• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dems not worried about post-vote backlash at home

Interesting spin on the constitution...



Do you want to tear it apart, or do you insist that I do?
Since you have to buy your insurance within a state, it is not interstate commerce, consequently the Congress has no jurisdiction. Forcing a citizen to buy any single product also constitutes socialism.
 
Since you have to buy your insurance within a state, it is not interstate commerce, consequently the Congress has no jurisdiction. Forcing a citizen to buy any single product also constitutes socialism.

Right on your first comment, but forcing a citizen to buy any product is totally deranged, and unprecedented in the history of this country, not socialism…. With socialism, they would give it to you free of charge. (for those that pay no taxes…. The rest of us get to pay for them)
 
Care to point out the socialist in Washington that you are referring to?

Red: No hysteria, just a complete understanding of the Constitution, based on The Federalist Papers, biographies of the Founding Fathers, and studies of the decisions of the SCOTUS. If you call collective rape of the constitution by progressive justices and members of Congress who have been perpetually undermining the limits placed on federal government "hysteria" then YOU don't understand liberty at all, much less how much of it we have lost in the name of "The Common Good".

DONC: As far a who are the socialists, since you lack the intestinal fortitude to research and derive your own understanding of socialism, I'll explain it to you...

Every stinkin' member of Congress with a (D) beside their name are socialists, plus a few (R)'s like Lindsey Graham, and McCain.. for additional (R) socialists refer to Republican Progressive Caucus.

THEY have taken over control of around 30% of our nations private businesses and if THEY can pass Cap and TAX, and the Healthscare Bill they will have taken over nearly 70% of American business... I won't trouble you with a definition of socialism.. you can Google that all by yourself...;)
 
Last edited:
DONC: As far a who are the socialists, since you lack the intestinal fortitude to research and derive your own understanding of socialism, I'll explain it to you...

Every stinkin' member of Congress with a (D) beside their name are socialists, plus a few (R)'s like Lindsey Graham, and McCain.. for additional (R) socialists refer to Republican Progressive Caucus.


Oh I have <“the intestinal fortitude to research and derive my own understanding of socialism”>just wanted a good chuckle and you gave me that with your lame attempt at calling anyone with a “D” a socialist. :2wave:

I also see that you got your memo from “Winger Central” about calling everyone the wingers don’t agree with socialist. Kinda smacks of McCarthy ara fear mongering to me. With commies, socialist in this case, hiding behind the big “D”, ready to pounce on the unsuspecting citizenry when the command is given.

THEY have taken over control of around 30% of our nations private businesses and if THEY can pass Cap and TAX, and the Healthscare Bill they will have taken over nearly 70% of American business... I won't trouble you with a definition of socialism.. you can Google that all by yourself...;)


Ohooo… the mysterious…THEY. I’m sure glad you have managed to identity who “THEY” are. :rofl

Could the big “D” be the mark of the beast?:shock: Nah, I believe the mark of the beast had three numbers rather than a big “D” but you cant be to careful, cant have these evil doers slipping things past us , even paranoids are right once in a while.

Cap and trade and healthcare are both a gift to the corporate masters, you know, the ones funding the lobbyist (both worldwide industrial and insurance companies) that have infiltrated our political system ,both parties. The last thing the puppet masters (whom the majority of have a big “R” on them) want would be a socialist government.
 
Last edited:
The weak-spined Democrats need to worry if they don't stop acting like Republicans and if they don't start doing the things that they were elected to do.
If someone loses his job for helping to pass Thew Obama's Health Care takeover, it is because they were NOT doing the job they were elected to do.
The American people are not happy with the healthcare bill NOT because they don't want Healthcare reform as the party of NO would like to spin this.
They aren't happy with it because of the watering down that people like Lieberman and the other weak Democrats foisted upon them.
This is an unsupportable assertion.
 
Why would they? They are getting paid up front.
 
Dems not worried about post-vote backlash at home - Live Pulse - POLITICO.com

Yeah, the polls just show this to be true... :roll:

I wonder how Reid will feel about the "joy" when he and about a dozen other Senators are unemployed come Nov?

When your party has been dreaming this for decades... they are willing to sacrifice anything to make the Volk more dependent, and to have a future hammer to "show" how heartless Republicans are. Another chunk of liberty abolished.

Bit by bit... on our way to becoming as incompetent and lame as Europe.

Let's face it, they have great institutions of indoctrination and propaganda to use once this beast is implemented... the schools... the Old Media... the (projectile vomit icon) Intelligentsia.

They ignore the massive failures of socialism now... you think they'll take responsibility for its failures later? LOL... no, no, no... it will be the heartless R's fault, and we will need to spend more and ration care.

.
 
When your party has been dreaming this for decades... they are willing to sacrifice anything to make the Volk more dependent, and to have a future hammer to "show" how heartless Republicans are. Another chunk of liberty abolished.

Steyn, I think, has been particularly good at pointing out how Republicans are stupidly thinking tactically while Democrats are thinking strategically. The point isn't to win in 2010 or even maybe in 2012. It's to create a permanent majority dependent upon the state for something.
 
Steyn, I think, has been particularly good at pointing out how Republicans are stupidly thinking tactically while Democrats are thinking strategically. The point isn't to win in 2010 or even maybe in 2012. It's to create a permanent majority dependent upon the state for something.

It's not that we think "we should institute a public option so we can have a majority", we think "we should institute a public option because a society where everyone has access to health care and doesn't have to worry about being denied coverage, and a public option would be the best way to make sure of that".
 
16th amendment.
"The congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes..." How does instituting a health care system violate this?

9th amendment.
"the enumeration in the consitution of certain rights shall not be sontrued to deny or disparage others"
This could actually be argued that people have the right to access to health care under this, but I don't see how it helps your case.

10th amendment.
A truism, nothing more.

Article I, section 8.
What's your point about this?

Article I, section 9, clause 3.
No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed? Huh?

Article IV, section 2, clause 1.

:mrgreen:

The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states"

What about it?
 
"The congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes..." How does instituting a health care system violate this?


"the enumeration in the consitution of certain rights shall not be sontrued to deny or disparage others"
This could actually be argued that people have the right to access to health care under this, but I don't see how it helps your case.


A truism, nothing more.


What's your point about this?


No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed? Huh?



The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states"

What about it?
You know there is legal precident that demonstrates it's not across the board, that is some state laws are not subjugated by federal law.
 
I disagree.. There WOULD be great harm in doing so...

We conservatives are fully involved and we are taking back the Republican party, so that we can rid our party of progressives and castrate the socialist agenda.... sans anesthesia!

Socialism (progressivism) is STILL the enemy of freedom and liberty and WE are taking the fight to them in 2010!

Pick a side folks .. it's going to be an interesting year in the old US of A! :2wave:

socialism is positive freedom.
communism in its final form (orthodox marxism) is the ultimate expression of human freedom because one would simply do as they please because there would be an abundance of resources freely available to use by all.

capitalism is merely wage slavery. Slaves in ancient greece were often paid, and were able to purchase their freedom.

How is that any different than the typical capitalist view point of getting a job, building wealth just to live the easy life when you eventually can retire, while the real slave owners(the richest of the population) never had it hard to begin with?

if you have no wealth to start with you must work for someone else, you ARE at the mercy of the supplier.

slavery is often erroneously said to be "labor without pay" when slaves have been paid even in ancient times, and even the slave owners referred to them as slaves

Not to mention if someone buys all the land surrounding your property youre trapped, and thus not free.
 
"The congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes..." How does instituting a health care system violate this?

The bill would not regulate any activity, per se, write former Justice Department lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey in a recent Wall Street Journal opinion piece: “Simply being an American would trigger it.”

Moreover, legal critics of the bill say a tax on Americans who refuse to buy healthcare insurance violates the 16th Amendment, which regulates how government can raise and spend taxes – a critical link to how Americans perceive individual liberty in their personal and business lives.

“A ‘tax’ that falls exclusively on anyone who is uninsured is a penalty beyond Congress’ authority,” write Messrs. Rivkin and Casey. “If the rule were otherwise, Congress could evade all constitutional limits by ‘taxing’ anyone who doesn’t follow an order of any kind – whether to obtain healthcare insurance … or even eat your vegetables.”

Is the House healthcare reform bill unconstitutional? / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
"the enumeration in the consitution of certain rights shall not be sontrued to deny or disparage others"
This could actually be argued that people have the right to access to health care under this, but I don't see how it helps your case.

So you think I don't have the right NOT to be forced to buy some product that someone else thinks I should buy? :shock:
A truism, nothing more.

The 10th amendment is a truism?

tru·ism (trzm)
n.
A self-evident truth. See Synonyms at cliché.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tru·istic (tr-stk) adj.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
truism [ˈtruːɪzəm]
n
an obvious truth; platitude
[from true + -ism]
truistic adj
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged 6th Edition 2003. © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
truism
a self-evident, obvious truth. — truistic, truistical, adj.

truism - definition of truism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Works for me.... It's a self-evident, obvious truth that the Federal Government hasn't the right to force health insurance on anyone, thanx for agreeing.
What's your point about this?

Article I, section 8 is a list of the powers Congress has........ no where in that section does it say they can force me to buy a product of any kind.
No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed? Huh?

Attainder
attainder n. The loss of all civil rights by a person sentenced for a serious crime. [< OFr. attaindre, to convict] Source: AHD

In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has a negative effect on a single person or group (for example, a fine or term of imprisonment). Originally, a Bill of Attainder sentenced an individual to death, though this detail is no longer required to have an enactment be ruled a Bill of Attainder.

The Constitutional Dictionary - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states"

What about it?

You are aware of all the special deals (bribes) given to various States so their Congress Critters would vote for this mess?
 
Socialism is positive freedom.
Socialism, where you are forced to provide others with them means to exercise their rights, is slavery, the antithesuis of liberty.
communism in its final form (orthodox marxism) is the ultimate expression of human freedom because one would simply do as they please because there would be an abundance of resources freely available to use by all.
It is also contrary to human nature. Peopel will always act in what they see as their own best interest.
capitalism is merely...
...the incredibly silly idea that what you earn is yours and that -you- have the choice to do what you will with said earnings.
 
It's not that we think "we should institute a public option so we can have a majority", we think "we should institute a public option because a society where everyone has access to health care and doesn't have to worry about being denied coverage, and a public option would be the best way to make sure of that".

No, the average Liberal Dem voter thinks this about helping people. The Dem political machine wants to ensure more people like you continue to vote for them.

You can't tell us how or where the money to pay for this will come from.

You cannot explain the right to do it.

You just "Feel" it's important to provide people something for free.


Question, why do you support a program that puts a price on being free?
 
No, the average Liberal Dem voter thinks this about helping people. The Dem political machine wants to ensure more people like you continue to vote for them.

You can't tell us how or where the money to pay for this will come from.

You cannot explain the right to do it.

You just "Feel" it's important to provide people something for free.


Question, why do you support a program that puts a price on being free?
What do you mean "puts a price on being free"
 
Do you really think that 11 months from now, 12 senators who supported this will be out a job over this? The economy is going to be the big determinant to who people vote for in 2010. If the economy is improved significantly, dems will do well, it not, then dems won't do well. Health care is not going to be the big issue people vote on.

:confused: healthcare is 1/6th of the economy. this bill pushing peoples' health premiums up is part of their economy; as is the fact that this bill increases their taxes and forces them to purchase a product many of them do not want.

my uncle-in-law is a small business owner; he does contracting, and has up until now done very well with it. i talked to him over Christmas, and he told me that between the healthcare and the tax-and-cap going through congress, it was looking like he was going to have to cut 25-30% of his employees in order to keep his business solvent. how is being pushed out of work good for your household economy?
 
that would be the fact that it forces you to purchase a product just for being alive.

I wasn't necessarily a huge fan of that aspect of it, personally. There were plans I liked better.
 
What do you mean "puts a price on being free"

Have you not read the bill?? The whole "You have to buy this product for your own good, or you go to jail" bit?

Or does that escape you?

We are about to see a congressionally mandated law that forces people to purchase a service, or face fines, and jail time.

Freedom, Individual freedom, once again suffers for the "greater good".
 
Have you not read the bill?? The whole "You have to buy this product for your own good, or you go to jail" bit?

Or does that escape you?

We are about to see a congressionally mandated law that forces people to purchase a service, or face fines, and jail time.

Freedom, Individual freedom, once again suffers for the "greater good".

It would be helpful if you read all my posts before responding.
 
Socialism, where you are forced to provide others with them means to exercise their rights, is slavery, the antithesuis of liberty.

It is also contrary to human nature. Peopel will always act in what they see as their own best interest.

...the incredibly silly idea that what you earn is yours and that -you- have the choice to do what you will with said earnings.


Theres many different versions of socialism. Many of them are interested in voluntarism.

Its not contrary to human nature as many communistic viewpoints are all over the place. People naturally like to do what it is they love. With computers (namely wikipedia or the linux operating system... which is far superior to windows or mac) public means to control production is a reality. It also works out great.

For this to transcend into everyday non-computer life we simply need technology to take over the boring aspects of life, which they have been accomplishing. Its only a matter of time before so much of the doldrumatic parts of life are taken over and humanity would be left to do what it pleases

You cannot prove that property exists. You can prove that you use something, but to say that its yours is laughable. Capitalist philosophy is nothing but rhetoric to achieve a miserable goal.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom