Of course . . . one “dead somebody” being the Thomas Paine of 1776 – or even the Thomas Paine of 1791 and The Rights of Man.
“But where says some is the king of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."
. . . . . Thomas Paine, Thoughts of the present state of American Affairs, Common Sense, 1776
I asked for clarification. Through the fog of your Alpha Male pretentiousness, you clarified. Which word didn’t you understand?
Among other words you don’t seem to understand (or do you?):
It’s been my experience that the arguments of 0bamatrons do not rise above the pyramid’s 4th level (contradiction), and generally sputters and stalls out at attempts to rise above the second (Ad Hominem) level.
Yes or no?
The simple matter is this whole “struggle” is all about seizing the control of power and wealth: power over Conservatives and the confiscation of Conservative wealth (Liberals will surrender their very souls with barely a whimper - if even so much as that).
Yes or no?
Put simply, a fight over money and control of our backsides.
Yes or no?
Liberals have taken over Science and use it to demonstrate their “superiority” over Conservatives.
Yes or no?
Liberals do not believe anything of value exists beyond backsides.
Yes or no?
It is not the Judeo-Christian Tradition that mistakenly thinks Science is an ethical and moral system designed to guide us in the value judgments with which we must deal.
Yes or no?
The truth is both Liberals and Scientists know better, but dare not admit it.
Yes or no?
“In fact, Paine was rewarded rather handsomely for his service by the US Congress”
In fact, Paine died in poverty, unforgiven for his betrayal of the American People.
“Only six mourners came to his funeral...”
Included among those six, neither you, I, nor Thomas Jefferson?
I don't know of any "Obamatrons" on Free Republic, but I notice that I do get rather regularly attacked at the ad hominem level by people claiming to be "more conservative than thou".
YHAOS: "The simple matter is this whole “struggle” is all about seizing the control of power and wealth: power over Conservatives and the confiscation of Conservative wealth (Liberals will surrender their very souls with barely a whimper - if even so much as that).
Yes or no?"
You know, I travel a lot (it's why I can't post every day) and am a great fan of conservative talk show hosts -- Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Beck, Wilkow, even secessionist Mike Church -- they all say that's exactly what's happening, and I agree.
I also think, at least for now, we are losing the struggle.
YHAOS: "Liberals have taken over Science and use it to demonstrate their “superiority” over Conservatives.
Yes or no?"
Certainly, in the case of government funded research on "Anthropogenic Global Warming", where they've skewed the data and corrupted computer models to produce politically inspired results.
But I am not aware of such large-scale corruptions in other fields of natural-science.
As for precisely who claims "superiority" to whom, seems to me there's quite a bit of that going around, even right here, on Free Republic.
My whole suggestion here is that much of this "superiority" issue disappears if we simply recognize the stark boundaries between what is "natural-science" and what is not.
Back in the Old Days, many other branches of knowledge (i.e., theology, metaphysics) were considered equal or superior to natural-science.
Indeed, iirc, wasn't it you YHAOS who told me theology was called the "Queen of sciences"?
YHAOS: "Liberals do not believe anything of value exists beyond backsides.
Yes or no?"
I would give them more credit than that.
As Rush says, liberals claim they are out to "help the poooooooooor", and doubtless the youngest among them actually believe that.
Cynical older pols are a different matter, of course.
YHAOS: "It is not the Judeo-Christian Tradition that mistakenly thinks Science is an ethical and moral system designed to guide us in the value judgments with which we must deal.
Yes or no?
Yes, but why the double negative and what's your point?
Do you suppose that's controversial?
YHAOS: "The truth is both Liberals and Scientists know better, but dare not admit it.
Yes or no?"
Better than what, exactly?
YHAOS: "In fact, Paine died in poverty, unforgiven for his betrayal of the American People."
False, false & false.
In fact, 72-year-old Paine died "poor" only relative to his previous wealth.
He was far from "poor" by average American standards.
In fact, there was no "betrayal of the American People", period.
The real American list of indictments against Paine consists of exactly two items: 1) in 1779 he criticized wealthy Pennsylvanian Robert Morris for war profiteering, and 2) in 1796 Paine publically criticized George Washington, in the belief that Washington had left Paine rot in a French jail, almost to the point of beheading.
Yes, in fact, many religious Americans of the early 1800s strongly disagreed with Paine's ideas in Rights of Man (1792) and Age of Reason (completed 1807).
But Age of Reason was a best seller, so Paine at even that late date still had admirers in America, including President Jefferson.
So there was no "betrayal" and no "forgiveness" required.
Some Americans -- then and now -- strongly disagreed with Paine's ideas, others as strongly agreed.
YHAOS: "Included among those six, neither you, I, nor Thomas Jefferson?"
Do you want to explain to us why, exactly, you so wish to gloat over the death and burial of a great British citizen supporter of the American Revolution?
What is your problem, exactly?