To the Conservatives.

[DiveCon]

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.


You wanna argue, argue with James Madison.

if you are going to quote, you should make sure you are quoting it correctly
you did not

 

[DiveCon]

Sources? Links?


Or is that all you have left, insults?

you are proving you are not worth the effort, you get what you deserve

if you think that only Bush has violated the constitution, you are either a partisan moron, or you are seriously delusional

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

you are proving you are not worth the effort, you get what you deserve

if you think that only Bush has violated the constitution, you are either a partisan moron, or you are seriously delusional

Nice try. When did I ever say that only Bush violated the Constitution. The Fallacy of the Straw Man argument. Busted!

Second, my quote was cut and pasted directly from the Constitution. Ignoratio elenchi, otherwise known as the Fallacy of Evasion. And a dishonest one at that.

Third -- delusional, not worth the effort, moron....The Fallacy of the Ad Hominem Attack. Otherwise known as infantile insults.


Wow. It's not every day that a guy finds three different ways to lose an argument all in a couple of posts.

Better luck next time!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Feel free to respond to my earlier post.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/congress/64386-to-the-conservatives-5.html#post998644

 

[Gunny]

Nice try. When did I ever say that only Bush violated the Constitution. The Fallacy of the Straw Man argument. Busted!

Second, my quote was cut and pasted directly from the Constitution. Ignoratio elenchi, otherwise known as the Fallacy of Evasion. And a dishonest one at that.

Third -- delusional, not worth the effort, moron....The Fallacy of the Ad Hominem Attack. Otherwise known as infantile insults.


Wow. It's not every day that a guy finds three different ways to lose an argument all in a couple of posts.

Better luck next time!

You had an argument? Oops ... the fallacy of delusional thinking ... busted.

Just what we need here. Yet another one that can't address an argument so has to attack the poster's style of argument. B-o-r-i-n-g.

 

[Gunny]

Wait two days.

Dream on.

 

[DiveCon]

Nice try. When did I ever say that only Bush violated the Constitution. The Fallacy of the Straw Man argument. Busted!

Second, my quote was cut and pasted directly from the Constitution. Ignoratio elenchi, otherwise known as the Fallacy of Evasion. And a dishonest one at that.

Third -- delusional, not worth the effort, moron....The Fallacy of the Ad Hominem Attack. Otherwise known as infantile insults.


Wow. It's not every day that a guy finds three different ways to lose an argument all in a couple of posts.

Better luck next time!

sorry, it wasnt directly from the US Constitution

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.

THAT is


what ever source you copied from, is in error

here is MY source
http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html



oops, i see you quoted from article 1 section 8 clause 1

 

[Gunny]

So you think Obama is going to violate the Constitution the way Bush did. And you base this on...

What?

Gaar's delusions about Obama's birth certificate?

How about absolute power corrupts absolutely?

If the President merely follows Congress and all the signing statements and caveats created to circumvent the Constitution, he will be in violation of the Constitution.

It's really not any tougher than that.

 

[Gunny]

Well he voted for the FISA Amendments which would seem to suggest that as President he intends to continue Bush's policy of spying on Americans, for one. Another example would be his voting for bailing out failed businesses, which the Constitution does not give the federal government the authority to do in the first place. To add to that, the bailouts were voted on by the Senate before they were approved by the House despite the Constitution saying that all money appropriations must first pass the House. Whether he agreed with the bailouts or not, he should have voted them down based on that fact alone.

My guess would be that, as President, he intends to circumvent the Constitution as he sees fit, just as he has done as a Senator.

I agree with your first two, not the last. The Senate can in fact originate it's own legislation. If it contains funding, it has to be then submitted through the House.

 

[Gunny]

First, you need to differentiate between legal and illegal wiretaps. Conducted properly, the taps are Constitutional and legal.

Second, the general welfare clause of the Constitution gives Congress the power to do almost anything it damn well pleases, to include bailing out banks.

Third, the bailout plan and the bailout appropriation are two different things.

Obama studied law at Harvard. He knows the Constitution pretty good.

You base that last sentence on WHAT? Don't state your opinion as fact.

 

[Gunny]

Nonsense.

Wrong.

 

[WillowTree]

Nice try. When did I ever say that only Bush violated the Constitution. The Fallacy of the Straw Man argument. Busted!

Second, my quote was cut and pasted directly from the Constitution. Ignoratio elenchi, otherwise known as the Fallacy of Evasion. And a dishonest one at that.

Third -- delusional, not worth the effort, moron....The Fallacy of the Ad Hominem Attack. Otherwise known as infantile insults.


Wow. It's not every day that a guy finds three different ways to lose an argument all in a couple of posts.

Better luck next time!

Oh really? It was? Then they get an F for spelling too.

 

[Gunny]

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.


You wanna argue, argue with James Madison.

James Madison isn't arguing, YOU are. In context, paying the debts of the United States of America is NOT paying the debts of private business within the US, or the debts of individuals within the US.

"General welfare" is about as vague as it gets, and if you think robbing taxpayers so corporate failures can continue to collect exhorbitant salaries and bonuses, I suggest you rethink your fallacious ideology.

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

You had an argument? Oops ... the fallacy of delusional thinking ... busted.

Just what we need here. Yet another one that can't address an argument so has to attack the poster's style of argument. B-o-r-i-n-g.

Bullcrap.

He claimed that nearly every president has violated the Constitution, and then didn't back it up.
He claimed my reading of the Constitution was wrong, and I shot him down using the text from the Constitution itself.
He tried to put words in my mouth, and I shot him down.
He tried an evasion, and I shot him down.
He tried insults, and I shot him down.

I can get you a souvenir scorecard of the game if you want. I win, he loses.

 

[DiveCon]

Bullcrap.

He claimed that nearly every president has violated the Constitution, and then didn't back it up.
He claimed my reading of the Constitution was wrong, and I shot him down using the text from the Constitution itself.
He tried to put words in my mouth, and I shot him down.
He tried an evasion, and I shot him down.
He tried insults, and I shot him down.

I can get you a souvenir scorecard of the game if you want. I win, he loses.

you shot nothing down, moron

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

James Madison isn't arguing, YOU are. In context, paying the debts of the United States of America is NOT paying the debts of private business within the US, or the debts of individuals within the US.

"General welfare" is about as vague as it gets, and if you think robbing taxpayers so corporate failures can continue to collect exhorbitant salaries and bonuses, I suggest you rethink your fallacious ideology.

One more time:

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.


The paying of debts and the providing for the general welfare are in different parts of the sentence. It's called parallel construction. You'll need to read a little more closely.

If you want to argue that it's bad policy, be my guest. But if you want to argue that it's unconstitutional, then sorry, the Constitution doesn't back you up on that.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I agree with your first two, not the last. The Senate can in fact originate it's own legislation. If it contains funding, it has to be then submitted through the House.

"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills." - Article 1, Section 7 United States Constitution

FindLaw: U.S. Constitution: Article I

I take this to mean that the Senate may not vote on the legislation until it passes the House, and the bailouts had not passed the House until after it passed the Senate. Also, since they hid the bailouts within a completely separate piece of legislation I assume that they take the same meaning that I do.

 

[HelloDollyLlama]

you shot nothing down, moron

I'm new here. Do you get extra bonus points for juvenile insults? Only reason I can think of, why he keeps doing it, after he's already lost the fight.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

One more time:

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.


The paying of debts and the providing for the general welfare are in different parts of the sentence. It's called parallel construction. You'll need to read a little more closely.

If you want to argue that it's bad policy, be my guest. But if you want to argue that it's unconstitutional, then sorry, the Constitution doesn't back you up on that.

The bailouts were not a debt of the United States, they were propping up failed businesses at the expense of the taxpayers. And the general welfare clause was not meant to be a free pass for the government to do anything it pleases.

 

[DiveCon]

I'm new here. Do you get extra bonus points for juvenile insults? Only reason I can think of, why he keeps doing it, after he's already lost the fight.

when someone proves that facts dont mean anything to them, i call them a moron, you fit the bill