2007-09-04 13:57:20 · 20 answers · asked by runnerguy59 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
NO ,NO WAY, NO HOW!!! they would be dissapointed and confused by all the so called political correctness,the illegal immigration problems and the gay agenda,and how corrupt and wild,lazy and immoral and unfit our nation has become.they would be amazed how little education is valued and by the lewdness ,disrespect,drunkeness and drug addicted pathetic people living here!
2007-09-04 14:07:09 · answer #1 · answered by dixie58 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No. But they were also wise in making the Constitution something that could be amended. How could they forsee the future? Medicine was limited in their time, the populations was much smaller, the industrial revolution had not taken place and many people were in business for themselves.
I sincerely believe that they would be appalled by a lot of things that Republicans think is right about our Government.
The biggest failure is this Administration is it's disregard for the constitution and the importance of checks and balances.
They would also wonder what happened to the idea of state Goverment. It doesn't exist as they saw it.
2007-09-04 15:37:37 · answer #2 · answered by Ellinorianne 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are spinning in their graves.
Heck no they don't approve. They may not have been perfect people, in a time when people still owned people, but they laid out a foundation where the people own this government not the other way around.
Just read Thomas Jefferson's works and you will see that if it gets any worse they just might get up out of the grave and lead a 2nd American Revolution.
2007-09-04 15:31:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No they tried to make it so Govt would never run the people but the people run the Govt. Neither would many of past Presidents such as Eisenhower and Keneddy approve of the conduct and aspirations of the present.
2007-09-04 14:29:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
They would no doubt wonder why the people complain so much when they have it so good and have so much compared to how it was in the early days of the United States. I feel that they would approve of how it is being run and disapprove of the peoples attitude because the people only complain. They don't offer solutions or try to change what they disagree with. "NO WHINERS ALLOWED"
2007-09-04 14:12:01 · answer #5 · answered by Johnny P 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, i don't think they would approve. all our civil rights are going down the toilet.
there is toooooo much government control & it is only going to get worse if we elect any of the "big 4" candidates to office. they are completely sold out to one world goverment.
there is a candidate that wants to get back to truly living by & supporting the Constitution... Congressman Ron Paul.
He is for:
- American privacy
- pulling the US out of the UN
- having our civil rights protected
- pro-life
-
He is NOT for:
- federal income tax (that should be enough to get him elected!!!)
- the Real ID Act of 2005 that has now become law.... the deadline this national id card for most states is May 11, 2008. this is not just going to be a national card, but global.
- the SPP
- opening the borders between Mexico, the US, & Canada by 2010
- NAFTA
- the North American Union
- the "Amero" (similar to the "euro")
it's time we elected someone who will stand up for our liberties & our country!
if we don't ... we are going to LOSE OUR RIGHTS & LOSE OUR COUNTRY!
all the other candidates SUPPORT IT.
WAKE UP AMERICANS!!!!!
if this NAU goes through as planned, we will lose our US sovereignty, our US Constitution, our Bill of Rights, our US monetary system & much more.
2007-09-04 14:25:35 · answer #6 · answered by t d 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Revolutionary War was started by far less than what is happening these days.
If they were alive today, they would be thrown in jail for trying to incite another revolution against our Congress because our Congress does not honor their oaths of office.
2007-09-04 14:05:21 · answer #7 · answered by KD7ONE 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. At least half of all the feds do is unconstitutional. I believe that in their opinion it was better under King George. I would agree with them too. I think their reaction would cause the government to immediately brand them as terrorists.
2007-09-04 14:05:19 · answer #8 · answered by rick b 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not, because they hated absolutists. They engineered a limited government for a reason -- they would consider the 16th Amendment a crime against the rights of the individual.
2007-09-04 14:04:59 · answer #9 · answered by Boomer Wisdom 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. They would say: "The tenth amendment is there for a reason." Not every issue is a federal issue. They envisioned that many issues would be handled locally, not so often at the federal level.
2007-09-04 14:15:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋