No they want to bring back the good old days of the 1950’s when:
women stayed home all day
smoking was legal every where
a candidates belief in god had no bearing on their electability
and most importantly
THE TOP TAX RATE WAS 70%
200 years ago only land owning Freemen were allowed to vote. That pretty much meant very wealthy white men that spoke and read the Kings English.
Women, people of color, landless white men, indentured servants and slaves were not considered worthy or capable of voting.
The most extreme of the TEA party seem to think this would be a good idea today. Most of the TEA party want all the benefits of government without taxes, or representation with no taxation.
Do a little more research there napaeric. Your general starting premise is correct, you conclusions are not. At one point in time the richest man in Virginia was in fact a freed black man. In some states coloreds could vote. Also, most every man owned land, not like the ever popular renting (or liberals bussing in homeless people to try and get them to vote Democrat). In fact, many indentured servants also owned property where they themselves had slaves and servants working while working for another land owner. There were also many government officials and judges that were in fact colored, this in the 1700s and 1800s. Don’t be blinded by partisanship and ideology.
Allow history to speak its own truth, in fullness, and then draw logical, consistent and objective conclusions from them. If those things run contrary to your ideology, then your ideology is wrong (whether that be conservative or the more probably liberal or lefty).
Yukoneric almost 14 years ago
No, Donkey (ASs) riding
Totalloser Premium Member almost 14 years ago
No they want to bring back the good old days of the 1950’s when: women stayed home all day smoking was legal every where a candidates belief in god had no bearing on their electability and most importantly THE TOP TAX RATE WAS 70%
napaeric almost 14 years ago
200 years ago only land owning Freemen were allowed to vote. That pretty much meant very wealthy white men that spoke and read the Kings English. Women, people of color, landless white men, indentured servants and slaves were not considered worthy or capable of voting. The most extreme of the TEA party seem to think this would be a good idea today. Most of the TEA party want all the benefits of government without taxes, or representation with no taxation.
DJGravityX almost 14 years ago
Do a little more research there napaeric. Your general starting premise is correct, you conclusions are not. At one point in time the richest man in Virginia was in fact a freed black man. In some states coloreds could vote. Also, most every man owned land, not like the ever popular renting (or liberals bussing in homeless people to try and get them to vote Democrat). In fact, many indentured servants also owned property where they themselves had slaves and servants working while working for another land owner. There were also many government officials and judges that were in fact colored, this in the 1700s and 1800s. Don’t be blinded by partisanship and ideology.
Allow history to speak its own truth, in fullness, and then draw logical, consistent and objective conclusions from them. If those things run contrary to your ideology, then your ideology is wrong (whether that be conservative or the more probably liberal or lefty).
ponytail56 almost 14 years ago
confound a liberal use facts and logic when you argue
MisngNOLA almost 14 years ago
Or simply by reading historical documents.
DJGravityX almost 14 years ago
I don’t think they make blogs in paper back…