GOP getting warmed up, cut a million from food stamp rolls. Getting ready or the election.

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

The constitution does not authorize and air force! Dismantle it immediately !

Fine with me. We can give all of the air force's airplanes to the navy.

Nope.
The constitution does not allow for airplanes .

Really? Where are the forbidden?

The same spot where they forbid food stamps . Somewhere towards the back.

The Constitution doesn't actually forbid anything. The Constitution has a list of items and things the federal government is supposed to provide. Anticipating your response, if it's not outlawed in the Constitution, then it is constitutional. If you really believe that, then what was the point of listing what our federal government was supposed to provide in the first place? If they made a list of what the government wasn't allowed to provide, then the Constitution would be 100 pages long.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

 

[Nosmo King]

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Did the states, when they established their compact, give their agent, the federal government, the legislative power to issue food stamps?

But to back up a step, you are aware that the federal government doesn't have plenary power but only has the specific, enumerated powers delegated to it by the sovereign states? If you don't understand this, then there's no point in continuing.

We can do better as a government than holding to the meger powers listed in the constitution. If all we are able to do as a government is to keep the ports clear of sediment, defend the coast, deliver the mail and get out of the way, we would be settling for a society no more advanced than the one we had in 1789

 

[Timmy]

The constitution does not authorize and air force! Dismantle it immediately !

Fine with me. We can give all of the air force's airplanes to the navy.

Nope.
The constitution does not allow for airplanes .

Really? Where are the forbidden?

The same spot where they forbid food stamps . Somewhere towards the back.

Can you please cite the language in the constitution that gives congress the power to give food stamps to the people of the several states?

I already did . The con allows congress to make laws . They made the food stamp law .

 

[Timmy]

Don't forget that a large percentage of people on food stamps are our military personnel and their families. Over 600,000 military households are on food stamps and need assistance from food banks. That's just flat out messed up.

I call bullflop on this ! Not true !

 

[Nosmo King]

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

 

[Centinel]

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Did the states, when they established their compact, give their agent, the federal government, the legislative power to issue food stamps?

But to back up a step, you are aware that the federal government doesn't have plenary power but only has the specific, enumerated powers delegated to it by the sovereign states? If you don't understand this, then there's no point in continuing.

We can do better as a government than holding to the meger powers listed in the constitution. If all we are able to do as a government is to keep the ports clear of sediment, defend the coast, deliver the mail and get out of the way, we would be settling for a society no more advanced than the one we had in 1789

I'm not sure of what state you live in, but you, through your state government, have the ability to do better in any way you think is necessary. And if you wish to amend the US constitution to be what you consider more timely, then you simply need a 3/4 majority of the states to do so.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Sick...Considering most of these people work and get next to shit of the productivity that they have worked for these past 30 years. Republicans are sick.

I have no problem with getting people off their ass into a job but this is just evil.

But now the state has all of that extra money they can spend on education, science, and infrastructure.

 

[sonic]

Don't forget that a large percentage of people on food stamps are our military personnel and their families. Over 600,000 military households are on food stamps and need assistance from food banks. That's just flat out messed up.

I call bullflop on this ! Not true !

You're uninformed. How sad that you would discount something you know absolutely nothing about. That's just sheer ignorance. Food stamps and food banks are a sad and embarrassing fact of military life.
Hungry Heroes: 25 Percent of Military Families Seek Food Aid - NBC News

 

[Centinel]

Fine with me. We can give all of the air force's airplanes to the navy.

Nope.
The constitution does not allow for airplanes .

Really? Where are the forbidden?

The same spot where they forbid food stamps . Somewhere towards the back.

Can you please cite the language in the constitution that gives congress the power to give food stamps to the people of the several states?

I already did . The con allows congress to make laws . They made the food stamp law .

The constitution grants congress a very small set of legislative powers. The power to make food stamp laws is not in the list.

 

[Centinel]

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

The constitution works for every american.

 

[CowboyTed]

Lads,
I live in Ireland... I have one of my employees whose Kidneys are failing... He is on dialysis...

The government give me €5.66 an hour I give him €10 in to his hand and pay his taxes and social insurance...

He has good days and bad ones... I can't rely on him as much as my other employees but he is a trojan and does the best he can (he wants to get married next year), lovely guy who is trying...

Thats the difference... The government is giving a hand up rather than a hand out... In the US he would have to be a full dependent of the of the system, while here he attempts to build a career and develop his skills..

 

[Nosmo King]

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.
The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

The constitution works for every american.

Prove it.

 

[Centinel]

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

The constitution works for every american.

Prove it.

Have you even read it?

 

[Timmy]

Don't forget that a large percentage of people on food stamps are our military personnel and their families. Over 600,000 military households are on food stamps and need assistance from food banks. That's just flat out messed up.

I call bullflop on this ! Not true !

You're uninformed. How sad that you would discount something you know absolutely nothing about. That's just sheer ignorance. Food stamps and food banks are a sad and embarrassing fact of military life.
Hungry Heroes: 25 Percent of Military Families Seek Food Aid - NBC News

Did you read the story ? They point out "poor financial management " as a problem .


If you are in the military you get housing and food allowances . You can also buy stuff on base for much lower costs . If you are on stamps , you are fucking up .

Also the numbers are inflated by reservists and vets . They are not full time military! They have to earn a living like the rest of us .

So quit maiming it seem like joining the military means you need food stamps . Not true .

 

[mikegriffith1]

Boo-hoo-hoo. For every cherry-picked unfortunate case that you can cite, I can cite five or six cases of genuinely able-bodied people playing the system to get benefits they don't deserve. I personally know two people who get disability and another government payment even though they are perfectly capable of working.

I used to have a neighbor in the Northeast who would work construction jobs 6 months and 1 day and then quit and collect unemployment and food stamps. He was proud of how "clever" he was. My wife and his wife were good friends. By the way, guess how he voted?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Boo-hoo-hoo. For every cherry-picked unfortunate case that you can cite, I can cite five or six cases of genuinely able-bodied people playing the system to get benefits they don't deserve. I personally know two people who get disability and another government payment even though they are perfectly capable of working.

I used to have a neighbor in the Northeast who would work construction jobs 6 months and 1 day and then quit and collect unemployment and food stamps. He was proud of how "clever" he was. My wife and his wife were good friends. By the way, guess how he voted?

A couple of years ago I had to evict a family from one of my rental units. It was an unmarried couple with two children: one three years old and the other fourteen.

The male worked a full time job but not one hour over 40. The female stayed home supposedly home schooling her kids. But they kept getting further and further behind on rent and that forced me to intervene.

I suggested that the female get a part-time job on the weekends while her boyfriend could sit home with the kids. She wouldn't even consider it. Why? Because she was getting $250.00 a month of food stamps. Any income on her part would interfere with those benefits.

Long story short, I evicted the family, then sued him in court for back rent, damage to the rental unit and my legal fees. All for what? Food stamps.

Neither mom nor dad drank or used drugs, but they smoked cigarettes along with their 14 year old daughter who they supplied tobacco to. They had three cats and a large dog. They had cable television, an Obama phone and high speed internet, but we taxpayers were buying their food.

 

[rdean]

President Obama signs $8.7 billion food stamp cut into law

From your link:

In fact, the benefits reduction would eliminate the state-level “Heat and Eat” policies currently employed in 15 states and Washington, D.C. Left-wing opponents of the Farm Bill, including Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., expect the burden of burden of the cuts to fall disproportionately on the elderly and disabled.
“Poor people are getting screwed by this Republican majority [in the House] and Democrats in my opinion aren’t doing enough to push back,” he said. “I wish there had been more of a fight from the White House and others.”
McGovern also admitted to being “puzzled” by the White House’s silence on hunger and food stamp cuts. He predicted that Republicans’ success in getting a several billion dollar food stamp cut meant that they would soon try again for even more.
“They know they can’t get a $40 billion cut right off the bat, so what they’re doing is they’re chipping away at it,” he said.

 

[80zephyr]

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

The fed gov should cut food stamps. There is no constitutional authorization for them.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” —James Madison

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ah! If we could just use the constitution as a panacea! Let's harken back to the 18th century when there were no paved roads, rum was used as an anesthetic and only White property owning men could vote! The good old days for just White property owning men.

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.

Or subsidizing oil companies, yet, they get more than the food stamp budget..

The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

How does the Constitution not work for everybody? And what class of people do you think our founders were in?

And by saying shouldn't the Constitution work for everybody, do you mean taxpayers feeding people that don't want to work is a way for it to work for everybody? Well.....it may work for those who are receiving that taxpayer money, but it doesn't work so well for the taxpayer.

If you have a law that forces Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Not sure whether you're aware, but the constitution prohibits slavery.

It also prohibits food stamps.
The constition also prohibits subsidizing oil companies.

Not that I don't agree with the "idea" that you are putting forward, but please - where the hell in the Constitution does it state that?

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.

Feeding the hungry citizens insures domestic tranquility, promotes their general welfare and helps them secure the blessings of liberty.

Then why were they not feeding the hungry after the Constitution was law of the land?

Because the constitution worked well for the class who wrote it. Shouldn't the constitution work for every American?

How does the Constitution not work for everybody? And what class of people do you think our founders were in?

And by saying shouldn't the Constitution work for everybody, do you mean taxpayers feeding people that don't want to work is a way for it to work for everybody? Well.....it may work for those who are receiving that taxpayer money, but it doesn't work so well for the taxpayer.

If you have a law that forces Peter to pay Paul, the Paul's of your society generally have no objection.

You're the one that has no understanding of the constitution. The tax payers want the roads but then bitch about it??? lol.

Go live in somalia and fuck off.