Obama Admits it: Conservatism Works

[SFC Ollie]

You are attempting to apply 21st century political philosophies to the 18th century. Founding fathers were decidedly Liberal for the 18th century. In the 18th century there was no UNITED STATES, there was only a confederation of states that were united. Due to the dispersion of States, lack of a communications or transportation system there was no way to execute a UNITED STATES with a strong federal government. By default, we needed a State-centric government. Each state also had strong loyalties to the states themselves.
This does not make them conservative. What makes the founding fathers the LIBERALs of THEIR DAY (not 2009) was the pushing of the rights of the individual over the rights of the state and the pushing of equal rights of all citizens (except for women, blacks and indians )

18th century conservatives were Torries and were loyal to the crown

Ah the liberals of their day, But by todays standards (we do live in today I believe) they are quite Conservative. Therefore the USA was founded by right wing conservatives.

conservatism is relative.

are you saying the government should be the same size it was then?

i think that reasonable persons have come far beyond assuming that the government should be some bare-bones contraption, and are willing and able to appreciate what our government has become over time as a part of what our country has become.

i dont know where you stand, but if youre proposing like ddave and crusader that the government should be limited to the founders government, i dont think thats what the founders had in mind with congress and all. they'dve attempted to make a more robust document with no persons in charge of expanding it via bills and acts at all, no?

I am a realist, I understand that as technology and the country grew, so would the Federal Government. There is so much more today. But I also say that the Federal Government is larger than it should be and larger than it needs to be. I also believe there are too many regulations telling us how to live our lives. Do you know there are regulations on how much water you should use to flush your toilet? I like to flush twice to see if I can get the shit back to Washington where it comes from.

 

[antagon]

Ah the liberals of their day, But by todays standards (we do live in today I believe) they are quite Conservative. Therefore the USA was founded by right wing conservatives.

conservatism is relative.

are you saying the government should be the same size it was then?

i think that reasonable persons have come far beyond assuming that the government should be some bare-bones contraption, and are willing and able to appreciate what our government has become over time as a part of what our country has become.

i dont know where you stand, but if youre proposing like ddave and crusader that the government should be limited to the founders government, i dont think thats what the founders had in mind with congress and all. they'dve attempted to make a more robust document with no persons in charge of expanding it via bills and acts at all, no?

I am a realist, I understand that as technology and the country grew, so would the Federal Government. There is so much more today. But I also say that the Federal Government is larger than it should be and larger than it needs to be. I also believe there are too many regulations telling us how to live our lives. Do you know there are regulations on how much water you should use to flush your toilet? I like to flush twice to see if I can get the shit back to Washington where it comes from.

we're certainly in agreement, sarge. im an optimist, tho, and roll with the punches. me and my clic have retrofit a bunch of 1.3gal shitters, so i cant complain too much. the ol' wagners law is in full effect in the US, but it wont stop me trying to grow my piece of the pie, notwithstanding.

 

[Joe Steel]

Nonsense.

First, the states did not create the federal government. The document we call the US Constitution, technically, is a compact. That is, it is solemn agreement among individuals to create a community. The Preamble says "we the People...." not "we the states..." "do ordain and establish..." That's what makes it a compact. Everything after the Preamble is a consititution, i.e. a text constituting or creating a government.

Secondly, the general welfare clause, in fact, is a declaration of unlimited power for Congress. The Founders deliberately chose a vague and indefinite phrase,"provide for the general welfare," to ensure the federal government would be empowered to act in any way necessary to serve the People. This created a problem, though. Reasonable persons could have good faith disagreements about the nature of the general welfare and what policies would serve it. To avoid this problem in certain areas, the Founders defined a number of powers as necessary to provide for the general welfare. These are the so-called enumerated powers. Congress must do these things and may do anyting else it wishes.

Finally, the general welfare can be served by virtually any act of Congress as long the membership agrees. It need not be limited only the welfare of the states and exclude the welfare of individuals. If, for instance, Congress decides a half-pint of milk provided to every school child through the age of 10 years every morning would serve the general welfare, they can do it.

Absolutely WRONG....

1) The states ratified and created the federal government.. the citizenry did not ratify it nor create it... this is simple American History 101, which you evidently failed

2) The general welfare clause does not grant unlimited power to the federal government.... Are you seriously promoting and praising unlimited power of the state?? You are a fucking joke

3) No... they cannot.... by the rules set forth to them... though they have indeed done similar things with their expansion of power... which is exactly why the government needs to have it reigns pulled

I have to admit you're right. The States did ratify the Constitution.

Other that that...sorry.

 

[Vast LWC]

LOL

Yeah, the Founders meant to put everybody on the Welfare Roles because the Constitution says "provide for the general welfare"

Maybe they only meant welfare for Generals?

Libruls aren't just fucking assholes, they're lying fucking assholes

Yes Frank, of course I meant that to "Provide for the General Welfare" means to put everyone on welfare. Not.

To "be on welfare" is to be receiving money from the state because you are too poor to otherwise survive.

However the word "welfare" of course means "the well-being of".

To "look out for someone's welfare" is to make sure that they are doing OK.

And you childish insults are not appreciated. But hey, they make you look like a moron, so go ahead and keep on making a fool of yourself.

 

[Vast LWC]

im sorry, man, i dont want to argue your dumbass symmantics over the preamble.

theres no need for contextual analysis. it is stated very plainly.

the whole statement in the preamble isnt even 'provide for the general welfare of the united states' how you put it.

He's actually referring to the portion in Article 1, section 8 where it mentions "General Welfare", not the section in the Preamble.

However your point about the Preamble does prove that the Constitution wasn't just created and ratified by the states, but was created by "We the people of the United States of America". Which nullifies the argument about the "United States" referring only to the actual States, and not the people of the nation.

 

[antagon]

oh... there i go jumpin in again.

 

[antagon]

im sorry, man, i dont want to argue your dumbass symmantics over the preamble.

theres no need for contextual analysis. it is stated very plainly.

the whole statement in the preamble isnt even 'provide for the general welfare of the united states' how you put it.

He's actually referring to the portion in Article 1, section 8 where it mentions "General Welfare", not the section in the Preamble.

However your point about the Preamble does prove that the Constitution wasn't just created and ratified by the states, but was created by "We the people of the United States of America". Which nullifies the argument about the "United States" referring only to the actual States, and not the people of the nation.

yeah taking a peak at Article 1, United States is capitalized as well. One could only assume its a reference to the union for ourselves and our posterity from the preamble. retarded symantic presumption to base constitutional intent on to start with, but faulty all the same.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So we're back to giving welfare to Generals, what about Colonels? Don't they deserve welfare too?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

LOL

Yeah, the Founders meant to put everybody on the Welfare Roles because the Constitution says "provide for the general welfare"

Maybe they only meant welfare for Generals?

Libruls aren't just fucking assholes, they're lying fucking assholes

Yes Frank, of course I meant that to "Provide for the General Welfare" means to put everyone on welfare. Not.

To "be on welfare" is to be receiving money from the state because you are too poor to otherwise survive.

However the word "welfare" of course means "the well-being of".

To "look out for someone's welfare" is to make sure that they are doing OK.

And you childish insults are not appreciated. But hey, they make you look like a moron, so go ahead and keep on making a fool of yourself.

To a Librul, "look out for someone's welfare" means "Give them somebody elses money"