atrasicarius
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
- Messages
- 2,227
- Reaction score
- 1,182
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
So we have 40 REAL people voting government can.
12 REAL people voting it can't, and one really immature prick spamming the vote 57 times in favor of can't. Seriously. Pathetic. Even for this place.
No you aren't. The firm existed prior to the loan. Stop making **** up and pretending someone else said it.
How can you tell?
You mean just as some whine about cutting military spending by two-thirds?
And fortunately, the founders of the Constitution understood that times and circumstances would change and provided a process for those changes to be implemented by we the people.
None of the candidates that call for the elimination of the Education and Transportation have a snowballs chance in hell of winning a general election.
It is why the libertarian party only receive 0.4% of the vote in the last election.
What????????? That might require some more explanation there, you think?
"New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become."
- Kurt Vonnegut, Breakfast of Champions
Before unions, minorities and the mentally impaired were not allowed in schools with the "normal" white kids.
Charter schools were supposed to be the market place alternative to public schools
Obama's support is still head and shoulders above the support given to the libertarian views you espouse.
No problem my friend, we just have to eliminate the tax cuts for the rich to repay the money taken from it to pay for the unfunded wars and raise the cap on FICA, and SS is set for the foreseeable future!
it's not exactly whining to point out that eating seed corn is only good for you in the short term.
that's correct. that process, of course, is known as the amendment process. if you can point me to the Amendment establishing all these things, I would be most fascinated to hear about it, as my Constitution is evidently out of date.
sadly, that is not correct. there is literally not enough money in the world to make our entitlement system solvent.
Look to the purpose and guiding principals of the Constitution as stated in the Preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense. promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Liberals should not discuss constitutionality. It is a foreign subject to them.
So your say, yet the Supreme Court, the body authorized under the Constitution in its interpretation has held for decades that SS and Medicare are Constitutional, just as I have.
Ultra-conservative Ron Paul explains the distinction very well here between defense spending and unnecessary spending on the military-industrial complex
We were discussing SS, and it is easily "fixed" for the long term by the methods I outlined above
The only way to "fix" our health care system, public and private, is to switch to UHC as the rest of the industrialized world has done.
I fail to see however what this has to do with the topic of this thread. Do you have some point related to the OP that you would like to discuss?
Seems to me liberal minded folks would full on embrace that strategy. Why should anyone have to bother to actually show who they actually are to cast a ballot after all?He's counting the number of registered users that voted and comparing that to the number of votes.
For example, 42 people in total have voted for "yes it can". Additionally, 42 of those 42 people are all registered members whose names we can see.
On the flip side 70 people have voted for "no it can't". However, only 12 of those 70 are actually registered members and one of them has stated they voted that way incorrectly (Ockham).
So the only 58 votes in favor of "no it can't" come from unregistered people.
We have a tendancy on threads that are near and dear to extreme hyper partisans to see the answer that dramatically fails when looking at the general membership somehow have an overwhelming majority of the "non-registered voters". This tends to be because an actual registered voter, mad that this pet hyper partisan issue is getting thoroughly trounced, decides to vote unregistered a ton of times so they can try and claim some kind of victory. Global Warming and Gay Marriage threads see this often.
At times, unregistered votes are reasonably accurate. However, when registered members are going essentially 43 to 11 in favor one way and unregistered membesr are going 58 to 0 another its a pretty good guess that someone is screwing with the poll. Especially when that 43 is made up of a significant mix of people on both sides of the political aisle.
Look to the purpose and guiding principals of the Constitution as stated in the Preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense. promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Ron Paul also either does not understand or chooses to ignore the fact that our economy depends upon global trade, which depends upon global stability, which depends upon a forward-deployed US Military. That is the main reason he won't get my vote - because either of those disqualifies him (imo) from the Presidency.
however, color me surprised that you of all people would advocate slashing public employee pensions.
thank you yes precisely?
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison
or, if you like, we can discuss the Federalist Papers, where they made themselves even more plain about the very limited power of the federal government?
How can you tell?
Seems to me liberal minded folks would full on embrace that strategy.
The President said it would create jobs. It not only lost those new jobs, but lost the old ones too. That's not good.
And that disproves you are wrong how?
You claimed that the firm was created by the government. You are wrong on that. Rather then admit you are wrong, you change the subject.
Do you really want to get branded as someone very dishonest? Did you really expect me not to notice what you were trying to pull there?
You CLAIM be a conservative, but you apparently hold no respect for the belief in self responsibility.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?