Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Let me ask you what is the alternative? Do we allow ourselves to become so callous we just let old and young sick people die?
If we try to take care of everyone, our country will collapse. Which choice is preferable to you?
Mark
I don't like extremes of anything Mark, I do think we can do better with whatever type of government we choose to live under. I also think the fear interjected into the argument is wrong-headed. No one is saying we are going to become a purely Socialist country.
We can work smarter, we can reduce government and translate those benefits into a stream lined economy, I think we can expect certain departments to work smarter, the Department of Defense is a very good place to start cleaning up waste and redundant programs, I think we can get rid of the Department of Education, I think we should rethink the TSA, and the NSA, spying on citizens domestically does not end well.There are many other ways to reduce government so that we can afford programs that make the country richer. There was a time when immigrants screamed to come to America for the promise of a better world and it's been a while since we have seen that. I t wasn't long ago graduating from college was a proud event, now it comes with extreme debt, Moving towards a goal of a better, and grander America is a good thing as long as it doesn't get out of control like its big brother Capitalism did just eight years ago.
America was at its best BEFORE we implemented liberal policies. And even if that is the way America chooses to go, then our Constitution has to be amended to allow it.
Mark
Oh right! Did you forget the Constitution is the very basis of universal human rights? That's is not a conservative leaning at all. It was John Adams, who instituted the first tax so that health care for sailors would be provided. Perhaps you also have forgotten that originally corporations had to be chartered and could only exist for thirty years, and it was the East India Company that caused us to go to war in the first place. Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
The right in thiss country have been trying to make the Founders their own ever since the Declaration was written its too bad most of those things written in that document came fro a liberal education and is well reflected throughout that document.
Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
How can we "not forget" something that never happened? I've read the U.S. Constitution top to bottom hundreds of times and never once have I seen "separation of church and state". You can't let liberal propaganda overcome you like that. Do some research. Read the U.S. Constitution. The only thing the founders were concerned about was the state deciding and/or creating a national religion. Never once were they concerned about the people bringing religion into government.
It certainly was what the Founders intended
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
~James Madison
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802
And the way the document has been interpreted since.
Let me ask you what is the alternative? Do we allow ourselves to become so callous we just let old and young sick people die?
If we try to take care of everyone, our country will collapse. Which choice is preferable to you?
Mark
I don't like extremes of anything Mark, I do think we can do better with whatever type of government we choose to live under. I also think the fear interjected into the argument is wrong-headed. No one is saying we are going to become a purely Socialist country.
We can work smarter, we can reduce government and translate those benefits into a stream lined economy, I think we can expect certain departments to work smarter, the Department of Defense is a very good place to start cleaning up waste and redundant programs, I think we can get rid of the Department of Education, I think we should rethink the TSA, and the NSA, spying on citizens domestically does not end well.There are many other ways to reduce government so that we can afford programs that make the country richer. There was a time when immigrants screamed to come to America for the promise of a better world and it's been a while since we have seen that. I t wasn't long ago graduating from college was a proud event, now it comes with extreme debt, Moving towards a goal of a better, and grander America is a good thing as long as it doesn't get out of control like its big brother Capitalism did just eight years ago.
America was at its best BEFORE we implemented liberal policies. And even if that is the way America chooses to go, then our Constitution has to be amended to allow it.
Mark
Oh right! Did you forget the Constitution is the very basis of universal human rights? That's is not a conservative leaning at all. It was John Adams, who instituted the first tax so that health care for sailors would be provided. Perhaps you also have forgotten that originally corporations had to be chartered and could only exist for thirty years, and it was the East India Company that caused us to go to war in the first place. Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
The right in thiss country have been trying to make the Founders their own ever since the Declaration was written its too bad most of those things written in that document came fro a liberal education and is well reflected throughout that document.
If it was "well reflected" in their writings, then why didn't they live it? Why wasn't there welfare, gun control, and separation from religion at the very beginnings of our nation?
I'll tell you why, because they simply did not believe what you claim they did. They were not "liberal" in any sense of the word.
The right doesn't have to try to make the founders their "own", quite simply they are ours, since it is we who want to get back to the Constitutional government they envisioned.
Mark
Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
How can we "not forget" something that never happened? I've read the U.S. Constitution top to bottom hundreds of times and never once have I seen "separation of church and state". You can't let liberal propaganda overcome you like that. Do some research. Read the U.S. Constitution. The only thing the founders were concerned about was the state deciding and/or creating a national religion. Never once were they concerned about the people bringing religion into government.
It certainly was what the Founders intended
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
~James Madison
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802
And the way the document has been interpreted since.
Then why, after the constitution was ratified, did each state have its official religion? Wouldn't the new nation founded on the beliefs you espouse have outlawed such a practice?
I agree with another poster. You are a product of the liberal educational system. What you have been taught is CLEARLY not what is in the historical records.
As to the bolded, this is NOT how the left views it.
Mark
If we try to take care of everyone, our country will collapse. Which choice is preferable to you?
Mark
I don't like extremes of anything Mark, I do think we can do better with whatever type of government we choose to live under. I also think the fear interjected into the argument is wrong-headed. No one is saying we are going to become a purely Socialist country.
We can work smarter, we can reduce government and translate those benefits into a stream lined economy, I think we can expect certain departments to work smarter, the Department of Defense is a very good place to start cleaning up waste and redundant programs, I think we can get rid of the Department of Education, I think we should rethink the TSA, and the NSA, spying on citizens domestically does not end well.There are many other ways to reduce government so that we can afford programs that make the country richer. There was a time when immigrants screamed to come to America for the promise of a better world and it's been a while since we have seen that. I t wasn't long ago graduating from college was a proud event, now it comes with extreme debt, Moving towards a goal of a better, and grander America is a good thing as long as it doesn't get out of control like its big brother Capitalism did just eight years ago.
America was at its best BEFORE we implemented liberal policies. And even if that is the way America chooses to go, then our Constitution has to be amended to allow it.
Mark
Oh right! Did you forget the Constitution is the very basis of universal human rights? That's is not a conservative leaning at all. It was John Adams, who instituted the first tax so that health care for sailors would be provided. Perhaps you also have forgotten that originally corporations had to be chartered and could only exist for thirty years, and it was the East India Company that caused us to go to war in the first place. Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
The right in thiss country have been trying to make the Founders their own ever since the Declaration was written its too bad most of those things written in that document came fro a liberal education and is well reflected throughout that document.
If it was "well reflected" in their writings, then why didn't they live it? Why wasn't there welfare, gun control, and separation from religion at the very beginnings of our nation?
I'll tell you why, because they simply did not believe what you claim they did. They were not "liberal" in any sense of the word.
The right doesn't have to try to make the founders their "own", quite simply they are ours, since it is we who want to get back to the Constitutional government they envisioned.
Mark
Many of those things you note were a product of time and economics. The Founders however, never did see government as so small you could drown it in a bathtub. Look at the Louisiana purchase and how that expanded government, there was separation of church and state from the beginning, organized religion was there from the very beginning though, trying to infringe on the government.
John Adams signed the 1797 treaty of Tripoli that assured the Muslim nation that the United States of America was not in any way founded on the Christian religion. Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Hamilton, were extreme advocates of the "Age of Enlightenment" and stressed reasoning and scientific endeavor as the means to reveal the nature of "Providence" James Madison wrote that government involvement with the church "implies either that the civil magistrate is a competent judge of religious truth; or that he may employ religion as an engine of civil policy. The first is an arrogant pretension falsified by the contradictory of rulers in all ages, and throughout the world: the second an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation."
Thomas Jefferson despised organized religion, he believed that leaders and advocates changed the words and meaning of Jesus Christ for their own pursuit of power. He even created the Jefferson bible, where he took only the words of Jesus Christ as text. He believed the philosophy of Jesus was the most sublime and beautiful of any philosophy and that organized religion corrupted it.
You misunderstood me. I said that many of the things that you pointed out became a product of time and economics. I wasn't speaking of the Founders at that point.I don't like extremes of anything Mark, I do think we can do better with whatever type of government we choose to live under. I also think the fear interjected into the argument is wrong-headed. No one is saying we are going to become a purely Socialist country.
We can work smarter, we can reduce government and translate those benefits into a stream lined economy, I think we can expect certain departments to work smarter, the Department of Defense is a very good place to start cleaning up waste and redundant programs, I think we can get rid of the Department of Education, I think we should rethink the TSA, and the NSA, spying on citizens domestically does not end well.There are many other ways to reduce government so that we can afford programs that make the country richer. There was a time when immigrants screamed to come to America for the promise of a better world and it's been a while since we have seen that. I t wasn't long ago graduating from college was a proud event, now it comes with extreme debt, Moving towards a goal of a better, and grander America is a good thing as long as it doesn't get out of control like its big brother Capitalism did just eight years ago.
America was at its best BEFORE we implemented liberal policies. And even if that is the way America chooses to go, then our Constitution has to be amended to allow it.
Mark
Oh right! Did you forget the Constitution is the very basis of universal human rights? That's is not a conservative leaning at all. It was John Adams, who instituted the first tax so that health care for sailors would be provided. Perhaps you also have forgotten that originally corporations had to be chartered and could only exist for thirty years, and it was the East India Company that caused us to go to war in the first place. Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
The right in thiss country have been trying to make the Founders their own ever since the Declaration was written its too bad most of those things written in that document came fro a liberal education and is well reflected throughout that document.
If it was "well reflected" in their writings, then why didn't they live it? Why wasn't there welfare, gun control, and separation from religion at the very beginnings of our nation?
I'll tell you why, because they simply did not believe what you claim they did. They were not "liberal" in any sense of the word.
The right doesn't have to try to make the founders their "own", quite simply they are ours, since it is we who want to get back to the Constitutional government they envisioned.
Mark
Many of those things you note were a product of time and economics. The Founders however, never did see government as so small you could drown it in a bathtub. Look at the Louisiana purchase and how that expanded government, there was separation of church and state from the beginning, organized religion was there from the very beginning though, trying to infringe on the government.
John Adams signed the 1797 treaty of Tripoli that assured the Muslim nation that the United States of America was not in any way founded on the Christian religion. Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Hamilton, were extreme advocates of the "Age of Enlightenment" and stressed reasoning and scientific endeavor as the means to reveal the nature of "Providence" James Madison wrote that government involvement with the church "implies either that the civil magistrate is a competent judge of religious truth; or that he may employ religion as an engine of civil policy. The first is an arrogant pretension falsified by the contradictory of rulers in all ages, and throughout the world: the second an unhallowed perversion of the means of salvation."
Thomas Jefferson despised organized religion, he believed that leaders and advocates changed the words and meaning of Jesus Christ for their own pursuit of power. He even created the Jefferson bible, where he took only the words of Jesus Christ as text. He believed the philosophy of Jesus was the most sublime and beautiful of any philosophy and that organized religion corrupted it.
They were not "a product of the times". A new government was formed, I doubt that the intent was to have some words on a paper that would not be followed.
And freedom of religion is not freedom from religion. No matter the personal leanings of the founders, they understood that completely. Having no "official" religion is a far cry from not allowing any religion in the government.
Mark
Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
How can we "not forget" something that never happened? I've read the U.S. Constitution top to bottom hundreds of times and never once have I seen "separation of church and state". You can't let liberal propaganda overcome you like that. Do some research. Read the U.S. Constitution. The only thing the founders were concerned about was the state deciding and/or creating a national religion. Never once were they concerned about the people bringing religion into government.
It certainly was what the Founders intended
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
~James Madison
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802
And the way the document has been interpreted since.
Then why, after the constitution was ratified, did each state have its official religion? Wouldn't the new nation founded on the beliefs you espouse have outlawed such a practice?
I agree with another poster. You are a product of the liberal educational system. What you have been taught is CLEARLY not what is in the historical records.
As to the bolded, this is NOT how the left views it.
Mark
Wrong again Mark, I am a student of history. I love piecing the smallest nuances and discovering new things that reveal the past. You are a product of religion that wants to latch on to the Constitution for more power and to change the document to reflect what your church or religion wants it to say.
Sandra Day O'Connor the Supreme Court Judge once wrote: "Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly"
When Bill Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses in line to completely eliminate the national debt by 2012, why did George W. Bush slash tax rates for the rich and double the debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion?
Let's not forget the place religion had in the beginning and the message by the Founders was clear that there would be a separation of church and state and we did pretty well by that dictum until religious conservatives got in bed with churches and have encroached religion into the state ever since.
How can we "not forget" something that never happened? I've read the U.S. Constitution top to bottom hundreds of times and never once have I seen "separation of church and state". You can't let liberal propaganda overcome you like that. Do some research. Read the U.S. Constitution. The only thing the founders were concerned about was the state deciding and/or creating a national religion. Never once were they concerned about the people bringing religion into government.
It certainly was what the Founders intended
The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries.”
~James Madison
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”
~Thomas Jefferson, as President, in a letter to the Baptists of Danbury, Connecticut, 1802
And the way the document has been interpreted since.
Then why, after the constitution was ratified, did each state have its official religion? Wouldn't the new nation founded on the beliefs you espouse have outlawed such a practice?
I agree with another poster. You are a product of the liberal educational system. What you have been taught is CLEARLY not what is in the historical records.
As to the bolded, this is NOT how the left views it.
Mark
Wrong again Mark, I am a student of history. I love piecing the smallest nuances and discovering new things that reveal the past. You are a product of religion that wants to latch on to the Constitution for more power and to change the document to reflect what your church or religion wants it to say.
Sandra Day O'Connor the Supreme Court Judge once wrote: "Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must therefore answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly"
If you are a student of history, then you must KNOW that "God" has been a part of our historical makeup since day one, and that our government took part in that makeup.
Throughout our history(until 1962) school prayer and bible reading was part of school curriculum.
The evidence for religion in government is in fact utterly overwhelming.
So, O'Connor was wrong. Our system(before the liberals changed it) served us very well. It was after the change that the moral fiber of the country hit the skids.
As for myself, I am not paticularly religious, and don't go to church. However, I do not lie to myself to view history. I take it for what it was, not what I want it to be.
No better way to learn history than to read a first person account o that history:
Upon my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things.
In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country.
Religion in America...must be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief.
I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion -- for who can search the human heart? But I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society.
In the United States, the sovereign authority is religious...there is no country in the world where the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature than that its influence is powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.
In the United States, the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, but it extends to the intelligence of the people...
Christianity, therefore, reigns without obstacle, by universal consent...
Alexis de Tocqueville
Mark
What is the one branch of medicine where improvements are being made and costs are going down? Laser eye surgery. Since laser surgery is generally not covered by insurance, competition drives prices down while improving the product. Mark
Bingo! Because government subsidization causes prices to skyrocket. A simple, indisputable reality...
Its not only government. If you get into a fender bender and take your car to a body shop, before they give you a quote they ask you whether you have insurance or not. You see, they charge insurance companies more, although they would never admit it.
Mark
Well that's not entirely true. Some of that has to do with the business agreements that the repair shops and the insurance companies have entered into. The repair shops get consistent business and in return, the insurance companies get reduced costs. It just like health insurance and hospitals.
What people and corporations are leaving? The people who leave, leave because they can't afford housing - they're not the rich. The corporations that leave are the ones that rely on low skill, low wage labor for which we will never be able to compete with third world countries.You didn't source your claim so I have no way to know what date that was published. That said, California is back on an economic roll, higher taxes, higher wages, and a fully integrated system of business regulation have allowed California to remain the sixth most dynamic business engine in the world. The debt is being retired and unemployment has hit a new low. Life is good in the Golden state.
If life is so good in the "Golden State", why are people and corporations leaving?
I'm sure Rottweiller is infinitely better qualified to judge the Constitution than the Supreme Court. Just look at his qualifications. He has over 14,000 posts here. Supreme Court Justices - 0.it is you who went to the far right corner and I'm surprised you don't see it.
I love this desperate lie by the Democrats. True conservatives sit firmly planted the U.S. Constitution. Which is neither right nor left. It is ground zero - the legal structure of government implemented by our founders. Please tell me how we've moved "right" of that? I'd love to see a single example you could demonstrate. In fact - I'll make you this sincere promise right here and now. If you can give just a single real illustration of how true conservatives have "moved right" of the Constitution - I'll vote Democrat for the rest of my life. Examples of libertarian's, sovereign citizens, and anarchists don't count as they self-identify as not being conservatives but another group entirely.
Show me any true conservative that has suggested we violate the U.S. Constitution by stopping the federal government of one of their 18 emulated powers. I've never heard a conservative suggest that the states should run 50 individual patent offices (maybe a sovereign citizens has - but not a conservative). I've never heard a conservative suggest that the states should coin their own money. Please show me any conservative group (Tea Party, Constitution Party, etc.) that makes such an official (or even unofficial for that matter) part of their platform.
I appreciate your political stand but I hope you understand you don't speak for "all" Republicans. How the Supreme Court has interpreted the document has probably more to do with how we move about the Constitution. Each Party, actually each citizen is free to express to the court their concerns on how the document should be interpreted to protect their own varied interests. That's what makes the document so dynamic and interesting.
Absolutists make me laugh. Let me guess, you think the world was literally created in six days.How the Supreme Court has interpreted the document has probably more to do with how we move about the Constitution. Each Party, actually each citizen is free to express to the court their concerns on how the document should be interpreted to protect their own varied interests. That's what makes the document so dynamic and interesting.
Charming for sure, but 100% inaccurate (not to mention slightly desperate at your desire to avoid having to admit you can't provide even a single instance of conservatives "moving right" of the U.S. Constitution). First of all, it is illegal to "interpret" the document. The U.S. Constitution is the law (and the highest law in the land as established by the Supremacy Clause). A law which is "open to interpretation" is a law that cannot be adhered to. The speed limit in your neighborhood is the law. If you interpret 25mph to mean "anything up to 40mph" while an officer interprets it to mean "anything above 24mph" - you'll never be able to be compliant with that speed limit. Especially if yet another officer on that department interprets the speed limit a third way (say...impermissible to be at even 24mph or 26mph).
The U.S. Constitution is not "dynamic" (another silly liberal talking point). It is set in stone, says exactly what it says, and stays that way until such time as it is amended. At which time, that new version becomes the new law set in stone.
I can see how you'd be threatened over NYCs criminalization of spreading lies. But there are bigger fish to fry like Fox News. The average member of their audience apparently has neither the brains to see the lies nor the time to sort them all out and since they have the right to vote, it really is taking a heavy toll on society.What is happening in the Democratic party is every bit as interesting as what is happening in the Republican party. New parties and new ideas are being forged and the next five years should be very interesting. I have no way of knowing just hoe far each will be pushed or how they will react, but what we end up with will be very interesting indeed.
I can tell you exactly where we will end up if we don't restore constitutional government. A North Korean nanny-state. Devoid of rights and privacy. We're about 75% of the way there already. Did you see where New York City made it a crime to not spread a lie? The government had deemed that a person can choose their gender even though that is scientifically decided by chromosomes. Well, in New York City, if a business owner (such as a landlord) calls a person by their biological gender rather than the gender desired by the person with the mental illness, they will be charged with a crime. In other words, by law, the landlord must deny science and reality and propagate a lie. That is some scary shit right there. That is vintage George Orwell 1984.
When did Republicans get anything in return? Holy shit, have you not noticed to what extent the corporations control everything these days? Climb out of your bunker every once in a while. You might be surprised by what you see.Please point me to examples of those experiments to prove they are worthy of replacing government health, where are they?
We're not. But according to you liberals - your hearts bleed around the clock for those so less fortunate. If that's the case, you liberals are worthy. Something tells me many of you are paralyzed with fear that this would prove you're not as worthy and you don't care as much as you'd like people to believe.
I will not paint all Democrats the same, just as I would not paint all Republicans with the same brush. It is the true believer that slows progress and keeps the parties from negotiating like they once did. America is great because our ancestors weren't afraid to talk and negotiate, and hammer out compromises. These days it is something that will get you removed from the building, and labeled a traitor. It isn't the Democrats afraid to come to the table and frankly that is something you're going to have to come to terms with.
Why would Democrats be afraid to come to the table? They have been winning for years. They have welfare, social security, food stamps, Obamacare, abortion, gay marriage, and on and on and on.
You know why they got all those things? Because conservatives negotiated with them. For decades. Tell me, what have conservatives got in return? Where did the left EVER say, "enough is enough"?
Never.
Conservatives have learned that it is impossible to negotiate with the left. They keep getting what they want, and we keep getting the shaft.
And finally, when a non PC guy like Trump tells the truth, the left has protests against him, and he's not even president yet.
If I were a lefty, I'd be damn happy I got away with this as long as they did.
Hopefully, ITS THEIR TURN TO NEGOTIATE.
Mark
Absolutists make me laugh. Let me guess, you think the world was literally created in six days.How the Supreme Court has interpreted the document has probably more to do with how we move about the Constitution. Each Party, actually each citizen is free to express to the court their concerns on how the document should be interpreted to protect their own varied interests. That's what makes the document so dynamic and interesting.
Charming for sure, but 100% inaccurate (not to mention slightly desperate at your desire to avoid having to admit you can't provide even a single instance of conservatives "moving right" of the U.S. Constitution). First of all, it is illegal to "interpret" the document. The U.S. Constitution is the law (and the highest law in the land as established by the Supremacy Clause). A law which is "open to interpretation" is a law that cannot be adhered to. The speed limit in your neighborhood is the law. If you interpret 25mph to mean "anything up to 40mph" while an officer interprets it to mean "anything above 24mph" - you'll never be able to be compliant with that speed limit. Especially if yet another officer on that department interprets the speed limit a third way (say...impermissible to be at even 24mph or 26mph).
The U.S. Constitution is not "dynamic" (another silly liberal talking point). It is set in stone, says exactly what it says, and stays that way until such time as it is amended. At which time, that new version becomes the new law set in stone.
When did Republicans get anything in return? Holy shit, have you not noticed to what extent the corporations control everything these days? Climb out of your bunker every once in a while. You might be surprised by what you see.Please point me to examples of those experiments to prove they are worthy of replacing government health, where are they?
We're not. But according to you liberals - your hearts bleed around the clock for those so less fortunate. If that's the case, you liberals are worthy. Something tells me many of you are paralyzed with fear that this would prove you're not as worthy and you don't care as much as you'd like people to believe.
I will not paint all Democrats the same, just as I would not paint all Republicans with the same brush. It is the true believer that slows progress and keeps the parties from negotiating like they once did. America is great because our ancestors weren't afraid to talk and negotiate, and hammer out compromises. These days it is something that will get you removed from the building, and labeled a traitor. It isn't the Democrats afraid to come to the table and frankly that is something you're going to have to come to terms with.
Why would Democrats be afraid to come to the table? They have been winning for years. They have welfare, social security, food stamps, Obamacare, abortion, gay marriage, and on and on and on.
You know why they got all those things? Because conservatives negotiated with them. For decades. Tell me, what have conservatives got in return? Where did the left EVER say, "enough is enough"?
Never.
Conservatives have learned that it is impossible to negotiate with the left. They keep getting what they want, and we keep getting the shaft.
And finally, when a non PC guy like Trump tells the truth, the left has protests against him, and he's not even president yet.
If I were a lefty, I'd be damn happy I got away with this as long as they did.
Hopefully, ITS THEIR TURN TO NEGOTIATE.
Mark
I love how Republicans are not happy with trump being their nominee. Makes me think it's OK if trump wins. Either way at least rubio Cruz jeb kasich won't be president right?I know every gop comeback. This one was predictable.When Bill Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses in line to completely eliminate the national debt by 2012, why did George W. Bush slash tax rates for the rich and double the debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion?
The economy was on a downturn when clinton was leaving office.
Is "comeback" a liberal euphemism for "facts?"
