I always find it interesting…….
how people can turn a fiction into fact, or, at least, ignore the rest of the truth to prove they are above the fray. The article being referred to “The Greatest Liberals In American History And What They Did For Our Country” (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/03/the-greatest-liberals-in-american-history-and-what-they-did-for-our-country/) is a prime example of picking and choosing your facts, quotations, arguments, etc.to support your contention regardless of whether or not the conclusion you come to is true.
Although the article itself is well constructed and nicely proofread, it is of course, after all, little more than political commentary which puts a spin on factoids and ignores the content of the entire truth. This manipulation of fact tends to irritate me rather than cause me to embark upon thoughtful reflection and contemplation. Since I do not wish to spend the entire day answering all parts of the article, I will pick the first few “liberals” who happened to be our founding fathers and let my comments attempt to support my conclusion.
The article’s author briefly mentions (though others before him go through great lengths to chastise so-called “Conservatives” for opposing “a healthcare mandate” ) utilizes the ” 1798.CHAP. [94.] An act for the relief of sick and disabled seamen.” as proof that Congress has the power to require every individual citizen to purchase healthcare insurance whether they wish to or not.
Except for the term “Health” there is no resemblance between the insult congress passed in its last session, and the 1798 law for sailors care. That particular law did not levy a federal tax upon the wages of sailors but, rather, levy tax or fee upon the owners and operators of domestic and foreign sailing vessels for each sailor they employed. The law itself specifies that the owners and operators of the vessels are “authorized” NOT REQUIRED, to subtract that amount from each sailors pay on a per month basis (approximately 1% of the sailors then base pay). This is much the same way that my employer picks up 50% of my health care coverage . Note please that the sailors are not required to buy insurance and there is no provision reimbursing them if their pay is ‘too low’.
That the author refers to Jefferson and Washington as Liberals was rather interesting, Same for John Adams.
Gun ownership and opposition to gun control is often seen as a bastion of “Conservatism”. Controlling or forbidding the use of guns is often seen as a Liberal, Progressive, “fill in the blank here” necessity for those who are intelligent, kind, “fill in the affirmative here”. It is interesting to note that one of the liberals in the article referred to, could be presented as proof positive that the politico was a staunch Conservative, Right wing, Wacko, “introduce derogatorycomment here”. To be specific:
“A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” – Thomas Jefferson
Lest we forget that it is this particular “Liberal” that advocated the “blood of patriots” be spilled on a regular basis to provide the “manure of liberty” that would keep our freedoms alive. It is also Jefferson who applauded the Whiskey Rebellion and said that such a rebellion is necessary every 20 or so years. Were I have an opposite ilk, I would use this to call Jefferson a staunch conservative/Right-Winger.
When it comes to religion, founding fathers were by no means anti-religious but, rather,supportive of any religion, not the destruction of religious thought or comment in the effort to “separate church from state”. Please note that although the founders opposed state-sponsored religion, they had no qualms utilizing what we now call politically incorrect “religion-oriented” language in their speech. Before the reader jumps to a conclusion, this author is by no means a fundamentalist anything with regard to religion and is radically opposed to any state-sponsored/mandated religious structure.
“(T)he foundation of our national policy will be laid in the pure and immutable principles of private morality; …the propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained…” George Washington, first inaugural address.
We tend to forget why the founders included religion in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. I will let one of our founders state much more eloquently than I could. Note that from his words the term “Conservative” would seemingly apply to his personage:
“I consider the government of the US. as interdicted by the constitution from intermedling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. this results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment, or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the states the powers not delegated to the US.” Thomas Jefferson
A great deal of gnashing of teeth, casting aspersions, and outright hatred occurs whenever a self-appointed Liberal/Progressive/neo-whatever hears religion implied in the Constitution. To hear a Liberal apply religion to the Constitution is unheard of; or is it? Case in point:
“Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams
These so-called Liberals who are our founding fathers, were not anti-religious by any stretch of the imagination. When you examine their writings and quotations you see what would currently be labeled radical Right-Wing Conservatism. In this, they were neither. But rather than continuing this is the discourse of religion versus anti-religion let us continue with what would be a current-day conservative manifesto:
“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. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. … The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.” James Madison
Madison, one of the prime authors of the Constitution put the power in the hands of the states and the people. This “Liberal” as the aforementioned article claims actually seems more right-wing conservative than any kind of liberal or progressive. To take and cast the founders in terms of current political philosophy is disingenuous at best. These men were the creators of an experiment that continues to this day. They were neither liberal nor conservative, left nor right, anti-religious or religious. Truly, the best word that applies to all is the term patriot. They were complex personalities creating something that had never existed before in the history of mankind. To put current labels on them is at best dishonest and at worse an out right lie.
To speed the conclusion of this discourse there is only one person I wish to comment on, particularly in the light that the author of Greatest Liberals cast upon him. That is, of course, the myth of Abraham Lincoln. I could long debate how Lincoln sold out to the corporate interests that the article’s author claims our founders had contempt for. The land-grant act and others are arguably proof positive of “Corporate sellouts” by the Lincoln administration (This alone would label Lincoln as an unabashed conservative under modern definitions). That, however, is something left for another blog, another article, or perhaps a book. The greatest lie of all regarding Abraham Lincoln is that he, Pres. Lincoln, ended slavery.
As for Lincoln ending Slavery, that is patently false. The Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in those territories that were in rebellion, (the Confederacy) and did not affect slaves that were held in Union States nor Confederate territory that was held by Union troops. The 13th Amendment ended slavery and the 14th amendment insured that end. Lincoln was dead when both were ratified.
Rather than continue this discourse until the cows come home (and from the looks of what is outside they may be coming home soon) I beg the reader to focus upon this following conclusion:
It is disingenuous to extract one piece of truth to form another, much as the author of the original article has done. There is ample evidence that each “Liberal” lauded in the article could equally be called a ‘Conservative” depending on what facts needed to be distorted and what quotations, etc. needed to be forgotten.
We should be careful who we label, how we label, and why we label someone. Taken in a certain context, (particularly by the current media) the comments/quotes of our founding fathers are blatantly Conservative in nature. ALL of the quotes come from the same founding Fathers who were labelled “Liberal” by the referred to article’s author. (It is a well written article nevertheless) However, the ability to extract only those things which prove your point, begs the question “were they really Liberal or conservative”.
As for me, I am an American. Liberal at times, Conservative at others, so-called “Moderate” most of the time. I roil when the ultra-anything, Right or Left, Claims they have a mandate from the founders and must bend and distort history to show that mandate. Rather than Left/Right Conservative/Liberal, Ultra/Neo; I choose the middle path……
(And I am not even Buddhist… But THAT is another discussion…… )
PaulC