Lucy: Why should I get off welfare?

[Derideo_Te]

For anyone to disregard their actions are willfully disregard why America was created. It wasn't created so we could still be subjects to a central power.

And those founding fathers you claim to be emulating gave us ways of removing corrupt politicians and overturning legislation. You keep fighting. You don't quit and start hiding.

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

Littlereb complains about not being represented and points a finger at an amendment that gives the people the right to directly elect their own state representatives as being the problem?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And those founding fathers you claim to be emulating gave us ways of removing corrupt politicians and overturning legislation. You keep fighting. You don't quit and start hiding.

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

The 17th amendment took the power to elect members of the senate away from the state legislatures and put it in the hands of the people.

Don't like the two party system? Get out and campaign for a 3rd party. Vote 3rd party. Do something about it.

The 17th amendment changed the intent of what the founders wanted. The 17th amendment took the accountability away from elected senators, they would be more accessible and accountable to the state legislators, they are not accountable nor do they answer to the people, you may think they do, but it's just a little tap dance. repealing the 17th would take the lobbyist out of the picture and force senators to answer for why they voted the way they did.

 

[WinterBorn]

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

The 17th amendment took the power to elect members of the senate away from the state legislatures and put it in the hands of the people.

Don't like the two party system? Get out and campaign for a 3rd party. Vote 3rd party. Do something about it.

The 17th amendment changed the intent of what the founders wanted. The 17th amendment took the accountability away from elected senators, they would be more accessible and accountable to the state legislators, they are not accountable nor do they answer to the people, you may think they do, but it's just a little tap dance. repealing the 17th would take the lobbyist out of the picture and force senators to answer for why they voted the way they did.

So start campaigning to repeal the 17th amendment. Nothing will change as long as you sit at home and hide from the IRS.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And those founding fathers you claim to be emulating gave us ways of removing corrupt politicians and overturning legislation. You keep fighting. You don't quit and start hiding.

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

Littlereb complains about not being represented and points a finger at an amendment that gives the people the right to directly elect their own state representatives as being the problem?

D'retard doesn't have a clue, he should leave this discussion. If the founders had wanted the people to elect senators they would not have given that authority to the states.

It changed the whole lay-out of the election process when the 17th amendment was created.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I'm that bright bozo. I'm a plumber you don't stay in this skilled trade without learning a trick or two.

Indeed. But what Vox is describing is not what you said you are doing. Pick a story and stick with it.

Why should I have very little respect for subjects,

Would that be British or Tanzanian subjects?


I decelerate that thought!!!!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 17th amendment took the power to elect members of the senate away from the state legislatures and put it in the hands of the people.

Don't like the two party system? Get out and campaign for a 3rd party. Vote 3rd party. Do something about it.

The 17th amendment changed the intent of what the founders wanted. The 17th amendment took the accountability away from elected senators, they would be more accessible and accountable to the state legislators, they are not accountable nor do they answer to the people, you may think they do, but it's just a little tap dance. repealing the 17th would take the lobbyist out of the picture and force senators to answer for why they voted the way they did.

So start campaigning to repeal the 17th amendment. Nothing will change as long as you sit at home and hide from the IRS.

That's a joke and you know it. The powers that be will not allow their power to be taken away.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Indeed. But what Vox is describing is not what you said you are doing. Pick a story and stick with it.

Why should I have very little respect for subjects,

Would that be British or Tanzanian subjects?


I decelerate that thought!!!!

Subjects like you.

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's a new game!

How many ways can BigDerp misspell Rush Limbaugh's name in one thread?

Go, BigReb, go!!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYJzcUvS_NU]Vangelis - Chariots of Fire - YouTube[/ame]

 

[WinterBorn]

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

Littlereb complains about not being represented and points a finger at an amendment that gives the people the right to directly elect their own state representatives as being the problem?

D'retard doesn't have a clue, he should leave this discussion. If the founders had wanted the people to elect senators they would not have given that authority to the states.

It changed the whole lay-out of the election process when the 17th amendment was created.

Your "If the founders wanted..." logic is ridiculous. That would mean every amendment to the constitution goes against what the founders wanted? If that is true, then the founders were certainly wrong on a few subjects.

Now, if you want to maintain that having our congressmen appointed by the various state legislatures is better for us than having congressmen elected by the people, you will have some serious difficulty. The popular vote allows the citizens to have far more say in who represents them. Buying an election is MUCH tougher when you have to buy the popular vote, instead of just a handful of state senators.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No our election system was fucked up when the 17th amendment was enacted. Don't say our vote counts, it doesn't we have a two party system that will not give their power up. They mirror each other.

The 17th amendment took the power to elect members of the senate away from the state legislatures and put it in the hands of the people.

Don't like the two party system? Get out and campaign for a 3rd party. Vote 3rd party. Do something about it.

The 17th amendment changed the intent of what the founders wanted. The 17th amendment took the accountability away from elected senators, they would be more accessible and accountable to the state legislators, they are not accountable nor do they answer to the people, you may think they do, but it's just a little tap dance. repealing the 17th would take the lobbyist out of the picture and force senators to answer for why they voted the way they did.

Lobbyists were corrupting Senators from the origination of Congress irrespective of 17A. Your ignorance of history is showing. Furthermore accountability to a corrupt state legislature is meaningless. Only direct accountability to the people themselves works.

As Winterborn so aptly put it We the People need to get out there and remove the corrupt politicians and replace them with our choices as opposed to those of the Special Interests who have the power to buy politicians outright thanks to Citizens United.

BTW depending on the laws in your state your ability to vote could be taken away when the IRS convicts you of tax evasion. Bet you didn't think about that either.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Littlereb complains about not being represented and points a finger at an amendment that gives the people the right to directly elect their own state representatives as being the problem?

D'retard doesn't have a clue, he should leave this discussion. If the founders had wanted the people to elect senators they would not have given that authority to the states.

It changed the whole lay-out of the election process when the 17th amendment was created.

Your "If the founders wanted..." logic is ridiculous. That would mean every amendment to the constitution goes against what the founders wanted? If that is true, then the founders were certainly wrong on a few subjects.

Now, if you want to maintain that having our congressmen appointed by the various state legislatures is better for us than having congressmen elected by the people, you will have some serious difficulty. The popular vote allows the citizens to have far more say in who represents them. Buying an election is MUCH tougher when you have to buy the popular vote, instead of just a handful of state senators.

The 17th amendment does go against what they wanted, they even had heated angry debates on it.The large states wanted senators elected by the people. The small states wanted senators elected by the states. They compromised and split the elections House is elected by the people, and the senate was to be elected by the state legislators.

 

[WinterBorn]

D'retard doesn't have a clue, he should leave this discussion. If the founders had wanted the people to elect senators they would not have given that authority to the states.

It changed the whole lay-out of the election process when the 17th amendment was created.

Your "If the founders wanted..." logic is ridiculous. That would mean every amendment to the constitution goes against what the founders wanted? If that is true, then the founders were certainly wrong on a few subjects.

Now, if you want to maintain that having our congressmen appointed by the various state legislatures is better for us than having congressmen elected by the people, you will have some serious difficulty. The popular vote allows the citizens to have far more say in who represents them. Buying an election is MUCH tougher when you have to buy the popular vote, instead of just a handful of state senators.

The 17th amendment does go against what they wanted, they even had heated angry debates on it.The large states wanted senators elected by the people. The small states wanted senators elected by the states. They compromised and split the elections House is elected by the people, and the senate was to be elected by the state legislators.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature. And they will do what it takes to keep that legislature backing them.

If they were elected by the people, their loyalty is to the people and they have to keep the people happy.

The fact that elected officials are not loyal to their constituents is not a sign that the 17th amendment was a mistake. It is a sign that most people will continue to vote the party line, and the elected officials know this.

Break that up. Vote 3rd party and campaign for a 3rd party. That will change the game. Blaming the 17th amendment is ridiculous.

And yes, on a few topics the founding fathers were wrong. But by your logic we should not have had the 13th amendment, because the founding fathers did not abolish slavery.

By your logic, we would not have had the 19th amendment, because the founding fathers did not allow women to vote.

 

[Statistikhengst]

your "if the founders wanted..." logic is ridiculous. That would mean every amendment to the constitution goes against what the founders wanted? If that is true, then the founders were certainly wrong on a few subjects.

Now, if you want to maintain that having our congressmen appointed by the various state legislatures is better for us than having congressmen elected by the people, you will have some serious difficulty. The popular vote allows the citizens to have far more say in who represents them. Buying an election is much tougher when you have to buy the popular vote, instead of just a handful of state senators.

the 17th amendment does go against what they wanted, they even had heated angry debates on it.the large states wanted senators elected by the people. The small states wanted senators elected by the states. They compromised and split the elections house is elected by the people, and the senate was to be elected by the state legislators.

they were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature. And they will do what it takes to keep that legislature backing them.

If they were elected by the people, their loyalty is to the people and they have to keep the people happy.

The fact that elected officials are not loyal to their constituents is not a sign that the 17th amendment was a mistake. It is a sign that most people will continue to vote the party line, and the elected officials know this.

break that up. Vote 3rd party and campaign for a 3rd party. That will change the game. blaming the 17th amendment is ridiculous.

and yes, on a few topics the founding fathers were wrong. But by your logic we should not have had the 13th amendment, because the founding fathers did not abolish slavery.

By your logic, we would not have had the 19th amendment, because the founding fathers did not allow women to vote.

yes.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Your "If the founders wanted..." logic is ridiculous. That would mean every amendment to the constitution goes against what the founders wanted? If that is true, then the founders were certainly wrong on a few subjects.

Now, if you want to maintain that having our congressmen appointed by the various state legislatures is better for us than having congressmen elected by the people, you will have some serious difficulty. The popular vote allows the citizens to have far more say in who represents them. Buying an election is MUCH tougher when you have to buy the popular vote, instead of just a handful of state senators.

The 17th amendment does go against what they wanted, they even had heated angry debates on it.The large states wanted senators elected by the people. The small states wanted senators elected by the states. They compromised and split the elections House is elected by the people, and the senate was to be elected by the state legislators.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature. And they will do what it takes to keep that legislature backing them.

If they were elected by the people, their loyalty is to the people and they have to keep the people happy.

The fact that elected officials are not loyal to their constituents is not a sign that the 17th amendment was a mistake. It is a sign that most people will continue to vote the party line, and the elected officials know this.

Break that up. Vote 3rd party and campaign for a 3rd party. That will change the game. Blaming the 17th amendment is ridiculous.

And yes, on a few topics the founding fathers were wrong. But by your logic we should not have had the 13th amendment, because the founding fathers did not abolish slavery.

By your logic, we would not have had the 19th amendment, because the founding fathers did not allow women to vote.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature.

Yes their loyalties would be with the State legislators, and the state legislators answers directly to the people of that state, and not the one who has the most money. I have more access with my state representatives than I do to my federal elected representatives. hell for what it's worth I just had breakfast the other day with two of my state representatives and a couple of county commissioners, and city council members and the Governors representatives

They feared that that if the people voted for all elected officials they would vote vote themselves more money, it created the mess we have now. That's why we have the electoral college. This is why I am correct.

 

[WinterBorn]

The 17th amendment does go against what they wanted, they even had heated angry debates on it.The large states wanted senators elected by the people. The small states wanted senators elected by the states. They compromised and split the elections House is elected by the people, and the senate was to be elected by the state legislators.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature. And they will do what it takes to keep that legislature backing them.

If they were elected by the people, their loyalty is to the people and they have to keep the people happy.

The fact that elected officials are not loyal to their constituents is not a sign that the 17th amendment was a mistake. It is a sign that most people will continue to vote the party line, and the elected officials know this.

Break that up. Vote 3rd party and campaign for a 3rd party. That will change the game. Blaming the 17th amendment is ridiculous.

And yes, on a few topics the founding fathers were wrong. But by your logic we should not have had the 13th amendment, because the founding fathers did not abolish slavery.

By your logic, we would not have had the 19th amendment, because the founding fathers did not allow women to vote.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature.

Yes their loyalties would be with the State legislators, and the state legislators answers directly to the people of that state, and not the one who has the most money. I have more access with my state representatives than I do to my federal elected representatives. hell for what it's worth I just had breakfast the other day with two of my state representatives and a couple of county commissioners, and city council members and the Governors representatives

They feared that that if the people voted for all elected officials they would vote vote themselves more money, it created the mess we have now. That's why we have the electoral college. This is why I am correct.

I think you are absolutely wrong. But campaign for a repeal of the 17th. All you need is 38 of the 50 states to go along with you.

 

[zeke]

hey bigrebbie. Did you tell all those fine folk buying your breakfast that you are a dead beat tax cheat?

Or do you keep that to yourself? Except for sharing that info on a message board. Just curious.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

hey bigrebbie. Did you tell all those fine folk buying your breakfast that you are a dead beat tax cheat?

Or do you keep that to yourself? Except for sharing that info on a message board. Just curious.

I'm not cheating anyone I have nothing to give are working poor tax cheats when they don't pay taxes?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature. And they will do what it takes to keep that legislature backing them.

If they were elected by the people, their loyalty is to the people and they have to keep the people happy.

The fact that elected officials are not loyal to their constituents is not a sign that the 17th amendment was a mistake. It is a sign that most people will continue to vote the party line, and the elected officials know this.

Break that up. Vote 3rd party and campaign for a 3rd party. That will change the game. Blaming the 17th amendment is ridiculous.

And yes, on a few topics the founding fathers were wrong. But by your logic we should not have had the 13th amendment, because the founding fathers did not abolish slavery.

By your logic, we would not have had the 19th amendment, because the founding fathers did not allow women to vote.

They were wrong. If they are appointed by state legislatures, then their loyalty is to that legislature.

Yes their loyalties would be with the State legislators, and the state legislators answers directly to the people of that state, and not the one who has the most money. I have more access with my state representatives than I do to my federal elected representatives. hell for what it's worth I just had breakfast the other day with two of my state representatives and a couple of county commissioners, and city council members and the Governors representatives

They feared that that if the people voted for all elected officials they would vote vote themselves more money, it created the mess we have now. That's why we have the electoral college. This is why I am correct.

I think you are absolutely wrong. But campaign for a repeal of the 17th. All you need is 38 of the 50 states to go along with you.

What is the purpose of the electoral college if I am wrong? It's as old as the Constitution.

 

[WinterBorn]

hey bigrebbie. Did you tell all those fine folk buying your breakfast that you are a dead beat tax cheat?

Or do you keep that to yourself? Except for sharing that info on a message board. Just curious.

I'm not cheating anyone I have nothing to give are working poor tax cheats when they don't pay taxes?

Repeating this lie over and over does not change the fact that it is a lie.

You earn money that you do not report. That is cheating.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

hey bigrebbie. Did you tell all those fine folk buying your breakfast that you are a dead beat tax cheat?

Or do you keep that to yourself? Except for sharing that info on a message board. Just curious.

I'm not cheating anyone I have nothing to give are working poor tax cheats when they don't pay taxes?

Repeating this lie over and over does not change the fact that it is a lie.

You earn money that you do not report. That is cheating.

It's not a lie no matter how hard you force it.
Are working poor tax cheats who don't pay taxes?
And I am only anti obama care you can't change my mind on this.