Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 84

Thread: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    since those that said what bush did was illegal, both in the Iraq war and Patriot Act.

    Conservatives and Republicans have said time and time again since Bush wasn't convicted or tries of violations of implementing of the Patriot Act or Iraq war that he was INNOCENT.
    So what? Just because some other people use a dumb argument doesn't mean it's okay for you to use a dumb argument.

    So why is all of a sudden Obama guilty without any trial or even at the most charges being brought against him?
    An accusation of guilt always precedes a determination of guilt.

    Bring charges against OBama or (like conservatives and Republicans have said in regards to charges against Bush) STFU.
    So, unless I bring a lawsuit against Obama I'm not allowed to criticize him on a political debate forum? Are you suffering from Alzheimer’s?

  2. #72
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Oh you mean interpret the Constitution to how conservatives view it, got it.
    No he means interpret it strictly and originally, not redefine it endlessly to suit particular political platforms so it is a written constitution of worth.



    As a living document the Constitution would free slaves and make labor laws such as children shouldn't be labor, but we know how you would hate a living document to prevent those things.
    As a living document it would be just guidelines, you might as well get rid of it.

    You would just like the constitution to remain as is without any amendments and make those things I said to be against possible.

    Sorry we couldn't make the consitution static and not change slavery, child laber, etc. so sorry.

    A lliving document meant changes could be made but you would rather the consiutution stay as is and cannot be changed with any amendments.
    Umm, this doesn't have much to with amendments
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  3. #73
    Educator BulletWounD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-17-11 @ 09:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    984

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Sorry that will prevent you from joining, but I have read the constitution, it just seems I interpret it different than what you do.

    I interpret it as I don't agree with what Obama is doing with the bailout, however the precedent was set with Bush.
    Yes, absolutely. I was categorically against Bush's bailout of the airlines. Have you flown Delta lately? What a horrible, horrible, airline. They don't deserve to be in business. I knew it would set a terrible precedent. Government is like a cancer. It grows and grows and grows until it kills the host.

    Here's an article from 2001 regarding the airline bailout. Look at what we're doing today. Think about it.

    Airline bailout criticized

    It's funny though that Bush stacked the Supreme court with 2 Justices, yet this hasn't been brought before it.
    I don't really know enough about his appointments to comment. What I can say definitively is that if what you call "conservative" judges were appointed for the next 10 terms it still wouldn't be enough to roll back the expansion of power that's been wrought through the politicized judiciary.

    I am against the bailout, yet nothing has been brought against it legally.
    Yet... There may be sufficient grounds for some sort of court case but what good would it do? We can't get that money back.

    You didn't say who you voted for in 2008. I said mine and the reasons, are you embarrassed to say yours?
    I didn't vote. I was in no position to vote at that time. This goes back to the health problem and I'd rather not get into it. Yes, it is embarrassing.

    Perhaps Paul's concepts were unrealistic, but he had a chance to pave the way for third parties (much like Perot did in 1992) however like Perot, Paul backed out.

    While I don't think Paul or Perot would have won, I really think they would have paved the way had they run a legitimate campaign for third party.

    Perot failed when he ran, dropped out, then came back in and Paul failed when he wouldn't run as a third party candidate.
    Well, going back to our isolationist roots might be the best thing that ever happened to this country. But at this point in time, I feel we have too many obligations to free, democratic countries that we either helped create or propped up. (ie South Korea, Taiwan, now Iraq and Afghanistan, even Japan relies on our nuclear umbrella). At what point will these countries be able to stand on their own two feet and resist tyranny? I don't know... I do feel that it's our obligation as the harbinger of freedom to help them while they can't.
    Last edited by BulletWounD; 04-02-09 at 03:55 AM.

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    So what? Just because some other people use a dumb argument doesn't mean it's okay for you to use a dumb argument.
    Oh so now that a D is in front of the name, let's just forget all the things the Republicans said against Bush and apply them to Obama right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    An accusation of guilt always precedes a determination of guilt.
    so that somehow makes it right?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    So, unless I bring a lawsuit against Obama I'm not allowed to criticize him on a political debate forum? Are you suffering from Alzheimer’s?
    Again you and others seem to fail in recognizing the difference between criticizing Obama and bringing judgment as some here have.

    Much of what has been done is the equivalent of what the left did to Bush in saying he knew about 9/11 and allowed it to happen. That is just as false as those making judgment against Obama.

    Hell there is a thread about Obama "INTENTIONALLY de-valuating the dollar".

    Yet how many conservatives have come in that thread and said that is flat out wrong?

  5. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    No he means interpret it strictly and originally, not redefine it endlessly to suit particular political platforms so it is a written constitution of worth.
    Ummm just to let you know what the founding fathers saw in 1700 does not necessarily mean the same thing in the year 2009. That is why they allowed the process of Amendments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    As a living document it would be just guidelines, you might as well get rid of it.
    Well then we would be Europe wouldn't we?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Umm, this doesn't have much to with amendments
    It has EVERYTHING to do with Amendments. The founding fathers recognized that what they saw then would not necessarily be the same in later years so they ALLOWED amendments to happen in the constitution. Thus making it a LIVING DOCUMENT that could be changed and added to.

  6. #76
    Educator BulletWounD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-17-11 @ 09:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    984

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Ummm just to let you know what the founding fathers saw in 1700 does not necessarily mean the same thing in the year 2009. That is why they allowed the process of Amendments.



    Well then we would be Europe wouldn't we?



    It has EVERYTHING to do with Amendments. The founding fathers recognized that what they saw then would not necessarily be the same in later years so they ALLOWED amendments to happen in the constitution. Thus making it a LIVING DOCUMENT that could be changed and added to.
    By "living document" I'm not referring to the amendment process. I'm referring precisely to what Wessexman is talking about. Interpreting and re-interpreting ad nauseum until the document becomes meaningless.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by BulletWounD View Post
    By "living document" I'm not referring to the amendment process. I'm referring precisely to what Wessexman is talking about. Interpreting and re-interpreting ad nauseum until the document becomes meaningless.
    The amendment process is what makes it a living document though. And interpretation is what made it so women have equal rights as well as blacks.

    Are you saying you don't ever want it interpreted?

    Or are you just saying you don't want it interpreted in a way YOU don't like?

  8. #78
    Educator BulletWounD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-17-11 @ 09:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    984

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The amendment process is what makes it a living document though.
    Again, I'm not referring to the amendment process. The Constitution would be worthless without the amendment process.

    And interpretation is what made it so women have equal rights as well as blacks.
    14th...

    Are you saying you don't ever want it interpreted?

    Or are you just saying you don't want it interpreted in a way YOU don't like?
    I'm saying it should be interpreted strictly and the way the founders intended and amended more frequently when warranted.

  9. #79
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Ummm just to let you know what the founding fathers saw in 1700 does not necessarily mean the same thing in the year 2009. That is why they allowed the process of Amendments.
    Amendments are different. We, or at least I'm, are talking about judicial activism. Judges treating the existing constitution as guidelines with words and phrases to be reinterpreted willy nilly to fit particular social platforms ie randomly abortion is covered by the right to privacy or happiness despite all tradition and precedent.


    Well then we would be Europe wouldn't we?
    You'd have the same kind of activist state they do, yes.


    It has EVERYTHING to do with Amendments. The founding fathers recognized that what they saw then would not necessarily be the same in later years so they ALLOWED amendments to happen in the constitution. Thus making it a LIVING DOCUMENT that could be changed and added to.
    We are talking about judges and judicial activism. Amendments come from the legislature and people not from judges.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  10. #80
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 04:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,468

    Re: Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    The amendment process is what makes it a living document though. And interpretation is what made it so women have equal rights as well as blacks.
    So? This is a common liberal problem, a confusion of means and ends. Just because the ends are good doesn't mean we should support such dangerous means as making Scotus a liberal committee on public safety that can redefine the constitution as it likes.

    Are you saying you don't ever want it interpreted?

    Or are you just saying you don't want it interpreted in a way YOU don't like?
    I think he's saying he wants it interpreted strictly and originally.

    The most important part of this is the interpretation of almost all the FF's, even the likes of Hamilton, that what was not granted was reserved to the states and individuals. As Hamilton said, a bill of rights was not needed; free speech did not need protection because the constitution grants no power for the feds to take it away.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •