<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Republicans To The Right - Democrats To The Left</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/?feed=rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/</link>
	<description>A New Age of Reason in a Messianic World</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 13:38:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pat Dant</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-6429</link>
		<dc:creator>Pat Dant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 May 2009 00:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-6429</guid>
		<description>It is frustrating to hear individuals express insight into the views of the "religious right" or the “right-wing conservatives” and be so wrong. Most of the time it is from someone that supports Individualism and believes he\she is the true originalist of the founding fathers. Unfortunately, Individualists have a hard problem with the strong religious beliefs and practices of the 17th century and the direct involvement of the Christian faith with the creation of the country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is frustrating to hear individuals express insight into the views of the &#8220;religious right&#8221; or the “right-wing conservatives” and be so wrong. Most of the time it is from someone that supports Individualism and believes he\she is the true originalist of the founding fathers. Unfortunately, Individualists have a hard problem with the strong religious beliefs and practices of the 17th century and the direct involvement of the Christian faith with the creation of the country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5868</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 01:18:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5868</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Interesting then, that today it is the radical right that is called fascist. Taken together this implies that today’s “left” and “centrist” positions are well to the left of what the founders considered extreme left. And that the founding fathers governed to the right of what now is called extreme.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

We must remember who is calling who the fascist. The far left, ever increasingly becoming the norm in this country, are extremely quick to bandy about words like fascist and nazi because they are in the business of disinformation. 

Your right though, the founding fathers saw the right as what we could now call libertarianism. They saw the left as nearly what it is today, big government and centralized power structures (like the deceptively named Federal Reserve Bank).

Today left and right are a deception. A way to keep people from looking too deeply, either within themselves or at government and what it's really doing. The only way to fight this deception is for people to start reading again and not just entertainment books. The reason the founding brothers (the title of a book you all should read) were so smart and able to pull together this system of government is because they all were very well read, most even self taught. Nearly all the ideas that this country were founded on were not original, they were taken from various philosophers and historians. Most of them read the same books and thus were in agreement on many of the most important things.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Interesting then, that today it is the radical right that is called fascist. Taken together this implies that today’s “left” and “centrist” positions are well to the left of what the founders considered extreme left. And that the founding fathers governed to the right of what now is called extreme.</p></blockquote>
<p>We must remember who is calling who the fascist. The far left, ever increasingly becoming the norm in this country, are extremely quick to bandy about words like fascist and nazi because they are in the business of disinformation. </p>
<p>Your right though, the founding fathers saw the right as what we could now call libertarianism. They saw the left as nearly what it is today, big government and centralized power structures (like the deceptively named Federal Reserve Bank).</p>
<p>Today left and right are a deception. A way to keep people from looking too deeply, either within themselves or at government and what it&#8217;s really doing. The only way to fight this deception is for people to start reading again and not just entertainment books. The reason the founding brothers (the title of a book you all should read) were so smart and able to pull together this system of government is because they all were very well read, most even self taught. Nearly all the ideas that this country were founded on were not original, they were taken from various philosophers and historians. Most of them read the same books and thus were in agreement on many of the most important things.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5788</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 15:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5788</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote cite="Dave Wagner"&gt;The main point being that the founding brothers, despite their different views on religion and other things, were unanimous in their belief of morality and finding the center. This whole government was originally set up with centrist views in mind. The founding brothers believed that on the far right was anarchy and on the far left fascism. They knew the importance of agreeing on the most important things.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Interesting then, that today it is the radical right that is called fascist.  Taken together this implies that today's "left" and "centrist" positions are well to the left of what the founders considered extreme left.  And that the founding fathers governed to the right of what now is called extreme.

Also, if there were any Christians in the group, and no one denies that there were at least several, then what they felt were "the most important things" must have been front and center Christianity.

&lt;blockquote cite="Daniel Nixon"&gt;I have found little evidence that suggests that the majority of our founders were religious, and they certainly do not appear to have been Christian.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

 It's not surprising to me that you haven't seen the evidence but it's not hard to find if you look.  Here might be a good place to start your education:
&lt;a href="http://www.hobbylobby.com/holiday_messages/images/messages/july4.jpg" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.hobbylobby.com/holiday_messages/images/messages/july4.jpg&lt;/a&gt;

Strange indeed that the website you gave mistakes the meaning of virtually every quote.  No surprise that the founders showed strong contempt for the Roman Catholic church.  But to claim thereby that they denied Scripture only betrays complete ignorance of Catholic doctrine.  The Protestant Reformation started because the Roman Catholic church would not accept Scripture, but placed all authority in the hands of fallen man instead.  Do you really believe that the Pilgrims or any others of the early settlers who came for religious freedom were looking for freedom from religion?  A few, perhaps, but the majority desired freedom to preach "Sola Scriptura" without a church hierarchy watching over them while lining the pockets of its cardinals and bishops.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote cite="Dave Wagner"><p>The main point being that the founding brothers, despite their different views on religion and other things, were unanimous in their belief of morality and finding the center. This whole government was originally set up with centrist views in mind. The founding brothers believed that on the far right was anarchy and on the far left fascism. They knew the importance of agreeing on the most important things.</p></blockquote>
<p>Interesting then, that today it is the radical right that is called fascist.  Taken together this implies that today&#8217;s &#8220;left&#8221; and &#8220;centrist&#8221; positions are well to the left of what the founders considered extreme left.  And that the founding fathers governed to the right of what now is called extreme.</p>
<p>Also, if there were any Christians in the group, and no one denies that there were at least several, then what they felt were &#8220;the most important things&#8221; must have been front and center Christianity.</p>
<blockquote cite="Daniel Nixon"><p>I have found little evidence that suggests that the majority of our founders were religious, and they certainly do not appear to have been Christian.</p></blockquote>
<p> It&#8217;s not surprising to me that you haven&#8217;t seen the evidence but it&#8217;s not hard to find if you look.  Here might be a good place to start your education:<br />
<a href="http://www.hobbylobby.com/holiday_messages/images/messages/july4.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.hobbylobby.com/holiday_messages/images/messages/july4.jpg</a></p>
<p>Strange indeed that the website you gave mistakes the meaning of virtually every quote.  No surprise that the founders showed strong contempt for the Roman Catholic church.  But to claim thereby that they denied Scripture only betrays complete ignorance of Catholic doctrine.  The Protestant Reformation started because the Roman Catholic church would not accept Scripture, but placed all authority in the hands of fallen man instead.  Do you really believe that the Pilgrims or any others of the early settlers who came for religious freedom were looking for freedom from religion?  A few, perhaps, but the majority desired freedom to preach &#8220;Sola Scriptura&#8221; without a church hierarchy watching over them while lining the pockets of its cardinals and bishops.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack W</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5781</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 11:29:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5781</guid>
		<description>In politics, the middle road is no way at all....John Adams.  (yes, THE John Adams)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In politics, the middle road is no way at all&#8230;.John Adams.  (yes, THE John Adams)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Netgrits</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5733</link>
		<dc:creator>Netgrits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 09:58:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5733</guid>
		<description>Please excuse the unclosed italics in the previous post. The application was meant to apply to one word only - assault. I've discovered I can't change it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please excuse the unclosed italics in the previous post. The application was meant to apply to one word only - assault. I&#8217;ve discovered I can&#8217;t change it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Netgrits</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5732</link>
		<dc:creator>Netgrits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 09:53:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5732</guid>
		<description>Daniel Nixon -- well said, sir. But I must say that as a gun owner and user for over 50 years I will have no more problem with being licensed to use them than I will have with being licensed to drive a car.

Assault weapons (what &lt;i&gt;is an assault weapon?) could well be another matter. I agree with those who say that they are dangerous and of no practical use. Were I a collector I might have a different attitude, legitimately, but only if I were.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel Nixon &#8212; well said, sir. But I must say that as a gun owner and user for over 50 years I will have no more problem with being licensed to use them than I will have with being licensed to drive a car.</p>
<p>Assault weapons (what <i>is an assault weapon?) could well be another matter. I agree with those who say that they are dangerous and of no practical use. Were I a collector I might have a different attitude, legitimately, but only if I were.</i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Netgrits</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5731</link>
		<dc:creator>Netgrits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 09:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5731</guid>
		<description>Dave Wagner -- your comment was excellent. Thank you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave Wagner &#8212; your comment was excellent. Thank you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Netgrits</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5730</link>
		<dc:creator>Netgrits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 09:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5730</guid>
		<description>I can't disagree with any of this except perhaps your tired take on Obama who is so new in office and both far smarter and less powerful than you may imagine. Forget Pelosi who is a caricature in any case.

Yes, long live the Enlightenment Party.

You are so right about the ever escalating interest payments. That is our underlying doom. It won't be long - you'll be around - before the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency. The effect will be serious but gradual.

We will become just another England. Something, it seems, we've been trying hard to become for a long time now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t disagree with any of this except perhaps your tired take on Obama who is so new in office and both far smarter and less powerful than you may imagine. Forget Pelosi who is a caricature in any case.</p>
<p>Yes, long live the Enlightenment Party.</p>
<p>You are so right about the ever escalating interest payments. That is our underlying doom. It won&#8217;t be long - you&#8217;ll be around - before the dollar is no longer the world&#8217;s reserve currency. The effect will be serious but gradual.</p>
<p>We will become just another England. Something, it seems, we&#8217;ve been trying hard to become for a long time now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: terrymac</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5529</link>
		<dc:creator>terrymac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 22:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5529</guid>
		<description>... isn't that they hate abortion, but that they cannot bring themselves to admit that the Department of Defense is just as much a corporate welfare agency as any other boondoggle dreamt of by Congress. 

Neither party is willing to admit that the financial crisis was caused by the Federal Reserve Commissar's efforts to "manage" the money supply. 

We managed to divorce religion and the State; let us do likewise for the economy, and most especially, for the currency; we cannot permit the State to manipulate the value of the dollar.

Faced with this rising debt, the State will simply inflate its way out of the problem. The rest of us will pay higher prices, a hidden form of taxation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230; isn&#8217;t that they hate abortion, but that they cannot bring themselves to admit that the Department of Defense is just as much a corporate welfare agency as any other boondoggle dreamt of by Congress. </p>
<p>Neither party is willing to admit that the financial crisis was caused by the Federal Reserve Commissar&#8217;s efforts to &#8220;manage&#8221; the money supply. </p>
<p>We managed to divorce religion and the State; let us do likewise for the economy, and most especially, for the currency; we cannot permit the State to manipulate the value of the dollar.</p>
<p>Faced with this rising debt, the State will simply inflate its way out of the problem. The rest of us will pay higher prices, a hidden form of taxation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Wagner</title>
		<link>http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/rep/#comment-5488</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Wagner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 03:13:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/?p=426#comment-5488</guid>
		<description>Steve, I think you missed his point on the way towards your tangent. He wasn't saying that all religion is bad, just that there are extreme religious people on the far right that would seek to limit our rights to that of their own  belief system. I believe this to be as true as there being extreme leftists that are nothing more than fascists disguised as the peoples champions.

The main point being that the founding brothers, despite their different views on religion and other things, were unanimous in their belief of morality and finding the center. This whole government was originally set up with centrist views in mind. The founding brothers believed that on the far right was anarchy and on the far left fascism. They knew the importance of agreeing on the most important things.

Look at how quick we are in today's society to attack one another; that persons a liberal, that persons a rightwing nutjob. You said something I disagree with so I'm going to attack you personally. If you've ever read the letters and editorials of the founding brothers, they were highly critical of each other, but their letters were littered with high praise as well. They all agreed that brotherly love was the only thing that could hold this country together. They designed this government for a highly moral people, and only a highly moral people could maintain it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve, I think you missed his point on the way towards your tangent. He wasn&#8217;t saying that all religion is bad, just that there are extreme religious people on the far right that would seek to limit our rights to that of their own  belief system. I believe this to be as true as there being extreme leftists that are nothing more than fascists disguised as the peoples champions.</p>
<p>The main point being that the founding brothers, despite their different views on religion and other things, were unanimous in their belief of morality and finding the center. This whole government was originally set up with centrist views in mind. The founding brothers believed that on the far right was anarchy and on the far left fascism. They knew the importance of agreeing on the most important things.</p>
<p>Look at how quick we are in today&#8217;s society to attack one another; that persons a liberal, that persons a rightwing nutjob. You said something I disagree with so I&#8217;m going to attack you personally. If you&#8217;ve ever read the letters and editorials of the founding brothers, they were highly critical of each other, but their letters were littered with high praise as well. They all agreed that brotherly love was the only thing that could hold this country together. They designed this government for a highly moral people, and only a highly moral people could maintain it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
