- Joined
- Jun 11, 2009
- Messages
- 19,657
- Reaction score
- 8,454
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
You cannot be serious...
I mean, I have seen blind fealty to the Supreme Court, but this takes the cake.
Since when has the Court become the superior branch of government?
I'll state it one last time for you silly Conservatives.
You preach and advocate that using the amendment process should be the only way to expand the power of government.
Then feel free to use it to pass a Constitutional Amendment restricting the power of the federal government.
Why is it so hard to practice what you preach?
You don't have a very good grasp of American history do you?
Thomas Paine was the first to suggest a welfare entitlement program.
You don't have a very good grasp of American history do you? The government gave away virtually free land to anyone willing to settle it. Does that constitute an entitlement program? Government resources being distributed to the poor? Relief programs and poor houses were also very common.
Thomas Paine was the first to suggest a welfare entitlement program.
This is laughable. You pervert the Constitution, then cite it as a justification for your position. Do you know what "cognitive dissonance" is?
Simply incredible. The irony is totally lost upon you...
Show us the specific quote to which you are referring so that we may discuss it accordingly.
Show us where the government gave government land to the citizens. I'm gonna live this.
I recall American settling land that was there for the taking from the indians, but don't recall any massive land give away by our early government.
Post your sources, please! Can't wait!
I'll state it one last time for you silly Conservatives.
You preach and advocate that using the amendment process should be the only way to expand the power of government.
Then feel free to use it to pass a Constitutional Amendment restricting the power of the federal government.
Why is it so hard to practice what you preach?
There is no need to pass such an amendment. Why do you think such an amendment is required when we already have the founding documents citing limited government as the vision, the first 10 amendments, the commerce clause, etc.?
Well?
Or are you parroting some lefty blogs seemingly clever gotcha question? Yeah, it's clear that you are.
No additional amendment is necessary. What is necessary is for the executive and legislative branches not to subordinate themselves to the judiciary. Why do you blindly support court decisions?
Like Kelo for example...the Constitution is very clear in the Takings Clause, yet, the Court found that government could take property not just for public use but for private use, too. No problem with that?
What happened when the settlers took ownership of the land? Did they go to the mailbox every month and get their check, or did they use it to make a living?
I'm not the one preaching strict adherence to a document written over 2 hundred years ago.
Do you know what "hypocrisy" is? If you truly believe in the value of the Constitution, then stop bitching and get a Constitutional Amendment passed.
Haven't you ever read "Agrarian Justice"?
Thomas Paine's 'Agrarian Justice': The Rights of Individuals to Own Property Investigated
I'm happy you conservatives think this way. I'll enjoy health care reform while you guys bitch about how Unconstitutional it is, but do nothing about it.
Obviously they used the land they never paid for to make a living. I have no problem with that kind of welfare. In fact, TANIF embodies the same principles the founding fathers had in regards to no able bodied man being given a free ride. Only those who are truly deserving and in need of welfare should get it.
What should the Amendment say!? "Adhere to the Constitution" or something similar?
I've read it, yes. I don't see where Thomas Paine advocates for a Federal income tax used to fund massive expansions of centralized authority and Keynesian fiscal and monetary policy. Could you show me specifically where he supported such measures? I can't find it...:roll:
2010 and 2012. You will hear the voice of real America.
:2wave:
That's not how the current system works. Is it? The current system is your basic steal from the rich and give to the poor kinda set up. Which is why, "general welfare", in no way means that I should have to bust my ass, then have most of my money taken away to give to some buncha deadbeats that are too stupid, or too lazy to make it on their own.
I'm happy you conservatives think this way. I'll enjoy health care reform while you guys bitch about how Unconstitutional it is, but do nothing about it.
Do nothing? What world do you live in? Thirteen states or more now joining to challenge the constitutionality of requiring citizens to purchase a private product/service.
Do you really have no problem with the fed govt requiring you to buy something?
Do nothing? What world do you live in? Thirteen states or more now joining to challenge the constitutionality of requiring citizens to purchase a private product/service.
Do you really have no problem with the fed govt requiring you to buy something?
Edit - so to keep the domestic autos in business, if Obama says we must buy a new vehicle from Ford or GM, you'd have no problem with that? Fits right in with the Founders vision?
Okay, Chappy, we get it. You think the GOP is appropriately labeled as the "party of no". Your position is duly noted. Care to add something else, or are you just going to parrot your leftist rhetoric some more?
How about defining what "general welfare" and "common defense" are suppose to mean so that they cannot be interpreted to mean anything else. It seems the court decided they mean something that you disagree with, so that means the next step in action is for you silly conservatives to pass a Constitutional amendment. Funny how you advocate for it, but don't seem to know how it works.
Wow, you read all that into, "Thomas Paine was the first to suggest a welfare entitlement program."?
If the GOP wants to run on repeal of health care reform, then let them. They are already stepping away from doing so. All they are going to do is complain about how the health care reform endangers jobs and businesses in order to win seats and then they will do nothing. Heck, they'll probably expand upon it.
This thread is about “Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'” !!
I'm posting on the right thread, are you?
It's really simple! You want to talk about something else? Go make your own ****ing thread.
While it's true that it's not the best thing to require people to buy health care insurance. Are you saying you'd rather not have it at all?
They don't have to repeal it, just defund it.
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?