I will check out your supplied references for wikipedia as time allows. In essence though, yes there was a time when Wikipedia's reliability as a source was questioned and it's use as a reference was frowned upon, in the academic world as in other arenas as well. I don't believe that to be the case now, though for me I resolved the issue to my satisfaction some time back. As for the ability of outsiders to 'edit' it, yes there is a limited ability to do so BUT there are checks to ensure any editting or changes are true and accurate ones and any inaccurate changes are swiftly fixed or removed.

As for my ideology, I don't believe I have actually stated my position on anything other than that I question the validity of using the quoted opinions of one man (or even 4 or 5, especially if those quotes are out of context as they so often are) to represent the supposed views of a ill defined majority opinion of others. IF the speech was a real speech then it still remains the opinions of solely one man. If it was not a real speech then it adds further doubt over it's use as a source of doctrine. The reference(s) I included were included solely to point out that there is question whether or not the speech is even authentic, not for any other reason. Had I been looking for a proof that the speech was not real I would have found more complete and more referenced sources to share. From my perspective the fact that Crockett is on record as v****g for Federal Appropriations to the poor and to cheap land title 'grants' would be sufficient cause to doubt the authenticity of the speech, or any view that he thought such action was unConstitutional (either that or he was a hypocrite and I hestitate to accuse him of that).

As for cherry picking? At this point I am unsure of what you believe I am cherry picking. I haven't listed any real sources other than as to call in question the supposed validity of the speech this blog is supposed to be about. I admit to not sharing your views on economic systems and supposed dictatorships (which is not a true cause and effect relationship but is a prevalent idea among conspiracy theorists), but I haven't actually entered into a discussion of such, other than to question your conclusions in passing. Dictatorships come about through wealth disparity as easily (in fact more easily) than through seeking social justice. In fact a serious point could be made that our most affluent times and the largest growth of the middle class (and subsequent shrinking of the poor class) as well as our greatest expansions of the rights of people to all people occurred during our most progressive times and since we have "returned" to a 'free market' conservative system of policies we have seen a significant drift back toward economic and political disparity. I know I have seen much loss of citizen's rights and economic e******y since the 80's but that would be a lengthy (and off topic) discussion.

As for my meaning about a balanced discussion, my intented meaning there is it's hard to have a balanced and intellectual discussion with someone who has only read half (or less than half) of the arguments involved and has made up their mind that the portion they have read is all there is to the matter. Yes I referenced the "Anti Federalist Papers" because they express views from other citizens who were opposed to ratifying the new Constitution and one cannot completely understand the Federalist Papers, nor the issues of the times, without reading both sides. Sadly I have ran into far too many people who love to quote bits and pieces of one side but are either ignorant of the counter arguments of the day or wish to pretend they didn't exist. (Again sadly many "Constitutionalists" are like too many "Christians" in that they pick and choose what fits their already chosen viewpoints and ignore anything that would oppose that view). Please don't confuse that with thinking we are not bound by the Constitution, but as noted previously even those who were involved in drafting it are not in complete agreement as to it's limits and intents. Madison for one actually changed his position on Standing Armies during his time as President. Madison also did not believe a Bill of Rights was necessary and only drafted them upon request (partly from Thomas Jefferson).

From where I stand I would actually place most modern Conservatives in the group that opposed ratification of our Constitution but that's simply because of the attitudes they exude and express. Those same people who cry so loudly for a 'return to the constitution' would have actually been opposed to ratification of it during those times. Ironic to say the least.

As for my "ideology", I am a moderate progressive, or at least like to think I am. There are those who would disagree (from both Right and Left camps). At one time I was an adament "Constitutionalist" but time and research has given me better perspectives on what it truly means to support the Constitution and where our real enemies lie.

I would actually suggest you read Federalist Paper 9 by Madison (I have decided to reread both documents as memories do tend to fade as time progresses).
In essence Madison would have grouped both left and right, conservative and liberal into Factions. I would also suggest that if you haven't yet done so you read the works of Thomas Paine (a favorite of modern conservatives but I suspect it's because they haven't really read his works since he pretty much would be considered an ultra liberal in today's definitions). I would probably suggest "Common Sense" followed by "Age of Reason", "The Rights of Man" and "Agrarian Justice" for starters.

Dutchman:

I grew up on a farm, in the 50's, and have worked hard in construction most of my life.

Don't tell me, a man that spent his years taking orders, and drawing a check, funded by the people through TAX DOLLARS, can tell me anything about life.

Every one you worked with, and everything you used in the military, was paid for with TAX DOLLARS.

You guys spend 20 years, and "retire" with a pension, paid for withTAX DOLLARS. Then you go and work for a contractor that is hired by the pentagon, and funded by TAX DOLLARS.

Give me a break!!

The figures show that the upper 10% Pay over 70% of the taxes. http://money.cnn.com/2013/03/12/news/economy/rich-taxes/index.html But I still think the ultra rich and big oil get too many tax breaks. I say closing the tax loopholes is what is needed to make the tax system fairer. Note that part of what the rich pay goes towards maintaining a peaceful society. That way, the rich get to enjoy their riches without having to worry about a civil war which would be likely if there would be no hope for the average citizen to succeed in life. Taxes are what pay for the education of the working class. Education is what keeps America thriving.

I have read both the Federalist Papers and it's counterpart, I wonder if you can say the same? In fact since your response has a most predictably conservative bias to it I think I will refrain from any other response until I know whether or not you have since a balanced discussion is questionable without knowing whether or not you have, with the following one exception; As with all sources of information there are always those who try to discredit those sources who are not in lockstep with their own views.. Wikipedia being one of those sources. I had my own questions about it's reliability so I took the time to research it's reliability and accuracy and that research showed it to be as credible and reliable as any other major reputable encyclopedia so unless you have a credible source to support your view of it then I cannot give credence to your opinion of it.

It always "amazes" me that people love to quote ONE person's OPINION as if it reflected the opinion of ALL people concerning a given time or issue. Davy Crocket had some interesting, and potentially valid opinions but they were just that OPINIONS. Opinions not shared by others of his time and on the issue at hand. While it is interesting to know his opinion, and while it can help enlighten us to how HE felt about things it is still up to US to make our own choices based on how things are in the Here and NOW and as fits the needs of modern society and people. A read of the works of Thomas Paine will show that there was also a sentiment in those times that NO generation had the right to determine the government of any generation except it's own, that EVERY generation had the RIGHT and the DUTY to configure Government to fit it's own needs and that no generation had the Right NOR the power to dictate how another generation must live. So while it is noteworthy what Mr Crockett said from his Frontier perspective it has little bearing on how the rest of his time viewed things and even less bearing on how OUR generation should govern itself.

Not an "O**h K****r" are you?

The way I see it, it comes down to one of two people. Rand Paul, or Ben Carson. Doctor Carson was asked who he liked and he answered that Rand Paul would be his choice. I could settle for either of them.

As for the i*****l i*******ts, they only come here to get jobs and make money. Very few of them benefit from welfare. They make better workers than most US citizens and they are cheaper for businesses to hire.
Why are they cheaper to hire? Because businesses can hire them as contract workers and never have to pay all the things to the government that they would have to pay a US citizen.

They suffer a great deal of abuse because of their illegal status. This abuse starts the second they decide to set out to get into the United States and well after. While many of them would benefit from being here legally, a great deal of their leverage over legal citizens would be lost because their labour would then be just as expensive for businesses as it is to hire legal citizens. It speaks volumes about the working conditions in Mexico and points further south that any of them come here at all.

This brings one other thing to mind. The very few young men that tried to hire on at the fabrication shop I was running could deal with fractions. Even less knew how to read a measuring tape or ruler and even fewer knew anything at all about drawings. The majority of them could not even read a map. On the other hand, most of the i******s could do all three or at least get by, even though they did not speak English at all.

We have a real problem with our workforce because our school systems are turning out illiterate, innumerate and overweight fools who do not want to get off the couch or out of the airconditioning. Did I mention that most of them are lazy? No, I didn't did I? The facts are hard, but they are the facts. I have been in a position to see it first hand.

I think this would be a more approprate avatar for this FIGIT