America's Founding Fathers Were Liberals - Fact or Myth?

CPT Jack Durish - I feel your memory is selective. I challenge you to find a single call for impeachment before Hillary conceded the election. You made the claim, now demonstrate what you say is true and not not normal partisan bullshit you like to spread around.

You ask, "Was ever there any such action upon the election of President Obama", but do you even consider those making the claim Obama wasn't a U.S. citizen. That would be an impeachable offense. I know, I know .. you will throw the false narrative that Hillary stared that, but plenty of "conservatives" picked up the ball and ran with it even BEFORE he was elected.

And "political correctness" is not an infringement of "free speech". Your right of free speech protects you from sanction from the government. Not from other people. It does not entitle you to a platform. But you feel entitled for some reason, so you will stretch that right to what you feel it should be... for you, but not for others who have opinions as well. Opinions you are more than happy to sensor if they don't comport with your world view.

Of course you are one of those that likes to trot out "... against all enemies foreign and domestic" while you watch a *president who is obviously compromised by a foreign adversary while he does their bidding. And you make excuses for him and rationalize his actions. Many forget what comes after that line in the oath, to bear "true faith" and allegiance to the same. You should try it sometimes, and not just pick and chose those parts of the Constitution you happen to like.

CPT Jack Durish - I'm admittedly late to the party, but I wanted to mention that I agree with your assessment of Wilson, of the "progressive" movement and its enthusiasm for using prescriptions and proscriptions, enforced by an ever-expanding state (at the cost of personal liberties), to chase some illusory ideal world where there is equality of outcomes, regardless of input. That isn't just a recipe for failure, it's a recipe that the Founding Fathers would not have recognized. And the Founding Fathers were, by any definition, liberals, having been steeped in Enlightenment philosophy, and rejecting traditions and mores that stifled liberties, such as hereditary aristocracy, social stratification and feudalism. Some of the FFs veered close to what we'd call "progressivism" (I'm looking at YOU, Tom Paine), but Franklin, Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson? Liberals to the core. Glad to see that we agree on that.

Where I differ with you is perhaps semantic, but I don't see much overlap in the Venn Diagram of "progressive" and "liberal" circles. You seem to be suggesting that liberals and progressives are the same thing, or that "classical liberals" (of whom I consider myself a member) aren't "real" liberals, or that modern liberals aren't "real" classical liberals, or perhaps something else entirely. If that's the case, I suspect it's due to classical liberals not being a high-visibility group; they don't provide the necessarily partisan or polemic soundbites that the media craves and focuses on. For decades now, if someone declared "I am a humanist who stands for maximum liberties for individuals, I reject the hegemony of kings and popes, and I declare the primacy of the individual over the state" it would've been met with indifference. When the Founding Fathers said it, it caused a stir. But today? It lacks the desired sizzle. The media wants to focus on provoking outrage by highlighting efforts to install transgender bathrooms in kindergartens, or to install Ten Commandments in courthouses.

But *this* liberal would take exception to being tarred with the same brush as progressives (I demand my own brush, made from American fibers, dammit!). I get it why the media does this; they don't care about making such distinctions. And I get it when politicians conflate the two groups, since their goal is to demonize anyone who isn't on-board with them; true liberals can seem suspiciously laissez-faire rather than partisan.

I do think that it's important to distinguish between the two camps, just as I'm sure that there are many good conservatives who want no truck with far-Right / alt-Right groups. So perhaps it's time for an effort to reclaim the legitimacy of "liberal". Hell, it's got something for everyone! Who doesn't like liberty? Who doesn't believe in a meritocracy? Who doesn't want to respect and emulate the FFs? Who doesn't like thumbing their nose at self-appointed "elites"? I say liberals -- actual LIBERAL liberals, should reclaim the term and be proud of it. Our ancestors didn't kick the British out of the Colonies so we could all go back to worshiping at the altar of tradition; they did it to secure the very freedoms that liberalism embodies. Perhaps if more folks to the Right of center knew what it actually meant, they would find more common ground with it than they'd think.

MSgt Steve Sweeney
They believe in all of their leftist lies.
Demonrats passed the laws and enforced some of the most harsh prison sentences ever, as well as the death penalty.
https://amp.swtimes.com/amp/42242325

MSgt Steve Sweeney
Abortionists have killed more unborn people than all of the wars the USA has ever been involved in and the covid19 virus combined. As someone who was given up for adoption in 1967, I greatly oppose the murder of millions of unwanted babies just because it might be an inconvenience to someone that made the choice to have sex with their body and then don't want to take any responsibility for it.
https://www.mdch.state.mi.us/osr/abortion/Tab_US.asp

Also, liberal vs. progressives?

Modern liberal & progressives are synonymous. Hard to differentiate from communists & fascists

Sgt Wayne Wood - Are you joking? Did you not study history? Communists were the extremists of the Left - to share everything blah blah, then socialism was that but more moderate. (Little of either of these two has ever realistically been implemented.) Fascists were and are the extremists of the Right! Totalitarian dictators, a number of them are admired by Pres. Trump - Duterte, Xi, Kim, Putin - he does not deny this: he likes fascists. In the latest recordings from July 2109, he asks Bob Woodward why, in his , Trum['s, relationships with authoritarian leaders "the tougher and meaner they are, the better I get along with them". This is fascism - if you're nice to the Leader, he won't punish you. In other words, there is NO freedom, no place that The Leader cannot overrule the rule of Law, as we are seeing Trump do repeatedly.
All of your words do not reflect the reality that we are objectively living. Repeating something continuously does not make it right or true, nor remove the lie of it. Please stop arguing by assertion - it is necessary that you prove what you say, otherwise it is *merely your belief*. If you are willing to argue by facts and look at evidence, I would be shocked, but certainly willing to do it. Please understand there is video to back up all i will argue, and that is a good standard. That means that I would expect such evidence on all that you assert - please bring such evidence to your assertions and let us determine these issues through looking at reality and the data.

Reasonable. Not sure who's supposed to deal with the alt-right though. They're a separate category of jerkfaces.