Is the left attempting to destroy America as we know it?

I'd say that statue has been moved. Wouldn't you?

 

I will assume you are not an American and learned your history from Monty Python, or you skipped history class altogether.

Salem Witch Trials:

The Salem Witch Trials did not occur in the state of Massachusetts. They occurred in the BRITISH COLONY of Massachusetts in the 1600's. The parties involved were English, not American. The US did not come into being for another 150 years. 20 people were accused of witchcraft and all but one ENGLISH SUBJECT were HANGED, not burned.

Slavery:

As many American states opposed slavery as approved of slavery in the 1800's. I say states, because the South hid behind the concept of states rights to keep slaves. Northern states disapproved of slavery, but did not have the power in Congress to abolish it.

The growth of the anti-slavery states in the West and the election of Abraham Lincoln sparked the Civil War. 350,000 Union soldiers (the equal of 4 million today) died to right the wrong of slavery, so don't forget that.

Jim Crow was still a STATE ISSUE even after the Civil War. It existed in the Southern States, not the rest of the country. Another fight occurred in the 1960's to confirm equal rights, so don't forget that either.

Claiming Jim Crow laws are still on the books in the South is ignorant.

London, Paris, Berlin and Mexico City have huge drug problems so that is a shared problem--not an American one.

 

Lincoln art - Represents a racist. Tear it down.

The Passion in art - Represents (to some) a celebration of torture. Burn it/smash it.

Picasso's art - Represents the work of a misogynist. Destroy it.

Van Gogh's art - Represents the workings of a troubled mind. Destroy it.

Jefferson Memorial - Represents a tribute to a genocidal, slave-holding serial rapist. Tear it down.

Washington Monument - See above, possibly minus genocidal.

All art MAY represent something that some MAY feel shouldn't be celebrated.

I say tear it down.

Do it now.

 

We're having a violent agreement, but SOMEBODY (their name rhymes with Schmoosier) isn't getting that I'm kidding around with him.

 

Is the Left Destroying America?

Actually, they are getting wiped out.

Don't forget that:

1. The Republican have all three branches of the federal government--Congress, the White House and the Supreme Court. The Democrats are not likely to get any of them back for years.

2. 35 governors are Republican. The democrat governor of West Virginia gave the finger to his party and became Republican recently because he felt they had betrayed him.

3. Over 1000 state seats have flipped Republican in the last eight years.

If there is a silver lining for democrats here, please point it out.

All they have is SHOUTING and POUTING from the mass hysteria (I mean media) and die-hard Trump Haters and Baiters.

That ain't nothing.

 

Where have you been for the last 4 decades (and especially the last 2). "America as we know it" was gone a long time ago.

The founders created a system of Gov't were the power of Gov't was to be limited: "limited to what" is then the first question.

Might as well let Jefferson answer:

The Declaration of Independence (DOI) puts individual rights and freedoms/liberty "Above" the legitimate authority of Gov't. The legitimate purview of Gov't then primarily for protection from direct harm .. one person on another (murder, rape, theft and so on).

In particular, Gov't is not to mess with individual rights an freedoms. "Give me Liberty or Give me Death"

Ben Franklin "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security".

Most citizens in the USA of today are on their knees cowering in fear "begging" to give up essential liberty - if only for a little more security from a risk of harm that is 400 times less than the risk of harm from "Walking". You heard me correctly.

It is now our "Patriotic Duty" to give up essential liberty. Obama then changed the name of the Patriot Act to the equally Orwellian doublespeak "Freedom Act".

"Reefer Madness" ... just create a little fear and the sheep can easily be convinced to give up essential liberty. The war on drug was a war on freedom. Innocent until proven guilty ? forget that nonsense... Asset forfeiture, arbitrary search and seizure, personal liberty to risk a reasonable amount of harm in the pursuit of happiness ... what were you thinking ? No supersizing that soda .... smoking in your car while driving (like this poses a risk greater than someone turning up the radio) ... no no no.

We now live in a quazi totalitarian police nanny state.

Ownership of private property ? Long gone ... you are a renter, not an owner.

There is no free and fair market ... long gone. Regulations are structured to keep away competition - the little guy from competing. Oligopolies regularly engage in anti competitive actions, price fixing, collusion, anti trust .. and so on. Tax law forces the middle class to subsidize these oligopolies and Big Gov't.

Gov't power keeps increasing and transparency decreasing. The media is controlled/owned by the establishment.

Now it is not just individual liberty that is being targeted (actions). Thoughts are now under attack. Voice an opinion that contradicts the Establishment narrative and you are a disturber of the peace. Say something that is a little risque or have an opinion that is not "politically correct" and your are banned from the main social media sites.

Uber partisanship is in part responsible for this mess. Get with the program. The Establishment is both Red and Blue. Voting for either is a vote for continued sodomy.

 

The Republican powers in Congress acquiesce and appease the left so it can be said the left owns that branch. The left or middle have six seats in SCOTUS; the right/conservative have three. The jury is still out on the White House. So the left is far from wiped out in Washington; to the contrary they pull the strings.
What you say about the states is pretty much accurate. Which is why many true conservatives feel the Convention of the States is the last hope to save our constitutional republic.

 

It might have gone a bit over the top, but your essential points are right on.

 

Progress requires change. If change="Attempting to Destroy America As We Know It" in your mind, then so be it.

 

What about change is so sacrosanct, inviolable, and absolute in your mind

 

I love made up facts! Yes we know how the red states are so integrated....they also take more from the government they pay, unlike ny and California

 

..Be afraid, be afraid, be afraid,,,the bogeyman is coming!

 

For progressives, change inexorably marches towards demand and direction. Why? Because they really want a world where their vapid illogic finds a shell of absolute authoritarianism that requires the rest of us to bend the knee to their stupidity.

 

Ignoring the assertion and returning with an unsubstantiated counter doesn't seem to be a successful discussion tactic. When you yourself make up assertions, it only further undermines your credibility. The fact that you don't actually understand the difference between per capital and gross is astonishing. CA is THE LARGEST recipient of federal money. Period. By a wide margin. Undisputed fact.

 

In large measure, you are correct.

But this legislative impotence has led many on the left to adopt tactics--illegal tactics--that just about all Americans once considered reprehensible.

Nowadays, the hard left is convinced that the end (or attempted end, anyway) justifies the means...

 

First, let me say that I agree with a considerable amount of what you have posted--albeit not quite all of it.

I really don't know about smoking while driving; but texting while driving is a bit of a problem around here. (Many people who are texting don't seem to notice when a red light has turned green; about four or five seconds later, a horn blast may be necessary to get their attention.)

And you sound rather like a libertarian; whereas I am a mainstream conservative (along the lines of, say, the late William F. Buckley Jr. or the late Jack Kemp).

 

The desire for "progress"--as you have said--is the hallmark of a progressive.

You may label me as a conservative.

In doing so, you would be quite correct...

 

Here educate yourself....mostly trump states
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

 

Again, you are simply uneducated.

http://www.lao.ca.gov/LAOEconTax/Article/Detail/131

CA receives over 50% more than any other state.

 

Between trying to destroy the nuclear family, destroy English as the dominant language, destroy our borders, make being a white male something to be ashamed of, demonizing wealth or success, demonize our military, making people ashamed of being either a male or female(why be just one gender when you can be anything @ anytime), they haven't had too much time for much else=)

 

I said Progress. What about progress is worthless, violable, and finite in your mind?

Even the conservative demi-god acknowledged the importance of progress in saying:

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/94629-i-am-not-an-advocate-for-frequent-changes-in-laws

 

Texting while riving is crazy dangerous. The bar for making law that messes with individual liberty "outside the Gov'ts legitimate purview which is protection from direct harm .. one person on another" is Overwhelming majority. At least 66%

It is reasonable to suggest that this bar is met with Texting and driving. Second however is that this is quazi in the purview of Gov't as it does apply to protection from direct harm.

This is legitimate law then on both counts.

It is like the difference between pot and heroin. Good luck getting 66% to agree that Pot should be illegal.
Heroin, Meth and other really nasty drugs that are very dangerous - I think this law would easily get 66%.

If something is so dangerous/harmful that he heavy hand of the State should be used to force people not to do this using physical violence .. then the majority should agree.

How man think Murder, Rape, Theft should be legal ? The bar is no different for any other law.

It used to be that the overwhelming majority thought slavery was OK. This law ..as nasty as it was .. was then legitimate.

At some point it became illegitimate as societal values changed. Same with rights for women.

Respect for individual rights and freedoms is one of the main principles on which this nation was founded. A principle we have forgotten.

 

Also, since the progressives can never define the end game, by definition they have to keep changing (the actions of the people).

 

The assertion was that progress requires change, therefore change is good -- always.... above all else.
I believe in individual sovereignty with god given rights. How should we change this to progress?