Roland Kayser | 3:25 p.m.You are aware that cutting or keeping
abortion... would affect the Federal Budget by $0.00... right?On cutting the budget... So any specific group/department/bureau
doesn't feel picked on... I would suggest cutting a percentage from all
department budgets. Then make sure the things they cut are the waste,
inneficiency, fluf, etc... not the essential services their department
provides.It seems like every time we propose cutting budgets they
immedatly say... "Well OK, but that means the FIRST thing that has to go will be
Police, Firemen, teachers, etc". They never even CONSIDER cutting the salary
of the cute secretary for the under-secretary of an aid to a bureaucrat's office
or something like that!The endless beurocracy is always the
LAST thing they will cut.
To @Charles: I know you weren't addressing me but I would be happy to compromise
on a tax cut, as soon as they tell me what spending will be cut to pay for
it.What would you suggest as an abortion compromise? Okay for the first
trimester, illegal after that except for valid medical reasons? Abortion seems
to be one of those issues that both sides find uncompromisable. (I'm not on
either extreme on that issue, so I would be willing to compromise.)
Moderation in commitment to truth and true principles is not a virtue; however,
moderation in temperament is essential to civil and effective discourse in
@Lane Myer 9:46 a.m.I was referring to this:"In The
Federalist Papers...two of our leading founders, James Madison and Alexander
Hamilton, tried to teach 'a lesson of moderation.'"Only a minor
editing thing, but gotta give John Jay his due.@Brer Rabbit
2:30 p.m.Good Cicero quote.
For the most part the founding fathers would be considered extremest, especially
from the King and British point of view. Not all of the debate during those
times was just "happy talk."Likely there would have been no
Revolution if there hadn't been the likes of Patrick Henry to encourage the
extremists. Then later we have Patrick Henry opposing the new Constitution and
refused to vote for it. The voice of Patrick Henry would have been considered
extreme, from the biased point of view of this writer. No Patrick
Henry, probably no United States. To label the TeaParty folks as extremist is as
biased as labeling the original Tea Party, by the Sons of Liberty an extreme
action, which it was. "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in
pursuit of justice is no virtue." Marcus Tullius Cicero, (Roman Statesman)
"In Federalist No. 2, John Jay, who later became the first chief justice of the
Supreme Court, contrasts moderation with "pride," which predisposes us to
"justify all (our) actions" instead of "acknowledging, correcting or repairing
(our) errors and offenses." "----------I think that is
actually in Federalist #3, but who cares?Your point is well made.
The letter writer states, "As a result, the political right is able to profit
from using alarmist fear tactics to demonize the left, and the left is smugly
satisfied with using ridicule to make the right seem foolish."What
is a fear tactic and how does anyone profit from it?What is extreme
and who gets to decide?@Esquire: you make many generalizations and
accusations in your post. Contrary to your assertion Christ never acknowledged
the "necessity" of taxes. Christ taught people to be self-reliant, provident
living and to help others of your own free will and choice. No force or stealing
through the government to give to another. I'd also like to ask any
self-professed Democrat, but especially Esquire since the theme of rigid and
unbending is being used: give me at least 5 areas that you'd be willing to bend
towards Conservatives. Any 5 areas and how you'd be willing to be less rigid.Cut taxes?Abortion?Stem-cell?Repeal Obamacare?National term limits?Acknowledgement of the 10th Amendment?Leave
marriage up to the states?Those are just a few suggestions but you
can come up with your own.Please share, okay?
Esquire | 7:38 a.m.You need to take the rhetoric and stereotyping
down a notch.So you spoke to a "Tea_party_type" who was a radical.
So what! That doesn't mean you judge or label or group ALL "Tea_party_types" as
being radical!That would be as lame as labeling all Muslims as
"Radicals" because you heard about one radical Muslim.There
are radicals in ALL groups. That DOESN'T mean they are all radicals.You seem to have a general stereotype for "Tea-party-types".
Would you mind sharing your genarlizations and pre_conceived notions of what a
"Tea_party_type" is? So we can see if they all fit your "Tea-party-type"
mold?If you cared to find out (and not just accept what you
heard "Tea_party_types" are on TV or from the few "Tea_party_types" you know...
you would learn that they are a very diverse group. Some racicals. Some very
common people.There is no one group/type that has all
knowledge.... and the other that gets everything wrong. Stop grouping people
into "Types"... and you may realise that.When you stop seeing people
as rhetorical "blah_blah_blah_Types"... "Democrat_types", "Republican_types",
"Christian_types", "Islamic", "Jewish_types", etc... You will be better off.
In the election of 1800, the supporters of John Adams called Thomas Jefferson
the Anti-Christ. They meant it in a literal, not metaphoric, sense. They had
newspapers that were every bit as partisan as Fox news, the Weekly Standard, or
The New York Review of Books.Its a bit of a stretch to say that were
John Charity Spring | 7:38 a.m. Sept. 17, 2010 Alloway, NJ As
this letter points out, the Fathers hated political extremism. Indeed, the very
reason they fought the Revolutionary War was to rid this Continent of
extremists.The Fathers not only believed in moderation, they also
believed in loyal, prudence, and chastity. =========================
John, Why do your comments always come across as you
are the only expert on what the Founding Fathers thought?Agreed,
they didn't like extremists - since they were Progressive Liberals who valued
equality to all mankind.They fought England on account of freedom
and equality - something the Conservative Lords and Royals who wanted to
continue a caste system back in England were trying to "Conserve"the status
quo.And some of them were far less than "Chaste".But I don't
want to go there out of reverence for what they accomplished.
Nate | 7:34 a.m. Sept. 17, 2010 Pleasant Grove, UT Mr. Riddle,You don't count John Jay as a Founding Father? Really?-----------Nate, I think he did count him as one. I
do not see where you think he excluded him.
A Revolutionary War wasn't too moderate.The idea is not to be
convictionless or rudderless. No, the Founders were very opinionated and
willing to argue for what they believed in. That said, when two
sides are yelling at each other, rarely is anyone convinced.
This is truly one of the best letters to appear in this paper in a log time. Too
few people these days know what the Founding Fathers stood for, and are willing
to follow their wishes.As this letter points out, the Fathers hated
political extremism. Indeed, the very reason they fought the Revolutionary War
was to rid this Continent of extremists.The Fathers not only
believed in moderation, they also believed in loyal, prudence, and chastity. The
modern left-wing extremists in charge of the government have abandoned these
values, and this Country is worse off for it.
I generally like what I read here. It is too bad the tea party types say they
love the Founding Fathers and the Constitution, yet open-minded reasonableness
is the furthest thing from their minds. I had a discussion with one of them who
said taxes are government theft. When I pointed out all the services he
receives, and that even Christ acknowledged the necessity of taxes, he was
unmovable. No taxes, in any amount whatsoever. He religiously watches Fox News
and the right wing commentators, and clearly does not think or mentally process
what he is hearing. Just because it is harped on over and over by Glen Beck and
others, does not mean it is true, reasonable or accurate. And I have talked to
many who are similarly rigid and unbending. This is not what the Founding
Fathers wanted or believed in.
Mr. Riddle,You don't count John Jay as a Founding Father?
Really?Another thing: fear-mongering is not exclusive to the right,
nor is ridicule exclusive to the left. (I ridicule the Left all the time.)You did a good job, and gave us much to think about. It's hard to be
moderate when your freedom is at stake. But we do need to keep a level head.
An excellent letter.Thank you.