Liberals Think We're Jerks For Wanting To Control Spending

[M14 Shooter]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

 

[Wry Catcher]

* * * *

Sorry, you haven't convinced me.

LOL. Like there was ever any chance of you having an open mind or being subject to persuasion by truthful facts and valid logic?

If you are so sure of your position, explain to all of us why so many decisions are 5-4?

MY "position" on what aspect of this entire conversation? But, cutting to the chase: I am quite sure that the SCOTUS took for itself the power of Judicial Review just as I am sure that it is a matter of implication rather than an explicit grant of authority. And it comes up with lots of non unanimous decisions because it is a body of human beings who view things through the filter of their own biases, prejudices, experiences, etc.

It's not at all clear why that makes the slightest difference here.


And by the way, unlike you, I already know what the the term "GENERAL WELFARE" meant when used in the PREAMBLE. I knew it without even having to look it up. But since you say you recognize that it is not a binding part of the Constitution, it makes it curious why you now attach such undue significance to it.

It's significance is not that is it in the preamble, and for the third time and last I will point out, the phrase is in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, to wit:

Article I, Section 8: Congressional Powers specifically enumerated in the Constitution. 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;...

Wait. Did you just write "to pay the debts?"

And "the General Welfare" means a lot of things, but it does NOT mean the 'Welfare Roles.' A GENERAL welfare necessarily applies to all, not just a chosen and select few. It might apply to roads and bridges and tunnels and it might apply to a Navy or an Air Force (the latter two going hand in hand with with providing for the common defense).

Take a look at:
CRS LII Annotated Constitution Article I

It seems that I'm not alone, and learned men have come down on both sides of he argument, at least until Butler, wherein the 10th Amendment was introduced. That said, the link brings into question Originalism as proffered by Scalia, given the difference of opinion expressed by Madison and Hamilton, and Jefferson's punt - though it's clear his opinion sides with Madison.

I've not argued the general Welfare phrase was intended to mean the Welfare Roles, history tells us the destitute lived and died in poverty, as any review of our nations census will tell us by reviewing the numbers of citizens living in a poor house. That poor houses no longer exist in our communities is a result of TNAF (nee: AFDC), SS and SSI. Is that a good thing? I believe so.

So, is the CDC legit, and if so is it because it provdes for the common defense against disease, or because it promotes the general welfare (as in well being) of our people?

 

[danielpalos]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

 

[danielpalos]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Socialism doesn't solve poverty, it creates poverty. Capitalism has brought billions of people out of poverty and raised the average standard of living to heights not even dreamed of just a couple of centuries ago.

Socialism is the system of parasites. It destroys. It doesn't create.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of socialism. Socialism merely requires social morals for free to achieve a secular and temporal, commune of Heaven on Earth. Capitalism will require a profit motive.

 

[danielpalos]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

 

[bripat9643]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Socialism doesn't solve poverty, it creates poverty. Capitalism has brought billions of people out of poverty and raised the average standard of living to heights not even dreamed of just a couple of centuries ago.

Socialism is the system of parasites. It destroys. It doesn't create.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of socialism. Socialism merely requires social morals for free to achieve a secular and temporal, commune of Heaven on Earth. Capitalism will require a profit motive.

Socialism requires a vast apparatus of compulsion called "the state." The term "voluntary socialism" is an oxymoron. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the profit motive.

 

[danielpalos]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Socialism doesn't solve poverty, it creates poverty. Capitalism has brought billions of people out of poverty and raised the average standard of living to heights not even dreamed of just a couple of centuries ago.

Socialism is the system of parasites. It destroys. It doesn't create.

Only if you appeal to ignorance of socialism. Socialism merely requires social morals for free to achieve a secular and temporal, commune of Heaven on Earth. Capitalism will require a profit motive.

Socialism requires a vast apparatus of compulsion called "the state." The term "voluntary socialism" is an oxymoron. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the profit motive.

Yes, you are right but Only to this extent: Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers. The Federalist Number 2

State public sectors are big, why would any rational person not believe the public sector of the general government would be bigger?

 

[Contumacious]

Mention spending cuts or even controlling spending and it's like holding up a cross in front of a vampire. They react violently at times. Most of the time they claim that spending cuts will bring this country down.

r

The conservative vs liberal "debate" constitutes a false dichotomy.


Conservatives want to spend monies invading every country on the face of mother earth disguised as "defense"


Liberals want to spend monies because they want to use taxpayers monies to feed, educate, insure clothe and quench the thirst of those who vote.


.Libertarians are the ONLY ones who want to spend monies on those activities CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED.


.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Mention spending cuts or even controlling spending and it's like holding up a cross in front of a vampire. They react violently at times. Most of the time they claim that spending cuts will bring this country down.

r

The conservative vs liberal "debate" constitutes a false dichotomy.


Conservatives want to spend monies invading every country on the face of mother earth disguised as "defense"


Liberals want to spend monies because they want to use taxpayers monies to feed, educate, insure clothe and quench the thirst of those who vote.


.Libertarians are the ONLY ones who want to spend monies on those activities CONSTITUTIONALLY AUTHORIZED.


.

Libertarians live in a fantasy-world, unfortunately. The fix is not that hard - raise taxes, cut spending, and grow the economy. The hard part is making the numbers actually work, which is why no one even tries.

 

[danielpalos]

the right would be much more credible, if they advocated more for ending our wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror; instead of only declaiming the most, social spending on the least wealthy under our form of capitalism and its emphasis on net worth instead of social worth.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

 

[regent]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yeah, those three things sort of came to pass when the states ratified the Constitution.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes

Why would you need a link to something you don't dispute?

Because I did dispute it you lying POS

Post a link backing up your claim or STFU

Are you blind, deaf, and dumb? NeoCon's are always talking about "the takers" yet have no problem spending money on weapons we don't even need. Here's just one example.

U.S. Republican Frontrunner Touts Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy Inter Press Service

U.S.: Republican Frontrunner Touts Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy

WASHINGTON, Oct 7 2011 (IPS) - In his first major foreign policy address of the 2012 presidential campaign, Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney Friday presented a largely neo-conservative platform similar to that pursued by George W. Bush, although he never mentioned the former president by name.

Speaking at The Citadel military academy in South Carolina, Romney promised to increase defence spending – and the size of the U.S. Navy – as part of a strategy designed to ensure that the United States remain the world’s dominant military power and that the 21st century be “an American century”.

“The United States should always retain military supremacy to deter would-be aggressors and to defend our allies and ourselves,” he told the Citadel cadets. “And know this: If America is the undisputed leader of the world, it reduces our need to police a more chaotic world.”

Once again.... prove your point.

What is the purpose of the federal government? It's not to provide a cushion for the poor.

The governments original purpose was to ensure our liberties and safe guard our country and our lives.

What is the purpose of the Federal Government




​

The purpose isn't to spend more than 10 countries combined on military, and on weapons we don't need.

Hey genius.....Your ability to post the idiotic drivel you are know for on here is because of those weapons....
So shut the fuck up

 

[thereisnospoon]

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yeah, those three things sort of came to pass when the states ratified the Constitution.

Thye did? How so?...And please take note...Do not quote the general welfare clause. Because that is NOT what it means nor implies.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes

Why would you need a link to something you don't dispute?

Because I did dispute it you lying POS

Post a link backing up your claim or STFU

Are you blind, deaf, and dumb? NeoCon's are always talking about "the takers" yet have no problem spending money on weapons we don't even need. Here's just one example.

U.S. Republican Frontrunner Touts Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy Inter Press Service

U.S.: Republican Frontrunner Touts Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy

WASHINGTON, Oct 7 2011 (IPS) - In his first major foreign policy address of the 2012 presidential campaign, Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney Friday presented a largely neo-conservative platform similar to that pursued by George W. Bush, although he never mentioned the former president by name.

Speaking at The Citadel military academy in South Carolina, Romney promised to increase defence spending – and the size of the U.S. Navy – as part of a strategy designed to ensure that the United States remain the world’s dominant military power and that the 21st century be “an American century”.

“The United States should always retain military supremacy to deter would-be aggressors and to defend our allies and ourselves,” he told the Citadel cadets. “And know this: If America is the undisputed leader of the world, it reduces our need to police a more chaotic world.”

Once again.... prove your point.

What is the purpose of the federal government? It's not to provide a cushion for the poor.

The governments original purpose was to ensure our liberties and safe guard our country and our lives.

What is the purpose of the Federal Government




​

The purpose isn't to spend more than 10 countries combined on military, and on weapons we don't need.

BTW Moron....YOUR guy in the White House thinks its time to start a new war in the Middle East.

 

[danielpalos]

We could be solving simple poverty through the force of law and call it, socialism bailing out Capitalism, like usual.

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yes, it is better than not having a "safety net, or a "warfare-State" or the concentration of wealth the right seems to prefer, when they claim they are for capitalism.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yeah, those three things sort of came to pass when the states ratified the Constitution.

So you DO support state-enforced involuntary servitude.
Why?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why do you support state-enforced involuntary servitude?

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yes, it is better than not having a "safety net, or a "warfare-State" or the concentration of wealth the right seems to prefer, when they claim they are for capitalism.

So... you DO support state-enforced involuntary servitude.
Why?

 

[bripat9643]

Are you on the right? Most of the red herring "alternatives" of the right involve the form of communism, they are currently practicing in Cuba.

Sorry... I don't see an answer top my question.
Well?

You are begging the question. Why do you believe I do, with our supreme law of the land.

You believe in the social "safety net"? The welfare state? The redistribution of wealth?

Yeah, those three things sort of came to pass when the states ratified the Constitution.

So you DO support state-enforced involuntary servitude.
Why?

Of course she supports state-enforce involuntary servitude. That's what liberalism is all about: forcing all of us to do the state's bidding. Liberals are all a bunch of servile, obedient little toadies who enjoy being told what to do, and they want to share their joy with all of us.