Page 14 of 19 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 183

Thread: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

  1. #131
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    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!
    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase]Louisiana Purchase - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

  2. #132
    Student
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 12:27 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    159

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    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?

  3. #133
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative Sword View Post
    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?
    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.

  4. #134
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,319

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    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?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  5. #135
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    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?
    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.

  6. #136
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    240

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I'm not the one preaching strict adherence to a document written over 2 hundred years ago.
    The Constitution is old. Is that your argument? Seriously!? Are you trying to make me laugh?

    What difference does the age of the document make, anyway? Has human nature changed in the past 200 years? Has individual liberty, choice, and responsibility become bad in the past 200 years? Constitutionally restrained government and decentralized power structures have become outmoded in the past 200 years?

    What, exactly, is your argument here, besides the Constitution is old?

    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.


    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...

  7. #137
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    04-13-10 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    240

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    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.
    2010 and 2012. You will hear the voice of real America.


  8. #138
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,319

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    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.

    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #139
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Gander View Post
    What should the Amendment say!? "Adhere to the Constitution" or something similar?
    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.

    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...
    Wow, you read all that into, "Thomas Paine was the first to suggest a welfare entitlement program."?
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 04-11-10 at 03:46 PM.

  10. #140
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Some Republicans embrace 'Party of No'

    Quote Originally Posted by Gander View Post
    2010 and 2012. You will hear the voice of real America.

    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.

Page 14 of 19 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... 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
  •