Thomas Jefferson - still relevant

[richlevy]

I was rereading Jefferson's first inaugural address.

During the contest of opinion through which we have passed the animation of discussions and of exertions has sometimes worn an aspect which might impose on strangers unused to think freely and to speak and to write what they think; but this being now decided by the voice of the nation, announced according to the rules of the Constitution, all will, of course, arrange themselves under the will of the law, and unite in common efforts for the common good. All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

Translation: The Constitution guarantees the right to speak and write freely. Some people aren't used to this. Just because the majority rules, they aren't allowed to be jerks about it.

Let us, then, fellow-citizens, unite with one heart and one mind. Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect that, having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long-lost liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others, and should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We have called by different names brethren of the same principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. I know, indeed, that some honest men fear that a republican government can not be strong, that this Government is not strong enough; but would the honest patriot, in the full tide of successful experiment, abandon a government which has so far kept us free and firm on the theoretic and visionary fear that this Government, the world's best hope, may by possibility want energy to preserve itself? I trust not. I believe this, on the contrary, the strongest Government on earth. I believe it the only one where every man, at the call of the law, would fly to the standard of the law, and would meet invasions of the public order as his own personal concern. Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the forms of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question.

Translation: If there are those who confuse democracy (actually a republic) with weakness and pine for the good old days of the monarchy, don't beat them up.

I have this image of Jefferson striding into the studio during one of Glenn Beck's pseudo-educational rants and basically telling him that he's got it all wrong but not to worry - the Constitution enshrines and protects every man's right to be an idiot.

[Lamplighter]

Very entertaining and remarkably veracious commentary

[W.HI.P]

Since we're quoting Thomas:

"If the American people ever allow private banks
to control the issue of their money,
first by inflation and then by deflation,
the banks and corporations that will
grow up around them (around the banks),
will deprive the people of their property
until their children will wake up homeless
on the continent their fathers conquered."

[Lamplighter]

Sorry WHIP, Snopes says this quote is false

I'm not sure there were things called "corporations" in his time,
but then maybe there were. Something to check out.

[W.HI.P]

There are dozens of Jefferson's quotes, that state the exact same thing.
Just as George Washington did, Thomas warns future American's of the situation American's are now living in

""The system of banking we have both equally and ever reprobated. I contemplate it as a blot left in all our constitutions, which, if not covered, will end in their destruction, which is already hit by the gamblers in corruption, and is sweeping away in its progress the fortunes and morals of our citizens.""

Snopes claim that is is false, seems to be false

[W.HI.P]

The following of course, is that of a constitution, who's purpose, has not been upheld.

"And what country can preserve its liberties, if the rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms"

[Lamplighter]

Originally Posted by W.HI.P

There are dozens of Jefferson's quotes, that state the exact same thing.
Just as George Washington did, Thomas warns future American's of the situation American's are now living in

""The system of banking we have both equally and ever reprobated. I contemplate it as a blot left in all our constitutions, which, if not covered, will end in their destruction, which is already hit by the gamblers in corruption, and is sweeping away in its progress the fortunes and morals of our citizens.""

Snopes claim that is is false, seems to be false

Strange, Snopes doesn't seem to have this quote at all

But I did find it in another source... Hooray !

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by richlevy

I was rereading Jefferson's first inaugural address.

Translation: The Constitution guarantees the right to speak and write freely. Some people aren't used to this. Just because the majority rules, they aren't allowed to be jerks about it.

Translation: If there are those who confuse democracy (actually a republic) with weakness and pine for the good old days of the monarchy, don't beat them up.

I have this image of Jefferson striding into the studio during one of Glenn Beck's pseudo-educational rants and basically telling him that he's got it all wrong but not to worry - the Constitution enshrines and protects every man's right to be an idiot.

It is this very difference between a democracy and a republic to which Jefferson is referring to.

[Shawnee123]

What if it walks like a dick?

[TheMercenary]

When we lived in Hawaii all the Filipinos did the yard work, everywhere. They don't have a problem there either. All the Japs owned all the property.

[TheMercenary]

It was not "palming a card", it was a question of degree. You support A, does that mean you support every extreme of the situation?

[classicman]

Here is a video for you...
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4000446n

Or you can read this article
or this one

read what you like here as well

Lastly I'll offer you this piece
...all done with a simple Google search in under 10 minutes.

Nothing new - this has been going on for over a decade.

Personally, I do not see this as a ploy by Merc, definitely one used by some illegal illegals though. It is just an inconvenient reality for some.

[TheMercenary]

I agree, but with the exception of the actually "drop and stay". Or "stay and drop", which ever you prefer...

It's true that many illegal immigrants are having children in the U.S. However, we are not convinced that "drop and leave" is a phenomenon. The data suggests that the motivator for illegal immigrants is the search for work and a better economic standing over the long term, not quickie citizenship for U.S.-born babies.

Bottom line is this:

These statistics suggest not only that the number is large, but is also growing.

To offer a concrete example, we found a 2006 article from the Dallas Morning News about Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas, a safety-net facility for poor residents. As many of 70 percent of the roughly 16,000 women giving birth annually at the hospital were immigrants who were in the U.S. illegally, according to one survey cited in the story.

I see it more as another wedge issue by Republickins but it has validity if you have concerns about stemming the tide of illegal immigration, which I do, and if you do not support whole scale amnesty programs, and I do not.

(all from link #4 above)

[TheMercenary]

I would also add that we should bill their home country for the care they receive. Because they do not have insurance and generally cannot pay for the care, so bill their government.

[jinx]

Makes no sense that illegals are automatically treated to the standard drugged up 2 day stay at border hospitals to begin with. If I can drop a kid drug-free and leave within 12 hours of arrival why can't most of them? Save the hospital stay for the ones that actually need it. Makes at least 10 thousand dollars difference per mom right there.