What is so crazy

[Avatar4321]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

 

[Madeline]

Well, the constitution is a toughie. People disagree over how a document written in 1787 is supposed to cope with the internet, etc.

Spending money we don't have has been a fact of American life since WW II. The problem is not that we have deficit, IMO. It's that we have nearly maxed out our borrowing capacity and yet the deficit grows, not in a lineral fashion but expoentially. The day the world downgrades US debt from AAA to B, we will kiss our financial well being good bye, and that day is VERY close.

I dun know why people are not more vigorous about Public Corruption. The FBI has arrested damned near every employee on the county payroll here, and still I see yard signs for Democratic candidates. What part of "they steal from us" is hard to grasp?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

What part of "the founding fathers were slave owners dont you understand"?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Spending needs to be reined in. Maybe the Tea Party folks can make impact there. Corruption? You are asking mankind to not be what it is: corrupt. The debt? Good point. My family has been preparing for a disastrous economic depression for years. Other than massive inflation, I think we can ride the bad times out.

 

[Bfgrn]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

It seems you are able to hear what you want to hear, and ignore much of what is said.

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

At the first national convention of the "Tea Party Nation" last February in Nashville, Tom Tancredo, former Colorado congressman and now Tea-Party-sponsored candidate for governor (as an Independent), brought the crowd to its feet by denouncing the "cult of multiculturalism" and accusing immigrants of threatening America's Judeo-Christian values. "This is our country," he declared to wild cheers. "Take it back!"

More than half of Tea Party backers say they'd be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports changing the 14th Amendment to prevent the children of non-citizens born in the U.S. from automatically becoming citizens. And Tea Partiers strongly support Arizona's recent immigration law making failure to carrying immigration documents a crime and giving police broad powers to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. "We're all Arizonans now," says former Alaskan Gov Sarah Palin.

Why Aren't Business Leaders Standing Up To the Tea Party?

 

[editec]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

When you put it into those simplictic terms?

Absolutely nothing wrong with that

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you beg the question just a tad more, please?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

Why don't you illuminate us with your vast and deep understanding of Constitutional scholarship, first, okay?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Avatar4321's constitutional position is rooted in the year 1791 and expounded by the John Birch Society, Cleon Skousen, and Glenn Beck. That is a world in which he would be very comfortable, I think.

 

[Avatar4321]

Seems that if we are going to be governed by a document we should adhear to what it actually says and not what it doesn't say.

Like when it speaks of the Federal Government having limited powers, we shouldn't give it powers it doesn't have.

When it says that any powers not given to the Federal Government belong to the states, it actually means that.

When it says "Congress shall make no law..." about something, that Congress shall not make a law about it.

That when the Constitution delineates certain powers to certain branches or divisions within those branches, it does so for a good reason.

Or when the Constitution doesn't say something, it's not a Constitutional issue.

I find none of this crazy. But apparently some people do. I'd simply like to know why.

 

[strollingbones]

here is the shocking part...neither party is gonna do any of this...get over it...the government now exists to do what....grow...and grow more...it happens under both parties

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sorry to resort to cliche, but the American people are incapable of resisting the temptation to elect politicians who make a convincing argument that they can have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Bfgrn]

Seems that if we are going to be governed by a document we should adhear to what it actually says and not what it doesn't say.

Like when it speaks of the Federal Government having limited powers, we shouldn't give it powers it doesn't have.

When it says that any powers not given to the Federal Government belong to the states, it actually means that.

When it says "Congress shall make no law..." about something, that Congress shall not make a law about it.

That when the Constitution delineates certain powers to certain branches or divisions within those branches, it does so for a good reason.

Or when the Constitution doesn't say something, it's not a Constitutional issue.

I find none of this crazy. But apparently some people do. I'd simply like to know why.

If the government our founding fathers created were limited to the point you right wing Utopians want and think our founder's intended, WHAT would replace it, Utopia? Are there any other 'forces' besides government we need to be weary of?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Seems that if we are going to be governed by a document we should adhear to what it actually says and not what it doesn't say.

Like when it speaks of the Federal Government having limited powers, we shouldn't give it powers it doesn't have.

When it says that any powers not given to the Federal Government belong to the states, it actually means that.

When it says "Congress shall make no law..." about something, that Congress shall not make a law about it.

That when the Constitution delineates certain powers to certain branches or divisions within those branches, it does so for a good reason.

Or when the Constitution doesn't say something, it's not a Constitutional issue.

I find none of this crazy. But apparently some people do. I'd simply like to know why.

If the government our founding fathers created were limited to the point you right wing Utopians want and think our founder's intended, WHAT would replace it, Utopia? Are there any other 'forces' besides government we need to be weary of?

You mean if the government our founding fathers created were limited to what the Constitution says it's limited too. It just gnaws at you that our founding fathers thought government should be limited, doesn't it?

 

[editec]

The floundering fathers also didn't want a standing army, entanglments in foreign affairs, and they so HATED FREE TRADE that they imposed HUGE TAFIFFS on imports.

Are any of you consitutional scholars on the right who think you know the minds of the FF also on board with those policies of the FF?

Not as far as I can tell based on your posts on these subjects.

 

[Bfgrn]

Seems that if we are going to be governed by a document we should adhear to what it actually says and not what it doesn't say.

Like when it speaks of the Federal Government having limited powers, we shouldn't give it powers it doesn't have.

When it says that any powers not given to the Federal Government belong to the states, it actually means that.

When it says "Congress shall make no law..." about something, that Congress shall not make a law about it.

That when the Constitution delineates certain powers to certain branches or divisions within those branches, it does so for a good reason.

Or when the Constitution doesn't say something, it's not a Constitutional issue.

I find none of this crazy. But apparently some people do. I'd simply like to know why.

If the government our founding fathers created were limited to the point you right wing Utopians want and think our founder's intended, WHAT would replace it, Utopia? Are there any other 'forces' besides government we need to be weary of?

You mean if the government our founding fathers created were limited to what the Constitution says it's limited too. It just gnaws at you that our founding fathers thought government should be limited, doesn't it?

What gnaws at me is the naive belief that the government our founding fathers created that offers We, the People representation must step aside and hand over power to Wall Street, banks and corporations that offer none. Maybe we need to understand WHAT the Boston Tea Party was a protest against and how our founding fathers heavily regulated and mistrusted banks and corporations and the malefactors of great wealth.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, said that America would never be destroyed by a foreign power but he warned that our political institutions, our democratic institutions would be subverted by malefactors of great wealth who would erode them from within. Dwight Eisenhower, another republican in his most famous speech ever warned America against the domination by the military industrial complex.

Abraham Lincoln, the greatest Republican in our history, said during the height of the Civil War "I have the South in front of me and I have the bankers behind me. And for my country I fear the bankers more."

Franklin Roosevelt said during World War II that the domination of government by corporate power is "the essence of Fascism" and Benito Mussolini who had an insider’s view of that process said the same thing. Essentially he said that - he complained that Fascism should not be called Fascism. It should be called corporatism because it was the merger of state of corporate power.

And we what we have to understand as Americans is that the domination of business by government is called Communism.

The domination of government by business is called Fascism.

And what our job is is to walk that narrow trail in between which is free market capitalism and democracy. And keep big government at bay with our right hand and corporate power at bay with our left.
RFK Jr.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

What part of "the founding fathers were slave owners dont you understand"?

See you got nothing do you?

 

[uscitizen]

About wanting our politicians to not be corrupt, to follow the Constitution, and to stop spending our money when we haven't earned it yet?

Many of you guys seem to be freaking out over this. You seem to think this is racist or hateful for some reason. You think anyone who actually wants this stuff is crazy. Can you actually explain why you find this insane?

Could you also explain why ignoring the Constitution, ignoring correuption, and spending money we don't have is a good thing?

what is crazy is for anyone to expect that "their" politicians are going to stop the corruption and spending, etc.

 

[Sallow]

The floundering fathers also didn't want a standing army, entanglments in foreign affairs, and they so HATED FREE TRADE that they imposed HUGE TAFIFFS on imports.

Are any of you consitutional scholars on the right who think you know the minds of the FF also on board with those policies of the FF?

Not as far as I can tell based on your posts on these subjects.

Oh THAT Constitution..

Nevermind..