• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Form of government

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
I am curious as to what the opinion of members on the form of government that the U S has?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
12,759
Reaction score
0
Location
Sask
What form of Government :?


BBB



Broke Busted and Bankrupt
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Lonecowboy said:
Constitutionally Limited Representative Republic


he posted "has" not "was", got to be "regressive" to get back to the way it should be, even if some choose to be "progressive"


OT? :eek: :lol:
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
What is amazing is that the left does not seem to understand this and get it wrong if you ask them. They should have paid attention years ago.
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
719
Reaction score
0
Location
South Central SD
I still believe we have a democratic form of government. A government run according to the will of the people. What we need is a better way to choose our leaders.

It's not our government. Our political system has to many flaws. A two party system is good as it stimulates debate, but to many of us follow an ideology of a political party and won't take the time to think for themselves. We need to lead our party, not let them control our thinking. Political parties should ask us what we need, and work for them, not dream up new ideas just to get votes.
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
So no libs care to answer. Lone cowboy and Ben got it but in another post obama was talking about a democracy.
Maybe Lonecowboy or Ben would like to run for prez
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Clarencen said:
I still believe we have a democratic form of government. A government run according to the will of the people. What we need is a better way to choose our leaders.

It's not our government. Our political system has to many flaws..

Clarence, what do you base your belief on?
Did you get to vote on the bill to increase the debt limit?
NO, well who did then, oh your representative did for you.
Say where did your representative get the authority to do that?
OH from the Constitution, the Constitution that created his office and he swears an oath to God to support, protect, and defend?
Is that the same Constitution that guarantees us a republican form of government? the same Constitution that the word democracy does not even appear in! The same Constitution that is the supreme law of the land.
The same Constitution that under which we do not even elect our president but rather the electoral college does instead.
Under the original Constitution we didn't even pick our U.S. senators but rather our state representatives did. (something we should go back to, talk about campaign finance reform)

"and to the Republic for which it stands, One Nation under God"
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
719
Reaction score
0
Location
South Central SD
I think our government was originaly aet out to be a republic, Our founders were a group of aristocrates. They believed that the common man was not capable to run the government. These men were experienced people, they were merchants, some were people who had worked with government, they were people who had experience with trade and commerce. They had to find a way to bring the thirteen colonies together, each colony had different resources and different people. To satisfy the masses, they had to give the common man, the workers, and builders some voice in government.

As time went by our government became more of a democracy. Given time most Democrocies fail unless there is something firm to hold on to, something to establish reason and reality. Our constitution is not perfect, it has been amended time and again. Still we have to rely on it, and on our faith in our government and the people who run it.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Clarencen said:
I think our government was originaly aet out to be a republic, Our founders were a group of aristocrates. They believed that the common man was not capable to run the government. These men were experienced people, they were merchants, some were people who had worked with government, they were people who had experience with trade and commerce. They had to find a way to bring the thirteen colonies together, each colony had different resources and different people. To satisfy the masses, they had to give the common man, the workers, and builders some voice in government.

yes these were experienced men, experienced in fighting tyranny and oppression! Arisocrats?? what do you base that on?? These men were subjects till they fought for and won their Freedom!
The Declaration of Independence's overaching principle of popular sovereignty — that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"" The Constitution's Preamble itself declares that "We the People do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
judging from these documents it was the other way around, the "common" man giving power to the government, not at all as you described. So once again what are you basing your thoughts/beliefs on Clarence?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Clarencen said:
I think our government was originaly aet out to be a republic, Our founders were a group of aristocrates. They believed that the common man was not capable to run the government. These men were experienced people, they were merchants, some were people who had worked with government, they were people who had experience with trade and commerce. They had to find a way to bring the thirteen colonies together, each colony had different resources and different people. To satisfy the masses, they had to give the common man, the workers, and builders some voice in government.

As time went by our government became more of a democracy. Given time most Democrocies fail unless there is something firm to hold on to, something to establish reason and reality. Our constitution is not perfect, it has been amended time and again. Still we have to rely on it, and on our faith in our government and the people who run it.

You are pretty much correct on that Clarence..Most Founding Fathers were from the higher class leading families and wealthy -the only ones that could afford to be sent to school and were educated back at that time...

Until the 1840s the education system was highly localized and available only to wealthy people. Jefferson was the first American leader to suggest creating a public school system. His ideas formed the basis of those education systems developed in the 1800's.

So they probably could have been considered the aristocracts of the time- and I can see why some thought of our government as a form of aristocracy...
You look at the makeup of D.C. today and the percentage of our elected reps that are wealthy and/or lawyers- and it may still be true...

Definition of ARISTOCRACY
1: government by the best individuals or by a small privileged class
2a : a government in which power is vested in a minority consisting of those believed to be best qualified


Declaration of Independence
Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War. Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists, Eleven were merchants, nine were farmers and large plantation owners; men of means, well educated.

Constitution
The framers of the Constitution had extensive political experience. By 1787, four-fifths (41 individuals), were or had been members of the Continental Congress. Nearly all of the 55 delegates had experience in colonial and state government, and the majority had held county and local offices.

Thomas Mifflin and Nathaniel Gorham had served as President of the Continental Congress.
The ones who lacked congressional experience were Bassett, Blair, Brearly, Broom, Davie, Dayton, Alexander Martin, Luther Martin, Mason, McClurg, Paterson, Charles Pinckney, Strong, Washington and Yates.
Eight men (Clymer, Franklin, Gerry, Robert Morris, Read, Roger Sherman, Wilson, and Wythe) had signed the Declaration of Independence.
Six (Carroll, Dickinson, Gerry, Gouverneur Morris, Robert Morris, and Sherman) had affixed their signatures to the Articles of Confederation.
Two, Sherman and Robert Morris, signed all three of the nation's basic documents.
Dickinson, Franklin, Langdon, and Rutledge had been governors.
The 1787 delegates practiced a wide range of high and middle-status occupations, and many pursued more than one career simultaneously. They did not differ dramatically from the Loyalists, except they were generally younger and less senior in their professions. Thirty-five had legal training, though not all of them practiced law. Some had also been local judges.

At the time of the convention, 13 men were merchants: Blount, Broom, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Shields, Gilman, Gorham, Langdon, Robert Morris, Pierce, Sherman, and Wilson.
Six were major land speculators: Blount, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Gorham, Robert Morris, and Wilson.
Eleven speculated in securities on a large scale: Bedford, Blair, Clymer, Dayton, Fitzsimons, Franklin, King, Langdon, Robert Morris, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, and Sherman.
Twelve owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms: Bassett, Blair, Blount, Butler, Carroll, Jenifer, Jefferson, Mason, Charles Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Rutledge, Spaight, and Washington. Madison also owned slaves, as did Franklin, who later freed his slaves and was a key founder of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society. Alexander Hamilton was opposed to slavery and, with John Jay and other anti-slavery advocates, helped to found the first African free school in New York City. Jay helped to found the New York Manumission Society, Hamilton was an officer, and when Jay was governor of New York in 1798 he signed into law the state statute ending slavery as of 1821.
Broom and Few were small farmers.
Eight of the men received a substantial part of their income from public office: Baldwin, Blair, Brearly, Gilman, Livingston, Madison, and Rutledge.
Three had retired from active economic endeavors: Franklin, McHenry, and Mifflin.
Franklin and Williamson were scientists, in addition to their other activities.
McClurg, McHenry, and Williamson were physicians, and Johnson was a college president.

A few of the delegates were wealthy. Washington and Robert Morris ranked among the nation's most prosperous men. Carroll, Houston, Jenifer, and Mifflin were also extremely well-to-do. Most of the others had financial resources that ranged from good to excellent. Among those with the most straitened circumstances were Baldwin, Brearly, Broom, Few, Madison, Paterson, and Sherman, though they all managed to live comfortably.

A considerable number of the men were born into leading families: Blair, Butler, Carroll, Houston, Ingersoll, Jenifer, Johnson, Livingston, Mifflin, Gouverneur Morris, both Pinckneys, Randolph, Rutledge, Washington, and Wythe.
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Yep- Documents written by home schooled or perochial schooled men over 200 years ago, that can't seem to be read or understood today by the product of our "modern" government run education system.
That certainly says allot for evolution doesn't it? :shock: :???:
The "progressive" ideals seem to be "regressing" us as a people! :(
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
Yep- Documents written by home schooled or perochial schooled men over 200 years ago, that can't seem to be read or understood today by the product of our "modern" government run education system.
That certainly says allot for evolution doesn't it? :shock: :???:
The "progressive" ideals seem to be "regressing" us as a people! :(

:roll: Try and make it fit whatever argument you want to... I wasn't aware they had correspondence college courses back then....Were they online classes they took ? ... :wink:

The Founding Fathers had strong educational backgrounds at some of the colonial colleges or abroad . Some, like Franklin and Washington, were largely self-taught or learned through apprenticeship. Others had obtained instruction from private tutors or at academies. About half of the men had attended or graduated from college. Some men held medical degrees or advanced training in theology. Most of the education was in the colonies, but a few lawyers had been trained at the Inns of Court in London
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Oldtimer said:
Lonecowboy said:
Yep- Documents written by home schooled or perochial schooled men over 200 years ago, that can't seem to be read or understood today by the product of our "modern" government run education system.
That certainly says allot for evolution doesn't it? :shock: :???:
The "progressive" ideals seem to be "regressing" us as a people! :(

:roll: Try and make it fit whatever argument you want to... I wasn't aware they had correspondence college courses back then....Were they online classes they took ? ... :wink:

The Founding Fathers had strong educational backgrounds at some of the colonial colleges or abroad . Some, like Franklin and Washington, were largely self-taught or learned through apprenticeship. Others had obtained instruction from private tutors or at academies. About half of the men had attended or graduated from college. Some men held medical degrees or advanced training in theology. Most of the education was in the colonies, but a few lawyers had been trained at the Inns of Court in London

Caution ot your ignorance is showing again! Quick cover it up. :D
 

Latest posts

Top