
Romney
- callmeslick
- Posts: 16473
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:02 pm
- Location: Fearing and loathing in Delaware and Virginia.
Re: Romney
actually, if you read what the founders wrote, inequity in commerce was a concern. Further, since the Founders went out of the way in the Constitution to include Article 5, which implies that they WANTED the document to evolve as needed. Change, with a huge amount of measures to make sure QUICK change didn't occur was the essential cornerstone of the foundation of the US.Barfly wrote:Income balancing? You gotta be fuggin' kidding me. lol. It wasn't much of a concern? How about it wasn't a concern AT ALL. You're just hedging your 'guess'. Also, saying you think the founding principles of this country were intended to evolve, is a polite or deceptive way of saying you don't agree with them.callmeslick wrote:you see, Pud, Buzz is showing concern for others. As am I. A fundamental difference from folks who THINK this nation was founded on principles that couldn't evolve with time. Limited government was the only option in an isolated former colony, and income balancing wasn't much of a concern when there was an entire frontier for men to head towand and make their fortune or at least secure a future for their families. Welcome to the modern, globalized, industrial world.
You may wish to take a history course or two and find out what drove the founders to design what they did. They were bright fellows, bright enough to realize that the nation would change in nature as PROGRESS occurred. These were men who saw huge progress in their lifetimes, and the knew the future would continue to do so.
- callmeslick
- Posts: 16473
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:02 pm
- Location: Fearing and loathing in Delaware and Virginia.
Re: Romney
follow up: What was the FIRST THING that the initial Congress did within the framework of the Constitution? Amend it. Not once, but ten times, creating the Bill of Rights. That should settle the whole matter of who doesn't believe in the founding principles, eh, Barfly?
Re: Romney
Another example of why you're always wrong.HappyHappy wrote:"BUZZ" and "Callmeslick" are the same "person".
HH
- callmeslick
- Posts: 16473
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:02 pm
- Location: Fearing and loathing in Delaware and Virginia.
Re: Romney
well, Buzz, we do both fish and hunt(you for big, leggy things, me for feathery quacking things), but that pretty well ends matters.
Isn't it amazing how Happy and others can be wrong with such consistency?
Isn't it amazing how Happy and others can be wrong with such consistency?
Re: Romney
So, prove the obvious?
Connect us in the slightest way other than we both post on the same forum?
I think that we're posting at the same time from different states should have some meaning to you.
Connect us in the slightest way other than we both post on the same forum?
I think that we're posting at the same time from different states should have some meaning to you.
- callmeslick
- Posts: 16473
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:02 pm
- Location: Fearing and loathing in Delaware and Virginia.
Re: Romney
Happy is an idiot, and makes it obvious regularly.
Nitwit, try reading back over the archives of this forum. You will see that Buzz and I are hardly clones or even think alike all that often.
Nitwit, try reading back over the archives of this forum. You will see that Buzz and I are hardly clones or even think alike all that often.
Re: Romney
Besides, Slick is bald. 
