why the left is dying

The voting public thought so.

Ironic as well that the Constitution was amended so quickly after FDR died in office after having been elected 4 times. Seems that in retrospect the citizens themselves realized with horror the folly of doing so and were quick to provide protection from repeating that mistake in the future. Might that be because of the way FDR used the force of his office?

You still haven't told us how the threat issued by FDR and Congress wasn't a use of force LJ. Neither have the parrots and court jesters that have piped in recently. That hole you've dug for yourself must be too deep to climb out of by now, huh.

I don't need to tell you something that is on its face not true... Give it up, liar...

You've lost this one...

"Seems that in retrospect the citizens themselves realized with horror the folly of doing so..."

If they realized the "horror", why didn't they do it after the 3rd term?... You mean they had to do it 4 times? And all those pictures of people standing along the railroad tracks, crying, as the funeral train passed by were actually just subdued Republican activists....

rofllol

Give it up yourself LJ. The reason you won't tell us how that wasn't a use of force, and thus consistent with the definition you yourself provided, is because you can't. It was a use of force to alter government and thus conforms to the definition you provided. So even according to the definition you provided it was a coup. Q.E.D.

LJ, don't you know that FDR was a founding father?

That the best you can up with Kate? Why not tell us how the threat issued by FDR and Congress wasn't a use of force? LJ's stuck in the hole she dug herself into and could really use your help at this point.

It's really amusing to watch you beat your head against a wall to rationalize a losing position you've taken. It's you usual debate style and is really entertaining. Please, carry on.

Remember, he's the same one that spent a week trying to convince us that John Quincy Adams was a "founding father."

"He ain't right--but he's never wrong..."

It wasn't "use of force"...

The Dictionary I looked up only had two definitions:

A) a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.

A quick and decisive seizure of governmental power by a strong military or political group. In contrast to a revolution, a coup d'état, or coup, does not involve a mass uprising. Rather, in the typical coup, a small group of politicians or generals arrests the incumbent leaders, seizes the national radio and television services, and proclaims itself in power.

Both of which, of course, are lies in the case of FDR...

Synonyms
overthrow, rebellion, revolution, uprising.


You're a liar, PS... There was no coup...But thanks for playing.


(...and John Quincy Adams was NOT a "founding father.")

And still the figurative cry of "heretic" is all that is to be found. No answers as to why a more liberal inclusion of who was a founding father is so stridently opposed other than it removes the excuse to engage in the politics of personal destruction and not a single attempt to explain why the issuance of a threat is not a use of force.

I would love to debate the issue of whether the issuance of a threat is a use of force or not Kate, but for some odd reason neither you nor LJ seem able to come up with a single argument as to why it is not despite numerous invitations to do so. Might that be because there is not a credible argument to refute that it is in fact the use of force?

That's because your "debate logic" is all in your head. You take a position and then bend the facts to support that position. I learned a month ago that it is futile to enter into a serious discussion with you, since you cannot tell reality from the fantasy in your head. You lost all credibility with me (and several others) when you argued that John Quincy Adams was a founding father and would not relent, even though it was demonstrated to you over and over again that he was not a founding father. You are once again entering that "Printsmith fantasy realm" in this twisted argument you have about this supposed coup that happened with FDR. It happened only in your mind, and the more you continue to go down this path, the more any remaining respect many of us have for you, will be irrevocably lost.

But by all means, continue to spin and twist your argument to attempt to rationalize your erroneous stance to which you have staked your reputation. It's very entertaining to watch.