Quantcast

The Vile History Of the Democratic Party 1.5

Deep007 2012/08/14 16:44:32
Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
No Way.. they wouldn't lie to me.. I'm special
You!
Add Photos & Videos
The Vile History of the democratic party part 1.5

In part1 of this series I established that EVERYTHING we were taught about the origins of the Democratic Party is a series of lies. Starting with the premise of why the party was created. The party's co-creators, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, did so as a means to preserve slavery and gain power. In this part you will see they performed a bloodless coup d`etat of the United States government that resulted in 12 of the first 15 Presidents of our country being southerners: slave owners and keepers of that faith. It is my intention to show that much has been intentionally doctored to keep Americans confused as to what constitutes right and wrong. From the realization that their country was created as a bastion from tyranny. A beacon of light to the world. A country originated on and established only through a belief in God. A virtual garden of Eden with its own serpents in the present as well as in the past. The fight between good and evil has existed from the beginning of this country's birth. Obama and his serpents are just the newest breed.

In the new garden of Eden the serpent was Thomas Jefferson. It was he that offered America the apple of power and greed, and she partook of it. As i noted in "Atheist, Feminists, Liberals...lend me yer ears" http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/atheists-feminists-libe... . We have been led to believe the schism between the 13 colonies at the end of the revolutionary war was one of geography: North vs. South. It was actually one of ideology but at the time classified as religion. , Protestant vs. Anglican (Catholicism) and as such, Ideology of each. The end of the Revolutionary war birthed America, and the fathers of the child were not all in agreement about her future. The Protestant figureheads, John Adams, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Rush (1) believed in an unwavering God when it came to right vs, wrong, good vs, evil. That because slavery violated the inalienable rights of men, and as such it was an evil to be eradicated. The Anglican aristocrats, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe identified with the feudal and caste system already in place in Europe and supported by the Catholic church. God was what you wanted or need him to be at that time.
George Washington is elected president of the new country. Washington, though a Virginian, is an unquestioned independent because there are NO political parties at the time. Washington commissions Jefferson to be be his Secretary of State and trouble begins in paradise. Jefferson is soon at odds with the brilliant Alexander Hamilton over his proposed national bank. Not because it is unnecessary or particularly a bad idea. The national bank would assume the states debt, and establish one currency. Jefferson has a problem with it because it gives the Federal Government the precedent to intercede into State matters. Many of Jefferson and Madison's quotes concerning states rights are inaccurately used today. The essence of them at that time was not maintaining a workable balance between the federal and state governments as they were about each state having complete sovereignty within its borders. That sovereignty was the cornerstone of slavery within their states. The institution of slavery was as much about money as it was about lifestyle. Slaves were bred/imported for labor, pleasure and sport. To the southern nobility, feudal slavers that deemed themselves as 'Planters', this constitution was becoming their Magna Carta. The birthrights of them as nobility could become infringed upon and constricted.
The ratifying of the constitution had identified the differences in ideology that were analogous to the religions of the day. Protestantism for the common man. Roman Catholicism (Anglican) for nobility. During the process two Pennsylvania Quakers (protestants) had appeared to argue that the true meaning of the Revolutionary war was freedom for all. The former royal colonies, led by Jefferson and Madison not only sidestepped that issue but manage to have their "slaves counted as 3/4 (they had wanted them counted as a whole man while maintaining that they were a special "species of property") of a man for larger representation purposes. They were able to do so because Former French diplomat Jefferson had France waiting on the line to deal with an independent south. No ratification meant NO United States of 13 colonies. leaving a United States of the north, and one also of the south. One would trade with England and the other France. The Protestant northerners, fearing they would lose all that fought for in the revolutionary war, acquiesced. "Hugh Thomas writes that "the compromise on slavery occurred because the delegates as a whole . . . agreed with Roger Sherman of Connecticut, . . . who made the observation that it was better to let the Southern states import slaves than to part with those states.'" (2) Jefferson knew full well what the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary war and the United States Constitution were examples of Protestant idealism and in that spectrum meant the freedom of all men. Jefferson went to great lengths to deny the humanity of 'Blacks', labeling them as "inferior" in no uncertain terms. (3)
With the Revolutionary spirit of freedom abounding, and Alexander Hamilton threatening to steal the national spotlight, Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson met with Speaker of the House of Representatives James Madison on the Hudson river in 1791 to discuss how to head off the fervor. What was being said without being said was what Virginian Nathaniel Macon once blurted out. "Tell me, if Congress can establish banks, make roads, and canals, whether they cannot free all of the slaves in the United States'. The very Federalist powers that James Madison argued for were now threatening their privileged way of life. To stop this runaway train George Washington (though a Virginian Anglican), John Adams, Thomas Paine, John Hancock and any other non 'southern' thinking American must be made to pay the price of being discredited politically, and demeaned privately. In the case of Alexander Hamilton, KILLED. Jefferson and Madison had conspired in 1790, with the Great Compromise, to have the capital of America situated in the south in order to give them greater access and control. Now they clandestinely established a newspaper in Philadelphia, the capital of the nation at the time, The National Gazette. Using it to accuse Washington of having insatiable aspirations of power and visions of grandeur. -The most negative buzz words in that day- As being mentally and physically unfit to be President due to advanced (read senility) age, and portrayed him as an unconscionable spendthrift of public monies. None of these were true, each were the opposite of the circumstance. Adams, Hamilton and Paine were treated in similar fashion. The attacks were two pronged. Not satisfied with disparaging decent, honest men. A scare also had to be created in the minds of the public. Between November 1791 and December 1792 Madison wrote 18 essays announcing a new party was forming as a viable alternative to these evil 'Federalists'. when there was no such thing as a Federalist. It appears that Adolph Hitler could have learned the finer points of propaganda from our Southern anti-constitutionalists. With editor of the paper, Phillip Frenau, on the State department's payroll, Jefferson was funding the paper that demonized the very administration he served. The word for such is TREASON. If that isn't enough Jefferson leaks confidential material to Freneau from the State department concerning Great Britain in attempts to further embarrass Washington.
Alexander Hamilton connects the dots and exposes Jefferson's subversion. The administration is shocked, too stunned to act on the betrayal of the very man who had wrote the Declaration of Independence. Washington writes to Jefferson, seeking clarification of Hamilton's charges. In September of 1792 Jefferson responds denying EVERYTHING, and ends the letter with
"In the meantime & ever I am with great and sincere affection & respect, dear Sir,
your most obedient and most humble servant" http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/br...
It doesn't get much better than that for bold faced lying whether you are Stalin, Mao or Castro
Jefferson, with accusations swirling about and forces closing in on him retreats to Monticello in 1793 without permission and without notifying anyone in the administration. The Washington administration, in it ambivalence, doesn't bring him up on charges, or fire him from his post and Jefferson never resigns. When John Adams is voted in as president, the burgeoning power of the republican Democrats elects Jefferson as vice president. Jefferson refuse to work with Adams instead attacking Adams at every possible instance. Even inferring that his lifelong friend possessed a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." During this time he and Madison continue to organize and solidify the Republican Democrats. In 1800 Jefferson reappears to take hold of the Presidency. In true nefarious fashion he completes the coup d`tat by declaring himself president. (4) Washington has been bypassed. Adams, and Hancock reduced and Hamilton via Jefferson's vice president Aaron Burr would soon be killed. Jefferson wears the presidium in royal style. Washington DC, as a coronation to Jefferson, is now the capital of the nation. Lavish parties as befitting a king are held monthly. Public monies are spent hand over fist. This is the real Thomas Jefferson. All the evils that Jefferson deliberately projected onto, and denounced others for, he embodied.
So the question before you is not why this happened?,,,but WHY DON'T YOU KNOW IT HAPPENED?. In order to confuse the understanding of right and wrong we have been given lies to digest. For all roads of wrong lead directly to the Democratic party. The Democrats have been in control of the Government since it onset. In ALL of our history books there are always there...but amazingly never to blame. They have covered ALL of their misdeeds with circuity and duplicity.from Jefferson, to Jackson, to Wilson, to FDR. They have made Americas villains into American heroes because they write the books as well as control the media. Examine the OWS crowd, the trained seals called liberals, socialist Government officials. None of what the utter is ever logical. It was information passed onto them form a ‘higher authority’ they accepted as a truth. All three are products of that same misinformation. The Democratic Party elitist have created a Matrix involving the public schools, the mainstream media, and government bureaucracy to indoctrinate and control. We all have been subjected to it. From elementary school on, as were our parents and now our children. Those of us blessed enough to slip through the cracks find ourselves at extreme odds with those indoctrinated. Its not a mistake that both think they are right. The human mind searches for truth. If supplied with information from a designated high authority, the Government, that is called truth, it generally assumes it is. Only those of us protesters (Protestants) who reject man made authority (Catholicism) escape the Matrix's grasp. Now you know just how deep the rabbit hole goes and the road that lies ahead. If America is to be free as it was it promised, the serpent must be neutralized from the head, and its head is the Matrix. Get involved in your public and private schools. Correct revisionist history so that your children understand the good in evil in the garden of America that was and rages on today.

1) http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html
2) http://www1.american.edu/ted/slave.htm
3) http://www.historytools.org/sources/Jefferson-Race.pdf
4) http://hnn.us/articles/36528.html
-Reprinted by popular Demand-

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • bman~AVA~BTTB 2012/08/17 18:43:28
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    bman~AVA~BTTB
    +7
    Wow! My friend this is quite a history lesson here. It's well written and very detailed. I applaud your efforts here as it is a good post.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • PrettieReptar 2012/11/03 02:27:46
    No Way.. they wouldn't lie to me.. I'm special
    PrettieReptar
    You lost me as soon as you started talking trash about Jefferson.
  • Deep007 Prettie... 2012/11/03 16:54:58
    Deep007
    Sorry kiddo...but WE were given a dream world to believe.. that why none of it makes sense. so lets take it from the top shall we and by the time we get to the bottom of it EVERYTHING will make sense...
    There is a reason why you are so adverse to what you partially read up there.. OUR (thats right, i read them too) history books state Jefferson is a hero or many sorts, here are many conservatives that quote him on 'State's right in reference to opposing Obamacare. Jefferson did advocate States rights because he rightfully believed that the Federal government was going to intervene in the institution of slavery, and abolish it. They tried to do it with the ratification of the constitution. But Jefferson and Madison thwarted that attempted. Jefferson creates the Democrat party to PRESERVE the institution of slavery....
    heh heh heh,,, you didnt know that eh. Well you also didnt know the civil was NOT against north vs. south as it was Republican States vs. Democrat States. .. the the reblicans would only hold power for 40 years 1860 to 1900 before the Democrat party regained it again using (abusing) the newly arriving we European immigrants. You also dind't know that Woodrow Wilson give us the income tax and our introduction into socialism, that FDR didn't rescue us from the depress...
    Sorry kiddo...but WE were given a dream world to believe.. that why none of it makes sense. so lets take it from the top shall we and by the time we get to the bottom of it EVERYTHING will make sense...
    There is a reason why you are so adverse to what you partially read up there.. OUR (thats right, i read them too) history books state Jefferson is a hero or many sorts, here are many conservatives that quote him on 'State's right in reference to opposing Obamacare. Jefferson did advocate States rights because he rightfully believed that the Federal government was going to intervene in the institution of slavery, and abolish it. They tried to do it with the ratification of the constitution. But Jefferson and Madison thwarted that attempted. Jefferson creates the Democrat party to PRESERVE the institution of slavery....
    heh heh heh,,, you didnt know that eh. Well you also didnt know the civil was NOT against north vs. south as it was Republican States vs. Democrat States. .. the the reblicans would only hold power for 40 years 1860 to 1900 before the Democrat party regained it again using (abusing) the newly arriving we European immigrants. You also dind't know that Woodrow Wilson give us the income tax and our introduction into socialism, that FDR didn't rescue us from the depression as much as he kept us in it, and his adminestration was overrun by communist. One, Alger Hiss, was in Yalta with him relaying information to
    Stalin. Now ask yourself, how is it our heroes are villain and our villains are heroes in our history books. yes.. there you have it. The Democrats WRITE our history for us. Too big to be true... tsk tsk.. wake up.. they control the media even now.. as they did then...... and NO, i am NOT joking. Its REAL.. and the only way you can do something about it is to REALIZE it and spread the reality. But to do that.. you might want to finish reading the rest of the post..see how deep the rabbit hole goes...lol
    (more)
  • Prettie... Deep007 2012/11/06 18:03:20
    PrettieReptar
    We disagree, kiddo.

    Jefferson and Madison were anti-federalists. They wanted a weak central government and no national bank. It had nothing to do with slavery--it had to do with fear of a big federal government--which is exactly what we have today.

    If it were not for states' rights we would not have the nullification doctrine--which btw, is what some states used to fight against pro-slavery Federal laws (see "Federal Fugitive Slave Acts").
  • lark 2012/10/01 01:58:14
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    lark
    +1
    so well written, now if you could just get the haters to believe. People that do not know me or anything about me call me a raciest just because I am not for the President. Thank you for the lesson.
  • Marek 2012/09/25 13:28:56
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Marek
    +1
    Excellent research Deep007.
    Pretty much as it happened.
  • Jackie 2012/09/19 01:21:17
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Jackie
    +1
    A keeper.......................
  • Deep007 Jackie 2012/09/19 01:25:17
    Deep007
    thank you
  • Pamela 2012/09/10 15:19:32
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Pamela
    +1
    Every doctrine and tenet of the Democrats entail on increase in political power and a decrease in the power of conscience, religion,tradition, civil society. The free market, mothers and (if there are any left around--in many Democrat stongholds there aren't fathers. If you recount Democrat beliefs one by one you'll get a mere catalogue of INSANITY.
  • Deep007 Pamela 2012/09/14 02:56:19
    Deep007
    Dang...
    you hit it on the NOSE
  • LiberalCowards 2012/09/05 17:21:15
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    LiberalCowards
    +1
    This is a great resource. My wife and I were just talking about something similar. I asked her which party Abe Lincoln was a part of and she said "He must have been a Democrat because he freed the slaves and fought for equal rights."..... lol
  • Deep007 Liberal... 2012/09/14 02:57:22
    Deep007
    lol...
    when you are confuse,... they become the source for knowledge
  • Lordphoton999 *AFCL* 2012/09/02 19:17:55
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Lordphoton999 *AFCL*
    +1
    Thanks for the history lesson.
  • NOva 2012/08/25 11:43:55
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    NOva
    +1
    Love it, a real history lesson. Thanks for putting it out here!
  • dispatcher 2012/08/23 16:35:39
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    dispatcher
    +1
    Yet a long narrative but full of facts & understanding. It's no wonder the left can"t handle the truth...
  • Deep007 dispatcher 2012/08/23 17:17:47
    Deep007
    +1
    Sorry.. wish I could have shortened it and still have it tell the story
  • Swampdog PWCM 2012/08/22 02:55:08
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Swampdog PWCM
    +2
    Outstanding! However you do realize that the goofy left will say, "But the southern Dixiecrats have now taken over the Republican party and they are bigots." It has been said before," If you want to piss off a conservative, lie to him, if you want to piss off a liberal, tell him the truth." Your article is proof.
  • Deep007 Swampdo... 2012/08/22 05:42:57
    Deep007
    +1
    tis is TRUE
  • in vino veritas 2012/08/22 02:31:48 (edited)
  • Deep007 in vino... 2012/08/22 02:51:47
    Deep007
    +1
    take yer time...they say the truth sets us free.. but in this case in takes us deeper down the rabbit hole to a whole new reality
  • clarkii b 2012/08/21 10:14:26
  • Deep007 clarkii b 2012/08/21 13:15:51
    Deep007
    +3
    Heh heh heh
    the Liberal mind EXPLODES explode
  • Don Leuty 2012/08/21 04:51:42
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    Don Leuty
    +4
    Well done. Once a slave master, always a slave master. Instead of iron manacles and leggings, it is a pair of golden handcuffs. They must have studied the Romans. They subsidized the poor to tame them.
  • Deep007 Don Leuty 2012/08/21 13:16:46
    Deep007
    +3
    the sleaziest part is they are the power without anyone knowing they are the power
  • Don Leuty Deep007 2012/08/22 00:28:12
    Don Leuty
    +3
    THAT is what makes them more dangerous than NAZIs.
  • Flash,a... Deep007 2012/08/28 11:02:32
    Flash,aka,Mr.Lightning
    +1
    Good posting here. It seems this ilk has moved its power base from the plantations of slavery to the masses of the cities to continue a form of slavery to 'hand outs' thereby insuring their power base to remain as elites. It comes under the guise of freedom.
  • Deep007 Flash,a... 2012/08/28 20:49:50
    Deep007
    BINGO
  • ~HopelessRomanticM17~ 2012/08/21 03:29:29
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    ~HopelessRomanticM17~
    +1
    ookayyyy then...
  • FairLady 2012/08/21 03:25:15
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    FairLady
    +2
    Wish I could give you 50 raves, my friend.

    Great job putting it together and posting. great
  • Deep007 FairLady 2012/08/21 13:24:23
    Deep007
    +1
    so American children know that the promise of America has NOT been fulfilled yet
  • FairLady Deep007 2012/08/21 19:56:34
    FairLady
    +1
    You got that right, my friend.
  • The Birdman ~ PWCM~JLA 2012/08/21 03:21:17
    Thanx...now it beginning to make sense
    The Birdman ~ PWCM~JLA
    +3
    Very interesting reading!
  • Average Joe 2012/08/20 22:43:29
    No Way.. they wouldn't lie to me.. I'm special
    Average Joe
    I won't go into all of the nuances I could touch upon but the most glaring slant is the loaded answers you provide for one to choose, not unlike "Do you still beat your wife, yes or no?" Some of your comments provide half-truths and when presented in such a context, can be conveyed in such an intentional manner to those who don't know their history. You also make plenty of assumptions and subtle implications. Hamilton was killed for publicly saying things about Burr, statements Burr believed slanderous and libelous. Hamilton could have refused the challenge but accepted and died in a fair fight.

    The National Gazette was founded to counter the Gazette of the United States, a Federalist paper existing BEFORE the national Gazette. The National Gazette was NOT "clandestinely" founded nor published. It was common and public knowledge that the two openly supported (financially and otherwise) the paper. What you may be referring to are some of their published articles. Yes, they often wrote under pen names, a widely accepted and common occurrence taking place to this day. You want clandestine (at least, initially), look at Common Sense by Paine.

    You incorrectly state there was no Federalist Party when the paper was being published, between 1791 and 1792. Hamilton most certainly f...





    I won't go into all of the nuances I could touch upon but the most glaring slant is the loaded answers you provide for one to choose, not unlike "Do you still beat your wife, yes or no?" Some of your comments provide half-truths and when presented in such a context, can be conveyed in such an intentional manner to those who don't know their history. You also make plenty of assumptions and subtle implications. Hamilton was killed for publicly saying things about Burr, statements Burr believed slanderous and libelous. Hamilton could have refused the challenge but accepted and died in a fair fight.

    The National Gazette was founded to counter the Gazette of the United States, a Federalist paper existing BEFORE the national Gazette. The National Gazette was NOT "clandestinely" founded nor published. It was common and public knowledge that the two openly supported (financially and otherwise) the paper. What you may be referring to are some of their published articles. Yes, they often wrote under pen names, a widely accepted and common occurrence taking place to this day. You want clandestine (at least, initially), look at Common Sense by Paine.

    You incorrectly state there was no Federalist Party when the paper was being published, between 1791 and 1792. Hamilton most certainly formed the party during Washington's first term but the actual party didn't have a name and wasn't officially founded until 1794 but make no mistake, Madison's essays were two years ahead of their time, boldly predicting the emerging actions of the Federalist Party (of which its network was firmly in place by 1790).

    You also assume none of the information about Washington is true. Ever heard of Sally Fairfax? In addition to keeping "company" with her, many volumes throughout history speak of his love-child from a slave named Venus. Even if neither report is true, Washington was no saint.

    I've read similar writings and reports, only with the term "Mason" in place of "Democrat."

    One can always tell when it's election time.
    (more)
  • Deep007 Average... 2012/08/21 13:23:31 (edited)
  • Average... Deep007 2012/08/21 15:39:49
    Average Joe
    That's pretty funny but par for the course. Those who are full of self-doubt and lack confidence come apart when questioned or challenged and incorrectly view it as an attack, using such as an excuse to go into attack mode themselves. I'm not really concerned with your lack of confidence and low self-esteem but you'd do well to learn how to debate properly before trying. Next time, try and remain on topic, save the ad Hominem attacks for those used to and accepting your abuse. See "Subfallacies" for a lesson in life http://www.fallacyfiles.org/a... and proper conduct. I don't make the rules, I simply abide by them and refuse to allow those who aren't educated in such things to affect my position. Now, can you try again without allowing me to be your puppet master and making ME your topic, or are you that enraged by my response that you simply have zero self-control to remain on topic?
  • Deep007 Average... 2012/08/21 22:43:02
    Deep007
    +1
    Judging, Ad Hominem, lack of confidence (the insecure angle)
    C'mon...
    TRY SOMETHING NEW...can't y'all beenies be a lil creative..c'mon..a lil original... you are all SO disappointing...did they actually train you to be this facile, this despondent. Its is so OLD....and cookie cutter like...are y'all so stupid that they don't trust you to educate yerselves...
    heh heh heh
    kinda a rhetorical question eh???...of course they don't trust you to have a brain.. otherwise you wouldn't be working for them
    haaaaa haaaaa haaaa
  • Average... Deep007 2012/08/25 14:42:25
    Average Joe
    I don't argue or debate people who don't have a clue about proper communications (the insults are the first clue) and of course, those who are unable to discuss without insult or attempting to change the subject to that of the person with whom they are discussing a subject with. I don't make the rules, I simply abide by them and don't waste my time with those who don't know better. Really, what is "OLD" (in YOUR words) is the FACT that those who are unable to intelligently discuss the topic continually try and change the topic to that of the chatter or debater. It's a tired, "old" projection tactic used by those who either A) don't know any better (but now you do so there is no excuse) or B) do so as a means because they can no longer add anything intelligent to the discussion and feel they must attack to defend their position or opinion. However, I believe everyone deserves a second chance. If you are able to discuss without obsessing on myself, welcome back. If you are unable to do or feel the need to continually project with insult, so long.
  • Deep007 Average... 2012/08/25 18:18:04
  • Average... Deep007 2012/08/26 17:34:25 (edited)
    Average Joe
    Attempted defense of your school-yard behavior by claiming "It is my blog" is akin to "It's MY ball so I'll take my ball and go home." All you've managed to do in -your- blog is illustrate to the masses your level, or lack of, communication skill. You attack because you've never been taught proper communication and don't know how (because you were never taught and/or never bothered to learn) to debate and disagree intelligently. Once you reduce yourself to insult in debate or discussion, anything you say, whether it has merit or not, is suspect at best but usually disregarded. The irony among in your rant is ... the only thing outdated is your typical red herring behavior of attempted disambiguation of which you're obviously unaware of or worse, not concerned. Once you learn how to convey your message or opinion with proper protocol and effectiveness, you will have reached a milestone. The first rule you need understand is how to not to allow your emotions to control you and when one disagrees or expresses a differing opinion, it's -not- personal ... except to neanderthals.
  • Deep007 Average... 2012/08/27 07:43:46
    Deep007
    Thank you..
    now try another
    http://www.sodahead.com/livin...
    how ya like me NOW
  • Average... Deep007 2012/09/01 22:14:39
    Average Joe
    Most educated intellectuals agree and disagree without allowing emotions to rule their response via employment of analytical and empirical data, critical thinking, etc.. An opinion coming from another with whom I disagree means little in regards to whether I "like" or dislike a person. Once one allows their emotions to control their response any merit they have, even if valid, is compromised.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/09/18 13:37:44

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals