Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu for one. John Locke for another - but he lived almost all his life in the 17th century. Among americans, Franklin, Jefferson, John Adams, and James Madison all easily outshine the likes of Paine - but frankly, there can proably br a good case made that many others - Jay, Hamilton, Rush, etc - are his betters as well. Paine, like Beck, had one outstanding virtue - he was opinionated and communicated in a way that moved people. Beck makes no pretense of being an intellectual or the originator of any wisdom - all he's saying is "lets remember what the smart guys said" Paine, as far as I know, made pretense of being an originator of great ideas, at least later in life (the virtue of "Common Sense" was that it wasn't so much a polemic as a call to arms)
Ooo! Dracula and Rasputin could use their fluids to resurrect more carcasses. Yeah, they could bring back Leo Strauss, and Irving Kristol, there's a couple more monsters for the cavalcade. Typhoid Mary, they could make her Surgeon General.... Shit, hope they press this whole thing out on DVD after, this'll be a keepsake.
Bah, Einstein outshone Nikola Tesla, but it doesn't lesson his contribution. And, ya left out Voltaire, and Hume.
Well, geez, Nazi boots clomping up your street would make you crap your pants, but I'm not nasty enough to root for that.
In very few cases. Would you argue that the racial makeup of the crowd was not, in any way, noteworthy?
Gotta admit I didn't make a point of noticing the racial makeup of the crowd, so I'll have to ask, what was noteworthy part?
Wasn't Al Sharpton's rally a predominantly black crowd also? Not sure what the point here is then, of noting the color of the people attending these rallies...
As a matter of fact, I DID have a dream last night. Prince Harry was in it. Do you want me to go "IN DEPTH?"
And to protest that government is too big, they took the government provided Washington Metro (subway) to a government provided park, to watch a speaker protected by government provided policemen. Ronald Reagan (and I voted for him TWICE), spent money like it was going out of style. Is that what the Teabaggers want?
It's only fascinating if one assumes that there is not sufficient grounds for supposing that Glenn Beck and the other crazies don't like unbelievers, which predictably, you're assuming as a given.
Which left wing site are you and the other person who's posted the EXACT same comment in this thread cribbing the thought from? Might as well go ahead and point it out - none of the "small government" folks have any objection to government provided spaces like parks and monuments, or publicly provided public safety services like police and firemen. You might have a point - a tiny one - regarding the metro but it's a pretty baseless assumption that all those people, particularly the one's on stage, took the metro to get there. the great majority of it (the extra spending) on things that small-government people support...i.e. the military. Which wouldn't have had to be done if Carter hadn't bled them dry. and, as with Dr. M before you - order of magnitude! Reagan's spending compared to the spending of the last 3 years is like comparing a bicycle to an F-14
Uh, the "other person" was Bobcat himself. He even quoted his previous post in the post you quoted. He was just repeating himself, because he thought it was such an appropriate comment (it wasn't, but that is beside the point) and that no one had noticed.
No, not because no one had noticed. Nova said the teabaggers were a noble group against "big government", so I simply pointed out again that the teabaggers used the "big government" services that they hate so much, in order to highlight their hypocrisy.
Well yee-haw. You're so fucking clever. Didn't we already have this exact discussion a couple pages ago? They used the services because that is what we have right now. Everyone at the gathering pays taxes like everyone else. They have just as much right to use the services they're paying for. If Comcast is the only broadband provider in your area does that mean you can't bitch about Comcast on your blog? It's like the dingbats who argued that if you voted against Porkulus, your state shouldn't get any of the benefits.
So the Teabaggers aren't hypocrites, they're just selfish. They're in favor of "big government" services which benefit them, but opposed to "big government" services which benefit someone else.
People are selfish? Fucking call the TV news--we've got to get this information out there ASAP! No shit, people are selfish. That's why communism, welfare, and every other hippy-dippy scheme is doomed to fail. Because people. Are. Selfish. All people. The problem is, "progressives" or "liberals" or whatever the socialists are calling themselves today aren't content with being selfish. They don't just want to keep their stuff. They want to keep their stuff and take from other people to give to themselves or to the people they decide are "deserving." So if you're faced with a system where someone is taking your money at gunpoint while promising you services, you'd be foolish to not take advantage of those services to get them to put away the gun.
