Trump prepares EO to close down the unconstitutional federal department of education

[johnwk]

No authorization is required. If it’s not expressly forbidden, it’s constitutional.

See the Tenth Amendment.

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

 

[konradv]

The responses given do not answer the fundamental question:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

Bullshit! Asked and answered.

 

[Lisa558]

No authorization is required. If it’s not expressly forbidden, it’s constitutional.

No. You are giving the “benefit of the doubt” to the federal government, which is opposite what our FF intended. The “benefit of the doubt” goes to the states.

If it is not expressly granted, the right goes to the state.

 

[konradv]

See the Tenth Amendment.

SCOTUS has known the 10th since it was written, but hasn’t ruled in your favor. Why would that be, since we’ve had plenty of conservative administrations, unless you’re wrong?

 

[johnwk]

Bullshit! Asked and answered.

I see you continue to avoid answering the fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

 

[konradv]

I see you continue to avoid answering the fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

Asked and answered. None required.

 

[johnwk]

Asked and answered. None required.

I accept your white flag and conceding you are incapable, or won't, answered a fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

 

[konradv]

I accept your white flag and conceding you are incapable, or won't, answered a fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

You’re a goofball!

 

[johnwk]

You’re a goofball!

Your white flag is accepted. You won't, answered a fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

 

[BackAgain]

When are any republicans gonna grow a pair and closedown the unconstitutional president?

The President (ie, the Executive Branch) is absolutely Constitutional.

We don’t want to shut it down. We want him to continue doing what he is doing, in fact, to restore the government to its legitimate role under our Constitution.

Hemlock, you stupid shit, grow at least your first brain cell.

 

[johnwk]

Trump should also close down the unconstitutional National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities.

Are we to forget how both have openly participated in indoctrination, propaganda, and use of tax dollars to display sexual deviant behavior such as Andres Serrano's anti-Christian bigotry called "P*** Christ"; Robert Mapplethorpe’s homosexual display called “The Perfect Moment”; Annie Sprinkle’s pornographic performances at a New York theater; Karen Finley, “the nude, chocolate smeared women”; Kyle Abraham’s “The Watershed and When the Wolves Came In” focusing on sexual identity; a 2016 festival for sexual deviant singing groups who appeared in a “flash mob” in Denver; taxpayer financing for a sexual deviant festival in San Francisco; funding for the Feminist Press at the City University of New York to digitize classic LGBT titles; an open mic group in D.C for story telling about “Queer Culture in America"; and the latest venomous and hateful smut on display financed by tax revenue being Shakespeare In Central Park depicting the violent murder of President Trump.


Our Founders were absolutely correct to limit Congress’ power to “… securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”


With respect to closing down the above mentioned agencies Representative Page's words, spoken on Feb.7th, 1792 elaborates on the suffering we now experience by our Constitution being subverted.

"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” SEE: Annals of Congress Feb 7th,1792 Rep Page (enter 194 in the small box at the top of the page)


It's time to end unconstitutional appropriations of federal revenue, especially to agencies and departments who use such money to propagandize the minds of our nation's children as does Randi Weingarten's crowd

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Stop being an asshole and answer the question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread.

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

When you ask a pertinent question, sure. I am waiting.

 

[skye]

 

[Rawley]

No authorization is required. If it’s not expressly forbidden, it’s constitutional.

Please tell us you're kidding.

 

[Lisa558]

No authorization is required. If it’s not expressly forbidden, it’s constitutional.

Just the opposite.

 

[konradv]

Please tell us you're kidding.

Just the opposite.

Been true for quite some time. Look it up.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Your white flag is accepted. You won't, answered a fundamental question which is pertinent to the topic of the thread:

Where in the Constitution has Congress been granted a power to tax and spend for State public school systems? I find no such authorization beneath Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, for which Congress is granted power to lay and collect taxes.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people. Tenth amendment.
.


The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? ______ MARBURY v. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

We don't argue the Constitution with illiterates from the libertarian and constitutionalist camps.

 

[Leo123]

The D.O.E. is a stink left over from the Carter administration.

 

[Rawley]

Been true for quite some time. Look it up.

So the President can dismiss congress, make up his own laws and run the country by himself.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

That's just it. Those savings won't go to you. They'll go to corporations, and Elon.

Let me know when those savings get passed on to you and me.

Or, will cuts to your social security and medicare save Elon and Bezos money?

I noticed this in the 2000's. Whenever GW Bush said Americans, he meant rich Americans. If he said rich Americans, his speeches were sincere. But he was talking to all of us. But this was a way for him to not lie. As a Christian, he didn't want to lie. So his speeches weren't lies. He just omitted the word RICH. Do you remember the Bush tax breaks? Of course not because you aren't rich. Bush said he was going to return the Clinton surplus to Americans. It's their money and he's giving it back. Did he lie? No. He gave it back, to rich people. You got squanch.

That’s a whole lot of BDS you have there.