Ben Franklin Would Be a Modern TEA Party Member

I agree. Franklin would have started the tea party a lot sooner; I think he would have been disgusted with how statist Regan was! We need to get back to tour roots and embrace this wisdom once again.

So i guess you're against women's rights and minority rights, then, too. Remember, most of the founders opposed those, too,

I think you've been reading too many liberal/progressive things, Franklin.

I wonder what causes old posts like this to come back to life...

Franklin, there's nothing to base that assumption on. There's some bad things from that era that we don't need to get back too. You knew this, I'm sure.

I have no idea why they do, Matthew. For a while, I had to have all of my email notifications turned off and I would miss an old item coming to life again.

Fantastic article. Take a look at my newest one it is on similar lines to this. It's called "The Great Debaters and Civil Rights"

Thanks, Michelle. I believe I've been to your latest, haven't I?

that there are persons in this country who believe that their happiness is hiding in their neighbor's wallet.

Greed is in the heart but it is made visible by the tongue.

"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal; but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also." ( Matthew 6:19-21)
"You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me." ( Mark 10:21)
"Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one's life does not consist in the abundance of possessions." ( Luke 12:15)
"The land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, 'What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?' Then he said, ' I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, 'Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.' But God said to him, 'You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?' So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich toward God." ( Luke 12:16-21)
"Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you." ( John 6:27)
Charity

Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God.

Jesus makes charity the new commandment. Whence Jesus says: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love." And again: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."

Fruit of the Spirit and fullness of the Law, charity keeps the commandments of God and his Christ: "Abide in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love."

Christ died out of love for us, while we were still "enemies." The Lord asks us to love as he does, even our enemies, to make ourselves the neighbor of those farthest away, and to love children and the poor as Christ himself.

The Apostle Paul says: "charity is patient and kind, charity is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Charity does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right. Charity bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." "If I . . . have not charity," says the Apostle, "I am nothing." Whatever my privilege, service, or even virtue, "if I . . . have not charity, I gain nothing." Charity is superior to all the virtues. It is the first of the theological virtues: "So faith, hope, charity abide, these three. But the greatest of these is charity."

The practice of all the virtues is animated and inspired by charity, which "binds everything together in perfect harmony. Charity upholds and purifies our human ability to love, and raises it to the supernatural perfection of divine love.

The fruits of charity are joy, peace, and mercy; charity demands beneficence and fraternal correction; it is benevolence; it fosters reciprocity and remains disinterested and generous; it is friendship and communion. Love is itself the fulfillment of all our works.

But it's not charity if the government steals the money, Darren. All the studies and polls show that conservatives give more of their time, talent and treasure.

Your comment is directed to people not Government. Now as to the Government and taxes Jesus was very clear. Render unto Caesar what is Caesars and unto God what is God's. Now Peter was a fisherman and when it was time to pay his taxes Jesus directed him to the wealth of his trade. Which as all fishermen know is "Fish" and in the mouth of the fish Peter found the money to pay his taxes.

It is God who both appoints and sanctions the Government. If you find fault in God's appointment then you must look into your own heart to find the cause.

Darren, God allows bad leaders, yes. We have the freedom to choose - God's way or man's way. And the freedom to make wrong choices. God can, and does, use those bad choices, that's true. But He would certainly prefer that we listen to Him and make the right ones.

Sure we need to render under to Caeser what is Caesar's. But God does not sanction stealing from one person to give to someone else. Charity and giving are choices we make, not Caeser's decision. Big difference. God (and Jesus) were not and are not socialists. The Bible is pretty clear about the importance of work, not entitlements.

I don't think you addressed the fact that conservatives give far more of their time, talent and treasure, did you?

Have you read this? The War on Success by Tommy Newberry: God is Not a Socialist

The Bible says: Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. (Luke 6:38) That doesn't say "pay your taxes and it will be given unto you."

There is also this: The point is this; he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly; and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully (2 Corinthians 9:6).

Newberry reminds us: Socialism breaches this law by forcefully expropriating the fruit of people’s labor and transferring it to others. One citizen gets what he didn’t plant and another citizen doesn’t get what he did plant. (And the course of redistribution, of course, includes a generous processing and handling fee for the government bureaucrat.)

And he says:

Obviously, we don’t imitate God when we steal or accept stolen goods. In the Eighth Commandment, God makes this clear in four words: ―Thou shall not steal. This Commandment clearly condemns expropriation, and Leviticus lays out an entire system for dealing with those who steal.8 Similarly, the Tenth Commandment says, ―Do Not Covet (Exodus 20:17), which in and of itself repudiates the entire underpinnings of socialism. And remember, these are Commandments, not suggestions.



Socialists often cite biblical imperatives to generosity, but God would never make us break His own Commandments in order to be ―generous. And besides, expropriation is not generosity at all, it’s simply theft.



The principle of the harvest is intended to encourage us to make wise decisions: if we don’t study today, and then we flunk our physics test tomorrow, it’s not because God is punishing us, nor does it make us a victim. We just didn’t follow His principles. This is part of God’s design, intended to encourage wise decisions. And God doesn’t recommend that the government give us someone else’s harvest—He wants us to responsibly plan for our own future.

Click the link above to read more, Darren. Coveting what others have is wrong. Stealing is wrong. And that's what this government wants to do and that's what those who support this government want to do.

Taxes support the common good and all societies have need of maintaining the commons. Now Jesus was a carpenter and he has tat us in both word and deed. He did not qualify Caesars rights or methods of taxation. He instead gave us simple instruction, both in word and deed. You have offered me the philosophies of man, had the Lord intended a philosophy he would have given one, as Rome was the highest order of human civics of the time.

But he chose the simplest of forms to his answer.

Love is patient and kind. Love knows neither envy nor jealousy. Love is not forward and self-assertive, nor boastful and conceited. If someone slaps you on one cheek, offer the other cheek also. If someone demands your coat, offer your shirt also.

Luke 6:30 Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.
Matthew 6:25 "Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?

“Martha, Martha, you are worried and bothered about so many things; 42but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”

Have faith in the Lords day and stop insulting the blessings God has given to the poor.

BTW I read Ayn Ran and fully understand how altruism leads to the idea of average as a stranded of excellence. It has been a long time since I spoke to you and I am being good and not offering offence.

I am pointing out only that you have ascribed thievery to the poor, when in fact we are paying less in taxes now then we have ever payed historically since WW2. Having pulled out of a depression with out raising taxes is an accomplishment.

Global depressions lead to world wars. And with the weapons of today a world war could mean the end of humanity. The president is the commander and chief he is elected of the people and appointed by the Lord.

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

In fairness I read the post and observed the bastardization of the scriptures. There was a lot of blanket accusation and false comparatives. Socialism is a system not a doctrine. It can not be coopered directly to Jesus, that would be a logical fallacy. A social system is arrived at by agreement it is not forced upon anyone. For example if you don't like the social system of public highways you don't have to drive on them, but you also can not drive at all if you do not accept the social system of licencing. Public education, law enforcement, public safety and even national security are all social systems based on public agreement. Socialism is the part we all give to one another from the most personal point of charity all the way up to the sacrifices made on the field of battle.

Now not every part of society is collectively owned or managed. Many things are privately held, but that does not exclude them from public responsibly. As a citizen I am not allowed to poison your drinking water and as a cooperation I should be equally kept from poisoning the public well. You might call this Big Government, but I call it a Government social mandate of collective agreement.

You are very much at war with Americans, but you should be more concerned with multi-national cooperations buying influence in the electoral process.

Darren, it is liberal/progressives like you who are at war. I will not argue with you about the Bible. I understand it and hate to see it corrupted by liberals. Social justice is not something in the Bible and preachers who preach it will be have to answer to God.

who is arguing? I pointed you to the words Jesus you pointed me to vitriol of an angry me a man.

Benjamin Franklin believed in social justice, he advocated for the public library, The public fire department and the adherence of government responsibility to the public welfare.

Now to your notion that Conservatives give more then lib's is a silly intellectual construct. Made by people who would divide the country for their own gain.

The fact is that the poor always give more then the rich. Not because of morality, but because of empathy. Empathy naturally leads to charity because the recognition of suffering is heart felt and understood inwardly.
One pain responds to another.

As to the Bible? Well it is a complex book with many layers of insight, but it has a single theme that can not be over looked.

That life comes of one source, that we are created in the image of that source and that when I see you and you see me it is in that moment that we see the source. If I hate you then I hate the source of you also.

The image of the cross leads us to empathize with the cruelty of our own hands. It is Cain's Able, Esau's soup, Josephs brothers and the deep pain of David's Johnathan.

I also showed you words from the Bible, Darren.

There is no hate in the material from Newberry. What there is is truth, truth about what God expects from us, and that's not to cripple people by giving too much. The Bible shows over and over again that God was proud of those who worked and not so much for those who did not. (Think about the book of Proverbs, for instance.)

Ben Franklin said the same thing in the quote above.

"Social Justice" is not in the Bible, Darren. It is a New Age teaching from which we should all run.

Giving is what is expected of us. And, frankly, if all the liberal/progressive Christians would step up and give of their time, talent and treasure, there would not be such a great need in poor communities. Conservatives can only do so much. And the Bible is pretty clear that we're not supposed to lean on the government to meet our every need, but on God.

What was Christ's advice to the rich man?

He still has a choice, Franklin.

Thanks, jj.

At one point I would have agreed with much of what the Glenn Beck's of the world say.

Looking back at my old self, though, I now see a selfish person consumed with his own situation and not the least bit interested in helping those who were "dumb" enough to fall on hard times.

I thank my lucky stars that somewhere along life's road I was able to cast off the bonds of the mind control that had been imposed, for the most part, by my initial family, the environment of growing up in a town which knew little hardship, a la-de-da private school education, a conservative religion and an even more conservative employer.

It strikes me now that those who shape the opinions that are parroted here, actually begin at the end - the point they want to make - and then work backwards to develop a reasonable-sounding rationale.

And it's not difficult to appeal to a selfish streak - nearly everyone has one.

I see nothing at all selfish about what conservatives think and want, David. We believe that people should be responsible for themselves. We believe they should take responsibility for their actions. We don't believe in anyone having massive debt, especially the government. And, you know, David, it's been proven that conservatives give more of their time, talent and treasure than do liberals.

Indeed people ARE responsible for themselves, however in rich countries, WITHIN COOPERATION.
I don't see any cooperation in willing the taypayer to pay for the Gulf spill, neither in refusing to integrate health care for most of the people.
This is to be translated as being responsible for ourselves at the sole conditions that taxpayer pays for our problems!

And it's not difficult to appeal to a selfish streak - nearly everyone has one.

Exactly, Dave. That's what politicians do all the time. Voters want something for nothing, and politicians promise to satisfy that greed.

Refusing to pay for the Gulf spill? You mean all of those bogus claims, including the pastor who said that "boo hoo" his church members WOULD PROBABLY not give as much?

Health care is not a right, Gilbert and no one ever died from not having insurance. Both of those are myths. Responsible people understand that from the time they leave their parent's care, they need to set aside money for emergencies and they need to either pay for insurance or put money aside for medical problems as well. Responsible people understand that they have no business whatsoever having massive credit card debt for unnecessary items and no plan whatsoever for if they get ill.

I also believe in all of what you listed, Marilyn...In fact it was the massive debt run up by Reagan, in direct contradiction to his campaign promises, that ended my lifelong support for the Republican party.

However, when I hear statements that suggest the jobless are disinclined to look for work because of their unemployment compensation, I tend to believe that those remarks are motivated by selfishness.

Perhaps there are some who take advantage of the system, just as there are some so-called conservatives who perhaps finagle outrageous compensation to the detriment of the stockholders for running corporations - or backdate options with the same results - but the vast majority of those who have been victimized by the economic downturn are truly hurting. There's a lot of pain below the surface and it's pretty much kept there. There are hundreds of applicants for the few available jobs that pop up. Does that sound like they are content to be out of work?

Oh, and incidentally, the unemployment payments help the economy more than any other expenditure the government makes, while extending the tax cuts for the wealthy helps the economy the least of all the major categories of expense (per the Congressional Budget Office). Now it's your turn to say the CBO figures are suddenly "unreliable," right, Marilyn, since they disagree with the connservative manifesto.

You talk about opposing massive debt - are you kidding? What have the Republicans done to the projected debt because of the tax cut extension and what would the recision of the healthcare reform law further do to it. The Republicans are the big spenders that have put this nation in the precarious position it's now in and they are continuing to spend like drunken sailors, except when it comes to the safety-net type items.

It's strictly selfishness wrapped up in the phony guise of personal responsibility.

The CBO figures are only as reliable as the data given them to analyze, David. So, yes, often it is unreliable. (Think about the first reports of Obamacare by the CBO as opposed to more current ones, now that people have started reading the bill.)

Hopefully, you'll see a difference in the Republicans now that they understand how serious the TEA party is and how influential. :-) But, seriously, you cannot compare what they've done to this current administration in the way of spending.

Unemployment benefits were never meant to go on forever, David. And, frankly, most states have zero accountability anymore to the recipients. We need to go back to the way it was in the 70s and 80s - prove that you are actively seeking work each and every week or don't get paid. You may think that the majority are doing that, but from what the forums show all over the internet, many people do not look for work until they think their benefits are about to run out. What they don't seem to understand is that the longer they are out of work, the less likely they are to be hired.

Continuing the tax cuts to everyone was smart, David. No government should raise taxes during a recession. And our businesses were at a standstill waiting to see if their taxes would be raised and how many people they would have to let go to pay them.

Marilyn, I have to agree, (I've seen all races caught up in the generational welfare.) I can tell you I have cousin's in Northern Michigan that live that way, generation to generation. I do see it as a long term conditioning starting with elementary schools in the 60's. I felt then that we were being programmed to be the ultimate consumer thanks to increasing use of credit, like credit was free money. I believe it started with Johnsons Great Society. That is when we saw a huge increase in governmental departments and redundancies!

Sure, it's a parenting problem. But it's also a school/education problem. And a church problem for those who attend church.

Everyone needs some finance courses like the ones offered by churches all over America last year, by numerous authors/publishers. Seeing a chart that shows what you actually pay over 20 years for a credit card with a $5,000 limit that is always maxed out (and you always only pay the minimum amount required) would probably astonish many.

Credit card companies should have never been allowed to set up on high school and college campuses. But it's not the government's job to fix that. All it takes is parents being responsible.

The fact is things are moving faster then we are keeping up with :) Marx had a point about the world of modernization. Labor is is shifting. Right now we can't produce for less then our competition, we have an excess of skilled labor (Blue collar) in markets that we can't compete in. Software and internet apps are reinventing work in the white collar industry as well. This is why we see recovery at the top with little movement at the bottom. A shift to Green would foster new Blue collar industries, but green means efficiency that helps the consumer but not the energy producers.

Utilities and the oil industry are fighting the shift as they have all along. Some people want us to return to protectionist markets and terrifs. That sounds good on the short end, but China and India are set to become the worlds largest middle classes. The American middle class fundamentally changed the would and these emerging classes will revolutionize the globe.

Darren I completely agree! If we ran out of oil tomorrow, we would be stopped from having alternative energy on a grand scale until our old energy masters had complete control of those things too! Take another look at China. They are not completely like us in percentage of middle class and they know they never will. A vast amount of their population will remain disposable like a growing number in this country! It seems that to have over a certain level of prosperity, there is always a percentage of the population sacrificed!
That's why the point I made to Marilyn about public assistance mostly rang true when work was plentiful years ago. Now it's survival! In checking job stats in our bicentennial year vs. today, we have fewer jobs today with 308 million people that in 1976 with 200 million people!

Marilyn is in the habit of deleting my comments so you may not get this :( There is a new economic model growing out of the chines idea, its not perfect, but it is the right concept. We have held that everyone needs a job in order to bet a part of the social team, but that is changing. Now as we move into deeper forms of collaborative environments, we find that skills are not always work related.

Learning to value people for their innate humanity is happening around the world and under our noses. I to agree in part with Marilyn, but one thing that is not said by her is the fact that what she and the rest of us take for grant, was built in part by money borrowed from me.

I personally am happy to live in the first baby steps of the space age. Money was borrowed against me generation and those who have come after. What are they getting for the investment? That should be the question. We know what some of those things are, longer life, augmented sensory perception, remote vehicle space travel, multidimensional work and learning environments, a robotic manual work force, the list goes on and on.Much of this is here now, but this emerging world requires us to grow up and re-imagine our models of integration.

Gene" Roddenberry imagined us moving beyond work into a world of human value. Its not so fantastic Read More

Darren, I should delete your comment because of your accusations. Did I delete a comment from this discussion? If I did, it was because you used the offensive word for TEA party members. You know I won't tolerate that.

I have not mentioned Tea at all and the comment was to JJ and the subject was the Lord Jesus and is word. If that is offensive to you then let the judgment stand on its own sword.

This comment was made to jj. I really don't know why you are so hostile.


I didn't know we were going to have Bible study, but if you like then so be it. jj.
Now Paul was addressing the Thessalonians in matters we have little documentation of. And we must keep in mind that Paul spoke often of his own mind and not of the Spirit, he and Peter openly argued the law.

No reasonable person would assume you could get the biblical perspective from one passage. The Bible is a large book with many layers of depth. Now not that many folks believe in it and most just use it as a tool of domination. But if one does choose to believe in it then one must take it as a whole, not parceling out what one wants and discarding the rest.

But in none of my comments did I ever say anything about Work!. Nor did I speak of entitlement. What I did say was that Socialism is a part of our history. Social institutions are a part of the commons. I said Ben believed in a social public commons.

I skipped referencing Paul and referenced Jesus instead as he is the highest authority on himself. Now his word stands on its own merits.

I can not see what your complaint is.

For those who are interested in the emerging world and changing paradigms. This shows the social changes over time.

Interim leaders are holding talks in Tunisia to try to form a unity government after a month of protests that led to the president fleeing. Young, educated bloggers, Tweeters and Facebook users are being credited with bringing down the regime.

A new world arises as the world continues its global conversation.

Darren, go away.

Aw, come on, Marilyn. Darren really has some good points and he's not causing problems at all, is he? Check out what he says.

My brother just got back from Tunisia about a month ago and he talked to many about their "president" that was currently holding a 29(?) year term of office. He liked it so much, he ruled out elections. Now he's on the run.

Cathi, Darren can post his words elsewhere.

I don't post words, I post thoughts. It is sad you have no true dialog beyond vitriolic scorn.

Thanks for sharing. I see the loons still come up with lame excuses for their true disrespect for our Founding Fathers.

They do.

"Disrespect" is a good word. Sometimes, though, I think the word "contempt" is more appropriate. Some of hose loons' attitude can probably be attributed to their ignorance of American history. I suspect that many people think all our Founders were evil racists. They probably don't realize that John Adams abhorred slavery and did not own slaves. Ben Franklin also did not support slavery. He may have even founded an abolitionist society. I seem to recall reading that in a biography of him, although I have to admit that I am not sure my memory is correct.

Marilyn, you may want to go to your library and look for Andrew Carroll's anthology of the world's greatest letters. One of them was written by Franklin when he was a very old man for a very young man hopelessly in love. It is extremely funny!

You also should share that Franklin quote with The History Buffs.' Club. I chose not to moderate the club and I am sure Gather has some procedures for cutting and pasting items to sites for other groups and clubs, so I doubt you would have any trouble doing that.

Thanks, Dave.

I'm not sure that's what it is. I don't mean to put words in his mouth, but I think the point he was trying to make was that our founding fathers were, like all men, imperfect.

Some (certainly not all) supported genuinely bad ideas (like slavery and the 3/5 compromise). These were GREAT men, but not all of their ideas were right.

The point being, that just because one might make the case for why a founding father might support one political party or another, doesn't prove that party is right.

That 3/5 compromise is one area where our history books lie. You might want to do some research on that.

I wonder what the world would be like today if some of our fonding fathers were alive today.

Benjamin Franklin would no doubt be a republican. Most of the founding fathers were (that's why they founded a republic).

Certainly I like this quote of his, and I agree with it, and I think he'd like the tea party. But I don't think he'd join.

The tea party is almost all conservative. Benjamin Franklin was a liberal.

Those terms - conservative and liberal - have come to mean different things. I do believe that he would be a TEA party member, since we're for fiscal responsibility, lower taxes and free markets.

Most if not all of America's founding fathers would have been Tea Party members were they living in today's Soviet Amerika.

I think you're right.

Wow, sure a lot of topics in the posts of this article! My thoughts
Yes there are certain hard fought rights that women have now. I don't want to return to Franklin times, as women really didn't have any say in almost everything that is important to me. I want to be able to speak and not have my husband speak for me. More than a few elections women have determined the outcome of the election.

I'm not sure if Frnklin would be a Tea Party Member, as we have watched more than 1 person say they stand for something get into office and do the opposite.

Back then we had honorable statesmen, Mary, not politicians who lie.

No one is saying to take away what we have. The point is that Franklin would definitely be a TEA party member today. We stand for what he and Jefferson and the others stood for.

Franklin sorry spelling error.

Benjamin Franklin is my favorite founding father. Loved the videos. I especially like that he gave his inventions away and didn't patent them.

Reading the Constitution and the Bill of Rights makes you realize that our founding fathers were very wise men.

I completely agree with you that Ben Franklin would be appalled at today's government, etc. I especially think he would be sick at his stomach to see so many people living off of the government. When I read the part about "entitlement" programs, I had to wonder why they are called "entitlement" programs and who in the world can be entitled to sit on their fanny and do nothing while others work their tails off and support them to do nothing. I am staying in a building full of people who seem to believe that they are "entitled" to live off of the hard work of the rest of us. Absolutely amazing at how lazy a lot of people are and how they think the rest of us should support their laziness. The Bible says that he who will not work shall not eat. I think we should bring that into effect.