power to take over health care, to take over energy, to work with banks, to control the money supply, etc, etc, etc, etc, (and to infinity) that life will be better. Despite the fact that anyone who looks at history can easily conclude that powerful governments have only lead to despotism. But none of this matters. No facts, no history, no nothing will ever prove to a certain segment of the population that their efforts to "improve society" are only making things worse.
As far as what did Woodrow Wilson do that was "progressive", you are really only exposing how little you know about history and progressives if you have to even ask this. Woodrow Wilson brought us the income tax. He brought us the federal reserve system. He also signed the 17th amendment which took away representation from the states. As I said, he was one of the most "progressive" Presidents in US history and did a ton of damage to the US constitution in the process.
I answered you. In the meantime you have yet to tell me how my version of history is wrong. Do you ever realize you've been owned and run over?
106 total posts on this thread and 20 are from the OP.
Some folks will go a long way for an argument.
Are you really counting my posts? That's so sad
1) Oh, I don't know. Chairman Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, etc, etc. Do these governments operate as a strong central government, or a weak decentralized one? Read the book "From the Gulags to the Killing Fields" and let me know if the people who suffered and were murdered were murdered at the hands of a powerful government or not. The example of the non progressive Utopia working is the United States. The US has historically been the most free, most successful, and least progressive country in history (changing over the past 100 years, but true nonetheless).
2) If you want to have a semantic debate, then fine. I think you know what I mean though.
3) Yes, of course government has solved problems. I never said otherwise. They also create a lot of messes. Government's purpose is to ensure our liberty, protect our property. Their purpose is not to centrally plan the economy, take over health care, institute "social justice" or anything else. When they do, they create destruction. The "great life" that we all enjoy is from the freedoms we still have, not from government taking things over. Read the book "the 5,000 year leap" and you'll see that it was the constitution that created vast improvements in the quality of life of ordinary people, not big government. Big government has been around a long time.....way before the United States was created.
4) I don't think the constitution is "magical" or "gospel".....but it has ensured more freedom for more people than any other document in history. It is the oldest constitution in the world precisely because it has been the most successful. If you have a better idea, then great. I'm all for it. Let's have an honest debate and you can change the constitution through the amendment process as it was designed for. But I'm not a fan of just doing whatever the hell you want, creating boards and administrations, and subverting the law just because you don't like it.
You are wrong about the constitution being designed to be interpreted broadly. James Madison, father of the constitution, wrote in Federalist # 45 that "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite." If you have a more original source than James Madison, then you let me know. Until then I'll just go with what he says.
Over 20% of the posts on this thread are from the OP.
Bumpity bumpity bump eh?
I already told you. Obamacare is just about as "progressive" as it gets.
This is my thread. If you don't like it then leave.
I'm sure there is some US citizen that you can go harrass because he avoided the draft in the 70's. Go do that. You don't have to be here.
Government running health care? Are you serious? This is the progressive wet dream. How can you be a progressive, yet know so little about progressivism.
Since you are now responding to posts below other posts that have gone unanswered, can I assume this means you concede the point that the US constitution was not intended to be "broadly defined"? Or would that be assumming too much?
So, he finished the job others started? Oh, OK. My favorite part is the wars continuing. Didn't see that one comin'.........
What is that, a Titleist? A hole in one...
more compound2 bumps to his own thread and it still isn't getting him the answers he sought
He is very serious. That's what is so scary.
Good call on Teddy Roosevelt. It's a shame, though, that he will never answer the question.
Compound, would characterize the ACLU as a conservative or a progressive organization?
So it is true that Ted Kennedy finally had his last drink?
You said that the constitution was designed to be broadly interpreted. I pointed out to you that this is not true and I quoted the Federalist Papers which was the argument that was put forward for why the constitution should be approved. I cited an original source document from the primary author of the constitution. Your response was to accuse me of "projecting that quote to today".
Could you be more intellectually dishonest. I proved you wrong 100%. Clearly, you have no interest in having an honest discussion. I'm just about done wasting my time with you now. Now I see why your original argument was to call people "retards". Because it's abundantly clear you have not done your homework.
I don't like Teddy Roosevelt either. I agree that he was a "progressive" just on the Republican side instead of the democrat side. No different than Lindsey Graham or John McCain today.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports