"Mr. President, you don't believe in the Constitution. You believe in socialism."

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Jul 5, 2004
13,399
1,706
245
So tweeted Representative Paul Broun MD (R-GA) from his office during the SOTU...telling it like it is...

Several of Broun's other instant responses to the president were also sharply critical:

"All children will be poor if we continue with Obama's policies #fb"

"From my seat, Obama's call for more investments sounds like more govt spending #fb #SOTU #TCOT"

If the govt would get out of the way, we could have innovation and development"

Rep. responds to Obama: ‘You believe in socialism’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs
 
More scare speech about what WILL happen. And people still fall for it. Amazing.
 
poor insane whining eagle.

What is the difference between 'investing' and 'spending' in Government-Speak?

Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.
 
poor insane whining eagle.

What is the difference between 'investing' and 'spending' in Government-Speak?

Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).
 
What is the difference between 'investing' and 'spending' in Government-Speak?

Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

So you also think our allies and us united against a common enemy is a form of "socialism"....? you libs really know how to twist things...
 
Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

So you also think our allies and us united against a common enemy is a form of "socialism"....? you libs really know how to twist things...

You are mixing statecraft and socialism..and now talk about "twisting things"?

Amazing! :lol:
 
What is the difference between 'investing' and 'spending' in Government-Speak?

Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

That's because National Defense is a power remitted to the Federal Government in the Constitution. General Welfare is not.

And, FYI: I have argued for more control over Government funded Military R&D projects and would happily support better oversight on excessive spending by contractors. Where I draw the line is anything that damages the effectiveness and safety of our front line troops.
 
It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

So you also think our allies and us united against a common enemy is a form of "socialism"....? you libs really know how to twist things...

You are mixing statecraft and socialism..and now talk about "twisting things"?

Amazing! :lol:

Why do you think the states united in the first place.....? to get oil subsidies....? :lol:
 
Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

That's because National Defense is a power remitted to the Federal Government in the Constitution. General Welfare is not.

Actually, yes it is. We've been through this before.
 
So tweeted Representative Paul Broun MD (R-GA) from his office during the SOTU...telling it like it is...

Several of Broun's other instant responses to the president were also sharply critical:

"All children will be poor if we continue with Obama's policies #fb"

"From my seat, Obama's call for more investments sounds like more govt spending #fb #SOTU #TCOT"

If the govt would get out of the way, we could have innovation and development"

Rep. responds to Obama: ‘You believe in socialism’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

IGNORANT to the nth degree
 
Honestly, not much. But it is true that military spending in the form of wartime spending, pushes to develop new technologies, or programs like the space race drive innovation in the USA. An insane number of the products we use today have roots in military spending.

I've said for a long time that if the military were handed the mandate to build a modern military that could defend this nation in the event that we were cut off from foreign oil that they'd pull it off. And the inovation necessary to build tanks, boats, and planes that could run on limited/no oil would completely change the game here at home.

It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

That's because National Defense is a power remitted to the Federal Government in the Constitution. General Welfare is not.

And, FYI: I have argued for more control over Government funded Military R&D projects and would happily support better oversight on excessive spending by contractors. Where I draw the line is anything that damages the effectiveness and safety of our front line troops.

You are absolutely wrong. No big surprise.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


I bolded the relevant parts for you..
 
So you also think our allies and us united against a common enemy is a form of "socialism"....? you libs really know how to twist things...

You are mixing statecraft and socialism..and now talk about "twisting things"?

Amazing! :lol:

Why do you think the states united in the first place.....? to get oil subsidies....? :lol:

Are "non-sequiturs" now considered a good debate strategy?

When you start making some sense..we can talk.
 
It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

That's because National Defense is a power remitted to the Federal Government in the Constitution. General Welfare is not.

And, FYI: I have argued for more control over Government funded Military R&D projects and would happily support better oversight on excessive spending by contractors. Where I draw the line is anything that damages the effectiveness and safety of our front line troops.

You are absolutely wrong. No big surprise.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


I bolded the relevant parts for you..

Oops. :lol:
 
So tweeted Representative Paul Broun MD (R-GA) from his office during the SOTU...telling it like it is...

Several of Broun's other instant responses to the president were also sharply critical:

"All children will be poor if we continue with Obama's policies #fb"

"From my seat, Obama's call for more investments sounds like more govt spending #fb #SOTU #TCOT"

If the govt would get out of the way, we could have innovation and development"

Rep. responds to Obama: ‘You believe in socialism’ – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs
How childish.
 
It's really surprising that those that cry out against "socialism" think military spending is somehow "sacred". It's not. It's a very big form of socialism. In fact, the United States Constitution is in part..socialism. There are articles and clauses that are socialism.

And I notice in the Republican responses..they focus on national defense (socialism) and breeze right over general welfare (socialism).

So you also think our allies and us united against a common enemy is a form of "socialism"....? you libs really know how to twist things...

You are mixing statecraft and socialism..and now talk about "twisting things"?

Amazing! :lol:

So just because YOU say military defense is a form of socialism, and you give us absolutely NO evidence of this. We are supposed to believe it....?

Are you F-ing crazy???? Military defense is NOT a form of socialism!

Yep, you libtards are twisting things so much its scary. :cuckoo:
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top