Was John Quincy Adams A "Founding Father"??

WayneH wrote: She was asked about it later and said she meant what she said and that she knew he was 9 years old at the time.

It was all a convoluted explanation to explain her comment that the founding fathers fought tirelessly to end slavery.

Yes.

That would be an example of trying to spin a blooper as fact.

AspenValley wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: [ Unvarnished and unspun.

I don't buy it, PS.

If Obama instead of Bachman had tried to claim John Quincy as a "founding father" you'd have been passionate in your riducule of the idea.

I'm sorry, but your partisanship is obviously clouding your viewpoint on this one.

Which one AV - the actions of FDR or whether JQA could be considered as one of the founders. Personally I don't think my viewpoint is clouded on either one given the facts of history, but it would be nice to know which one you are taking issue with.

PrintSmith wrote:

AspenValley wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: [ Unvarnished and unspun.

I don't buy it, PS.

If Obama instead of Bachman had tried to claim John Quincy as a "founding father" you'd have been passionate in your riducule of the idea.

I'm sorry, but your partisanship is obviously clouding your viewpoint on this one.

Which one AV - the actions of FDR or whether JQA could be considered as one of the founders. Personally I don't think my viewpoint is clouded on either one given the facts of history, but it would be nice to know which one you are taking issue with.

John Quincy Adams as "Founding Father".

He's certainly an important figure in early American history, but that doesn't make him a Founding Father.

He's not... And no amount of convoluted reasoning from the right can make it so.

AspenValley wrote:

PrintSmith wrote:

AspenValley wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: [ Unvarnished and unspun.

I don't buy it, PS.

If Obama instead of Bachman had tried to claim John Quincy as a "founding father" you'd have been passionate in your riducule of the idea.

I'm sorry, but your partisanship is obviously clouding your viewpoint on this one.

Which one AV - the actions of FDR or whether JQA could be considered as one of the founders. Personally I don't think my viewpoint is clouded on either one given the facts of history, but it would be nice to know which one you are taking issue with.

John Quincy Adams as "Founding Father".

He's certainly an important figure in early American history, but that doesn't make him a Founding Father.

So let me see if I have this straight. John Jay, despite not having been part of constructing either the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution is a founding father, but JQA is not because he didn't either. Have I got that right?

John Jay was a revolutionary when John Quincy Adams was an infant.

Founding means "founding". John Quincy Adams can't be a "founding father" because he was too young to have any role in the FOUNDING of America.

This isn't rocket science, PS.

There were lots of revolutionaries AV, are all of them founding fathers along with Jay?

PrintSmith wrote: There were lots of revolutionaries AV, are all of them founding fathers along with Jay?

I'd say it's a matter of degree depending on level of invovlement in the process. However, one thing they would all have in common would actually be having BEEN around at the founding of the country, and not as a nine-year-old kid.

Seriously, PS, I'm embarrased for you that you would even try to make such a baseless argument.

I'd really hate to lose respect for you over this. It isn't worth it.

You'd guess it depends - upon what you, or LJ, or a historian, or some partisan, agenda driven blogger have determined fits within their parameters no doubt. No room for diversitry of opinion. No room for inclusion of ideas that may differ from your own.. No room for a broadened interpretation. Certainly not - especially when holding tight to a more narrow definition may be used as an excuse to engage in demagoguery and dismissal of those who think otherwise. Not simply their opinion mind you, the very people themselves, a fellow citizen that you intentionally have distanced from yourself while at the same time decrying the scism that threatens to rip the nation apart. You can't have the cake and eat it also AV.

No... The kid was 9 years old.. I wasn't aware that that was open "to opinion"? He was NOT a so-called "Founding Father."

I'm embarrassed for you too.

PrintSmith wrote: ...the very people themselves, a fellow citizen that you intentionally have distanced from yourself while at the same time decrying the scism that threatens to rip the nation apart.

But I LOVE the "victimhood" bit... You have it down to a science... rofllol