• 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!

Should The National Endowment For The Arts (NEA) Be Abolished?

Should We Abolish The NEA?

  • Yes, replace it with nothing.

    Votes: 20 35.7%
  • Yes, privatize it.

    Votes: 7 12.5%
  • Yes, localize it and let the states handle it.

    Votes: 4 7.1%
  • No, keep it.

    Votes: 17 30.4%
  • No, but it needs strong reforms.

    Votes: 5 8.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 5.4%

  • Total voters
    56
How odd it is that our society has deteriorated to the point where it is considered “extreme” to think that this nation's Constitution means what it says, and that government is obligated to obey it; while thinking that government should be free to disregard and disobey the Constitution with impunity is not “extreme”.

You'd have a point if anyone had made that latter argument.
 
As much as I would like to,mi don't know that I can disagree with you. But we have never experienced extreme conservatism and are not separating from extreme conservatism or libertarianism. So,,while your statement carries truth with it, there appears to be no application.

That's the beauty of a democratic republic. There will be no application of it as long as we have a politically plural constituency. Extreme liberalism won't ever overpower extreme conservativism and vice versa. My comment was simply speaking to the ideology. While we don't experience it in our government, we do see it in the pie in the sky fantasies that are uttered by those who subscribe to those extreme beliefs.
 
You'd have a point if anyone had made that latter argument.

That's exactly the argument you've been making. The Constitution is absolutely clear regarding what powers the federal government has, and the Tenth Amendment is absolutely clear that the federal government is not to claim or exercise any power that the Constitution has not delegated to it.

Your entire argument has been to claim, on behalf of the federal government, a power that the Constitution does not delegate to it, and to defend the federal government's abuse of this power.
 
That's exactly the argument you've been making. The Constitution is absolutely clear regarding what powers the federal government has, and the Tenth Amendment is absolutely clear that the federal government is not to claim or exercise any power that the Constitution has not delegated to it.

Your entire argument has been to claim, on behalf of the federal government, a power that the Constitution does not delegate to it, and to defend the federal government's abuse of this power.

No, it is not "exactly the argument" I've been making. It is a spin of the argument I have been making born of sophistry.
 
Look up piss chr--t. it's a class of piss that the NEA calls art.

images8UVJYR0D.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 2upb66s.jpg
    2upb66s.jpg
    11.3 KB · Views: 102
Back
Top Bottom