America....The Present and The Future

[P@triot]

Liberals want a government that helps those that need help.

Boom! Game Over right there. A governmet that "helps those in need" is not constitutional government. Also - proof that you've never read the U.S. Constitution.

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

 

[P@triot]

As affirmed by hundreds of judicial cases, Article 1, Section8 gives Congress wide latitude in how they serve "We the People"

"Judicial Cases" are not the U.S. Constitution, junior.

That's literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

Another moron enamored with the Constitution but totally blind to its application

I've proven you wrong on this over and over. Why would you even attempt to argue the Constitution with me when you've never read it?

Again - talking about the U.S. Constitution and then pointing to "judicial cases" is literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

 

[Camp]

Liberals want a government that helps those that need help.

Boom! Game Over right there. A governmet that "helps those in need" is not constitutional government. Also - proof that you've never read the U.S. Constitution.

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

Jefferson did not write the Constitution you dope. A commentary and opinion by Jefferson has no legal standing. It is just an opinion he wrote long after the Constitution was in effect. Two centuries of history show the SCOTUS has disagreed with his opinion.

 

[rightwinger]

Liberals want a government that helps those that need help.

Boom! Game Over right there. A governmet that "helps those in need" is not constitutional government. Also - proof that you've never read the U.S. Constitution.

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

Show me a single judicial decision that supports your position

Internet Libertarians do not count

 

[rightwinger]

As affirmed by hundreds of judicial cases, Article 1, Section8 gives Congress wide latitude in how they serve "We the People"

"Judicial Cases" are not the U.S. Constitution, junior.

That's literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

Another moron enamored with the Constitution but totally blind to its application

I've proven you wrong on this over and over. Why would you even attempt to argue the Constitution with me when you've never read it?

Again - talking about the U.S. Constitution and then pointing to "judicial cases" is literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

Why do I bother responding to Libertarian assholes?

 

[P@triot]

Liberals want a government that helps those that need help.

Boom! Game Over right there. A governmet that "helps those in need" is not constitutional government. Also - proof that you've never read the U.S. Constitution.

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

Jefferson did not write the Constitution you dope. A commentary and opinion by Jefferson has no legal standing. It is just an opinion he wrote long after the Constitution was in effect. Two centuries of history show the SCOTUS has disagreed with his opinion.

The entire Constitution and our structure of government was built on Jefferson's ideas, writings, and legislation in the Virginia state legislature you dumb ass. He was one of our founders too you asshat. Unlike you libtards - he help found our entire nation.

You assholes point to the Supreme Court because the U.S. Constitution proves you are wrong and it prevents you assholes from trying to impose your will on the rest of society. For the third time now - pointing to the Supreme Court when discussing the U.S. Constitution is as ******* stupid as pointing to polio when discussing cancer. Idiots.

 

[P@triot]

Boom! Game Over right there. A governmet that "helps those in need" is not constitutional government. Also - proof that you've never read the U.S. Constitution.

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

Show me a single judicial decision that supports your position

Internet Libertarians do not count

Again....that's like saying show me a single case of polio when describing the crisis with cancer.

We're talking about the U.S. Constitution junior. The fact that you have to keep changing the subject to courts and justices (appointed for their agenda) because the U.S. Constitution proves you are wrong says it all.

 

[P@triot]

As affirmed by hundreds of judicial cases, Article 1, Section8 gives Congress wide latitude in how they serve "We the People"

"Judicial Cases" are not the U.S. Constitution, junior.

That's literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

Another moron enamored with the Constitution but totally blind to its application

I've proven you wrong on this over and over. Why would you even attempt to argue the Constitution with me when you've never read it?

Again - talking about the U.S. Constitution and then pointing to "judicial cases" is literally as stupid as me pointing to the eradication of polio as "proof" that we've cured cancer.

Why do I bother responding to Libertarian assholes?

And I'm not libertarian. Never have been. Never will be. Just another example of your extraordinary ignorance. And yet another post of yours that is 100% wrong. As usual.

 

[rightwinger]

Of course it is......We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

Show me a single judicial decision that supports your position

Internet Libertarians do not count

Again....that's like saying show me a single case of polio when describing the crisis with cancer.

We're talking about the U.S. Constitution junior. The fact that you have to keep changing the subject to courts and justices (appointed for their agenda) because the U.S. Constitution proves you are wrong says it all.

You have no clue how our Constitution functions

You look at it as a Cookbook with all the recipes and ingredients future generations are allowed to cook

In fact, our Constitution built a Kitchen comprised of three branches of Government. Future generations are allowed to use that kitchen to provide the meals they need

 

[P@triot]

The federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and "helping those in need" is not one of them. Of course - never having actually read the U.S. Constitution - one wouldn't expect you to be aware of that reality. But here is the ultimate constitutional conservative obliterating your false narrative...

“Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

Game over.

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

Show me a single judicial decision that supports your position

Internet Libertarians do not count

Again....that's like saying show me a single case of polio when describing the crisis with cancer.

We're talking about the U.S. Constitution junior. The fact that you have to keep changing the subject to courts and justices (appointed for their agenda) because the U.S. Constitution proves you are wrong says it all.

You have no clue how our Constitution functions

You look at it as a Cookbook with all the recipes and ingredients future generations are allowed to cook

In fact, our Constitution built a Kitchen comprised of three branches of Government. Future generations are allowed to use that kitchen to provide the meals they need

As a matter of fact - it is a cookbook with all of the recipes that future generations are permitted to cook. If they want to cook anything else, they must legally alter the "cookbook" (that is an analogy for legally amending the U.S. Constitution junior).

Once again illustrating your egregious lack of understanding about the U.S. Constitution. It is really sad how you believe that the U.S. Constitution breaks down government into three branches (because you've never read the Constitution and that's all you've picked up here on USMB). Astounding display of ignorance. That is merely the horizontal separation of powers at the federal level. But our founders designed a vertical separation of powers first and foremost. As the 10th Amendment clearly states - anything outside of the 18 enumerated powers specifically delegated by the states to the federal government are reserved to the states themselves or the people.

Seriously RW - you are the gift that keeps on giving. Every time you post you illustrate how much the left doesn't know what they are talking about. I would wince every time you posted if I were a liberal. Fortunately for me, I'm a constitutional conservative so I smile every time you post because you are showing everyone what not to be. An uninformed libtard who supports unconstitutional government and illegal activity.

 

[P@triot]

You have no clue how our Constitution functions

That is the kind of response I would expect from a child defeated in a debate. Only one of us has even read the U.S. Constitution - and it sure as hell isn't you. Only one of us has studied it throughly. Only one of us has extensively studied the original writings of our founders. Only one of us has read The Federalist Papers. Only one of us has backed up our comments with quotes (including dates), sections of the U.S. Constitution, links, etc.

If this were academia, you would have been kicked out for lack of sources (not to mention misinformation). You're out of your league here RW. You don't know the Constitution. I do. I'm sorry that it prevents you from the radical socialism you desire, but it does. You have two choices - move to Cuba and enjoy your ideological utopia first hand or convince the American people to amend the U.S. Constitution. I would recommend Cuba. It will be exponentially easier for you.

 

[P@triot]

Why do I bother responding to Libertarian assholes?

Your frustration is palpable. And understandable. If I had been throughly defeated to this degree with facts - I would probably be that frustrated too. Then again though, I would blindly stick to an ideology in the fact of all facts. I would learn from them and evolve my views.

 

[HUGGY]

A larger population automatically ensures more jobs by sheer need and numbers chief. More babies being born requires more nurses and doctors. More baby boomers aging requires more nursing home staff. More people requires more food - which means more farmers. It also means more automobiles are required. More houses are required. I could go on and on all day. Would you like me to continue?

A diminishing population would absolutely be a legitimate excuse for a certain amount of job loss. But an larger population ensures more jobs are required. If they aren't there, it's because policies are destroying them.

A larger population does not mean more jobs...workers that are willing to work for lower pay does, since we are in a global economy now..your beef is with corporations which seek to abandon everything but a higher profit....be sure to buy more Asian products to help build more jobs in China...

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

You are the delusional one. I will go ahead and say it. You are a bold faced liar. If you think Obama ruined the economy you are ready for the loony bin. The hate runs deep. It's obvious where it comes from. I just don't like Obama. There are no valid reasons to hate him. That only leaves racism. The extreme vitriol you people exhibit toward Obama and the office he occupies far exceeds any possible actions he has taken that I am aware of. Yet you give Bush a pass for lying our country into an unnecessary war or two and actually destroying the US and the Worlds economies. Crazy much? I don't believe you are kidding anyone about your motives.

 

[HUGGY]

A larger population does not mean more jobs...workers that are willing to work for lower pay does, since we are in a global economy now..your beef is with corporations which seek to abandon everything but a higher profit....be sure to buy more Asian products to help build more jobs in China...

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

Obama passed financial reform legislation at the same time Obamacare was passed

Of course, all Republicans voted against it

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't particularly like Obama but the thinly veiled racism these people exhibit show how backward our country still is in many respects. If there is anything that truly gets my goat it is blatant stupidity and willful ignorance. Their questioning MY character is laughable. They are some of the most unprincipled SOBs in existance.

 

[gipper]

A larger population does not mean more jobs...workers that are willing to work for lower pay does, since we are in a global economy now..your beef is with corporations which seek to abandon everything but a higher profit....be sure to buy more Asian products to help build more jobs in China...

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

You are the delusional one. I will go ahead and say it. You are a bold faced liar. If you think Obama ruined the economy you are ready for the loony bin. The hate runs deep. It's obvious where it comes from. I just don't like Obama. There are no valid reasons to hate him. That only leaves racism. The extreme vitriol you people exhibit toward Obama and the office he occupies far exceeds any possible actions he has taken that I am aware of. Yet you give Bush a pass for lying our country into an unnecessary war or two and actually destroying the US and the Worlds economies. Crazy much? I don't believe you are kidding anyone about your motives.

You might want to go back to grade school. I never stated he ruined the economy.

I do not hate anyone, but I do hate liberalism, elitism, and tyranny....all three have much in common.

W was without question one of our worst presidents...I have stated this many times on this forum, but apparently you missed it. BO is also one of our worst. There is little difference between the two. Yet, you hate W and love BO. Makes no sense, but then liberals seldom do.

 

[HUGGY]

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

Obama passed financial reform legislation at the same time Obamacare was passed

Of course, all Republicans voted against it

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And it did nothing to reform Wall Street....dupe.

The president isn't responsible to cure all ills in the US. What did congress do to reform the thieves and traitors at the Banks and Wall street? Nada...NOTHING!! I suppose THAT was all Obama's doing... Right!

 

[gipper]

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

Obama passed financial reform legislation at the same time Obamacare was passed

Of course, all Republicans voted against it

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't particularly like Obama but the thinly veiled racism these people exhibit show how backward our country still is in many respects. If there is anything that truly gets my goat it is blatant stupidity and willful ignorance. Their questioning MY character is laughable. They are some of the most unprincipled SOBs in existance.

Yeah it must be racism, because BO has done such a wonderful job. There can be no other explanation.

Can't fix stupid.

 

[HUGGY]

A larger population automatically ensures more jobs by sheer need and numbers chief. More babies being born requires more nurses and doctors. More baby boomers aging requires more nursing home staff. More people requires more food - which means more farmers. It also means more automobiles are required. More houses are required. I could go on and on all day. Would you like me to continue?

A diminishing population would absolutely be a legitimate excuse for a certain amount of job loss. But an larger population ensures more jobs are required. If they aren't there, it's because policies are destroying them.

A larger population does not mean more jobs...workers that are willing to work for lower pay does, since we are in a global economy now..your beef is with corporations which seek to abandon everything but a higher profit....be sure to buy more Asian products to help build more jobs in China...

If these dolts want to know where the jobs went just look East and thank the LAST TWO presidents BEFORE the black guy took office.

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

It's Mormon not morman.
Did ya hear about the little kid who came up after church and gave his Mormon Bishop a 5 spot. The Bishop asked what was this for. The kid replied,"my dad sez you're the poorest bishop we've ever had."

Not to me it isn't. The MORMANS have been the biggest cult of liars and thieves of any religious group this country has ever seen. If you don't like it...STUFF IT!

 

[gipper]

But the black dude did nothing to fix the problem. Does he deserve any blame?

What did HE do to make it worse? Does he deserve any blame? He has been the most powerless president since Carter. I'm not sure what he could have done. The republican leadership made it clear they intended to sabotage his presidency and they did. Many indicators are up including the DOW. Could he have done some things better? Sure. Stayed the hell out of Libya and Syria. It was Bush's mess ..he should have just washed his hands clean of it and let the chips fall where they would in the Mid East. At home he had little say on spending. In his first term he did get his Affordable Health Care Bill passed...sort of. A lot of people are complaining about it. Personally I am happy with my health care now. I can't complain.

All in all Obama's two terms have been a disappointment. Has he screwed the pooch? Not really as far as I can tell. Would the war hero/POW or the morman bishop have done any better? I doubt it. The ship was on the rocks when Obama took office. Many here conveniently forget that. Piss on them.

Obviously this country wasn't ready for a black POTUS. I would be more inclined to say THAT and not WHO happened to be the first black prez is what failed.

delusional, but typical dupe post.

He had both houses of congress and instead of cleaning up wall street and curtailing the cronyism that caused the crash, he chose to push a terrible failure that is obamacare.

race has nothing to do with it...dupe.

Obama passed financial reform legislation at the same time Obamacare was passed

Of course, all Republicans voted against it

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And it did nothing to reform Wall Street....dupe.

The president isn't responsible to cure all ills in the US. What did congress do to reform the thieves and traitors at the Banks and Wall street? Nada...NOTHING!! I suppose THAT was all Obama's doing... Right!

You will never get it, will you.

Congress and the POTUS are all corrupt criminals. Do you really think this group of elitists, who get huge donations from Wall Street and the banksters, will do anything to curtail crony capitalism?

Are leftists aware of the following and does it matter?

Hillary Clinton is obviously on the take. Nobody gets $675,000 from Goldman Sachs for three speeches because of the content of the speeches. Nobody who is as charisma-challenged as Hillary Clinton gets as much as $2,500.

She and Bill have pulled in $153 million in speaking fees. "It's just one of those things . . . just one of those crazy things."

 

[rightwinger]

200 years of judicial interpretation says otherwise

How does it feel to have you false narrative exposed in front of the world?

Show me a single judicial decision that supports your position

Internet Libertarians do not count

Again....that's like saying show me a single case of polio when describing the crisis with cancer.

We're talking about the U.S. Constitution junior. The fact that you have to keep changing the subject to courts and justices (appointed for their agenda) because the U.S. Constitution proves you are wrong says it all.

You have no clue how our Constitution functions

You look at it as a Cookbook with all the recipes and ingredients future generations are allowed to cook

In fact, our Constitution built a Kitchen comprised of three branches of Government. Future generations are allowed to use that kitchen to provide the meals they need

As a matter of fact - it is a cookbook with all of the recipes that future generations are permitted to cook. If they want to cook anything else, they must legally alter the "cookbook" (that is an analogy for legally amending the U.S. Constitution junior).

Once again illustrating your egregious lack of understanding about the U.S. Constitution. It is really sad how you believe that the U.S. Constitution breaks down government into three branches (because you've never read the Constitution and that's all you've picked up here on USMB). Astounding display of ignorance. That is merely the horizontal separation of powers at the federal level. But our founders designed a vertical separation of powers first and foremost. As the 10th Amendment clearly states - anything outside of the 18 enumerated powers specifically delegated by the states to the federal government are reserved to the states themselves or the people.

Seriously RW - you are the gift that keeps on giving. Every time you post you illustrate how much the left doesn't know what they are talking about. I would wince every time you posted if I were a liberal. Fortunately for me, I'm a constitutional conservative so I smile every time you post because you are showing everyone what not to be. An uninformed libtard who supports unconstitutional government and illegal activity.

You obviously have not read the document you claim to hold so dear

"We the People" constituted a government to represent us. That "Constitution" primarily establishes the branches of Government to do the will of "We the People"