Repeal the 17th Amendment!

[Oddball]

The only people doing the desperate deflecting are the desperate apologists like you.

My only two points in this thread, which have yet to be debunked despite your spurious claim, are:

#1 The original intent of the appointed Senate was for states to have a say in federal spending and bureaucracy....This is a matter of verifiable historical fact.

#2 That since the passage of the 17th Amendment, federal spending has ballooned from consuming a few percent to the neighborhood of 20% of all American GDP, which is also an undeniable fact.

All of the fallacious arguments, strawmen, non sequitur, unfalsifiable opinion and deflections have come from the apologists for mob rule like you.

You forgot #3: Proof that #s 1 & 2 are connected or that things would be any different under the old system. FAIL

yep...I agree. Prove that those two points make a difference or theyre irrelevent.

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

 

[Vidi]

You forgot #3: Proof that #s 1 & 2 are connected or that things would be any different under the old system. FAIL

yep...I agree. Prove that those two points make a difference or theyre irrelevent.

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

Or you could actually present some evidence...oh wait, thats right, you're another one of those "because I say so" neocon sheep, aren't you?

But there IS no evidence that the two are related is there?

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah, you dingbats wanting to change the Senate from elected men and women, to appointed women and men, are just fronting for the billionaires that would get to do the appointing. That is the history of the why of the 17th Amendment.

 

[Oddball]

yep...I agree. Prove that those two points make a difference or theyre irrelevent.

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

Or you could actually present some evidence...oh wait, thats right, you're another one of those "because I say so" neocon sheep, aren't you?

The historical evidence for why the federal legislature was set up that way has already been presented, and you've rejected it out of hand....The removal of that check on federal power, along with the passage of the Fed (can tax via inflation) and 16th Amendment 9no more apportionment of direct taxation), and the explosion of federal spending, international military intervention and adventurism, and massive bureaucratic bloat are directly attributable to the fact that nobody at any level can stop any of it.

Your living in denial is your problem...You're another one of those "communism works despite all the historical evidence to the contrary" sheep, aren't you?

 

[Listening]

You forgot #3: Proof that #s 1 & 2 are connected or that things would be any different under the old system. FAIL

yep...I agree. Prove that those two points make a difference or theyre irrelevent.

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

I would agree that people like Vidi are a waste of time and effort.

As I have stated previously, it really does not matter that historically it fits as you have described....even if it didn't, I'd still vote for it today. You can see what it is like NOT to have watchdogs for the state in congress.

What needs to happen is that conservatives need to coalesce behind this effort. There are a lot of GOP statehouses (imagine that) and there is a chance that if we could ever get the senate to do something...that it could be repealed.

Vidi would just sit on the sideline lamenting the fact that his votes just got more powerful and that his liberty was likely to be increased.

 

[Vidi]

yep...I agree. Prove that those two points make a difference or theyre irrelevent.

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

I would agree that people like Vidi are a waste of time and effort.

As I have stated previously, it really does not matter that historically it fits as you have described....even if it didn't, I'd still vote for it today. You can see what it is like NOT to have watchdogs for the state in congress.

What needs to happen is that conservatives need to coalesce behind this effort. There are a lot of GOP statehouses (imagine that) and there is a chance that if we could ever get the senate to do something...that it could be repealed.

Vidi would just sit on the sideline lamenting the fact that his votes just got more powerful and that his liberty was likely to be increased.

LOL

Too damn funny.

History doesnt matter huh? Tell me then sir, if history doesnt matter, would it matter WHY it was changed from State legislatures to the will of the People?
Shouldnt you AT LEAST consider the history of WHY a change was made before you BLINDLY advocate changing it back?

Dont have a fucking clue why do you? Go on. Go google it. Then get back to me on how your last sentence is complete and utter bullshit.

 

[Listening]

The reason for the structure is a matter of historical fact, as is the explosion of federal spending since 1913.

But you two could just be intellectually honest and admit that there's no evidence that you would accept, and save us all a lot of time and effort.

I would agree that people like Vidi are a waste of time and effort.

As I have stated previously, it really does not matter that historically it fits as you have described....even if it didn't, I'd still vote for it today. You can see what it is like NOT to have watchdogs for the state in congress.

What needs to happen is that conservatives need to coalesce behind this effort. There are a lot of GOP statehouses (imagine that) and there is a chance that if we could ever get the senate to do something...that it could be repealed.

Vidi would just sit on the sideline lamenting the fact that his votes just got more powerful and that his liberty was likely to be increased.

LOL

Too damn funny.

History doesnt matter huh? Tell me then sir, if history doesnt matter, would it matter WHY it was changed from State legislatures to the will of the People?
Shouldnt you AT LEAST consider the history of WHY a change was made before you BLINDLY advocate changing it back?

Dont have a fucking clue why do you? Go on. Go google it. Then get back to me on how your last sentence is complete and utter bullshit.

And how would you know what I know and don't know ?

Sorry chump.....I'll just stay engaged with those who might make it happen and really hope that you don't get your foot run over in the process.

 

[Vidi]

I would agree that people like Vidi are a waste of time and effort.

As I have stated previously, it really does not matter that historically it fits as you have described....even if it didn't, I'd still vote for it today. You can see what it is like NOT to have watchdogs for the state in congress.

What needs to happen is that conservatives need to coalesce behind this effort. There are a lot of GOP statehouses (imagine that) and there is a chance that if we could ever get the senate to do something...that it could be repealed.

Vidi would just sit on the sideline lamenting the fact that his votes just got more powerful and that his liberty was likely to be increased.

LOL

Too damn funny.

History doesnt matter huh? Tell me then sir, if history doesnt matter, would it matter WHY it was changed from State legislatures to the will of the People?
Shouldnt you AT LEAST consider the history of WHY a change was made before you BLINDLY advocate changing it back?

Dont have a fucking clue why do you? Go on. Go google it. Then get back to me on how your last sentence is complete and utter bullshit.

And how would you know what I know and don't know ?

Sorry chump.....I'll just stay engaged with those who might make it happen and really hope that you don't get your foot run over in the process.

Bacause if you knew WHY it was changed, you would understand that the last sentence proclaiming that my vote would be more powerful and my liberty increased is utter nonsense.

Strike one.

Try again.

 

[Listening]

LOL

Too damn funny.

History doesnt matter huh? Tell me then sir, if history doesnt matter, would it matter WHY it was changed from State legislatures to the will of the People?
Shouldnt you AT LEAST consider the history of WHY a change was made before you BLINDLY advocate changing it back?

Dont have a fucking clue why do you? Go on. Go google it. Then get back to me on how your last sentence is complete and utter bullshit.

And how would you know what I know and don't know ?

Sorry chump.....I'll just stay engaged with those who might make it happen and really hope that you don't get your foot run over in the process.

Bacause if you knew WHY it was changed, you would understand that the last sentence proclaiming that my vote would be more powerful and my liberty increased is utter nonsense.

Strike one.

Try again.

There is no way to know until we return back to the way it was before. Until then, it is all guessing.

 

[Vidi]

And how would you know what I know and don't know ?

Sorry chump.....I'll just stay engaged with those who might make it happen and really hope that you don't get your foot run over in the process.

Bacause if you knew WHY it was changed, you would understand that the last sentence proclaiming that my vote would be more powerful and my liberty increased is utter nonsense.

Strike one.

Try again.

There is no way to know until we return back to the way it was before. Until then, it is all guessing.

ooo strike TWO

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

 

[Oddball]

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

The irony of this is astonishing.

 

[Listening]

Bacause if you knew WHY it was changed, you would understand that the last sentence proclaiming that my vote would be more powerful and my liberty increased is utter nonsense.

Strike one.

Try again.

There is no way to know until we return back to the way it was before. Until then, it is all guessing.

ooo strike TWO

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

Enjoy making things up to argue against ?

But then, we are discussing a sructural issue, not a matter of governance.

And I would think that a great many people stepping into the voting booth in 2012 are going to be thinking about that definition of insanity as they chose the biggest loser (and vote against him/her) in some very key elections.

As to repeating the mistakes of the past....said mistakes still go in a great many forms.

All these arguments are repeat that have been repeatedly repeated again and again.

I am for joining those who want to repeal it. If we can get it done great. If not....tough for us.

 

[Vidi]

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

The irony of this is astonishing.

shuush...or do you want me to spank you in this thread too?

 

[Oddball]

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

The irony of this is astonishing.

shuush...or do you want me to spank you in this thread too?

You haven't spanked anything other than your monkey, junior.

 

[Listening]

those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

insanity - doing the same thing over and oevr and expecting different results

So youre advocating repeating the mistakes of the past rather than fixing the problems of today?

The irony of this is astonishing.

shuush...or do you want me to spank you in this thread too?

Uh oh....

Sounds like we have another Black Knight (via Monty Python) on the board.

 

[Vidi]

The irony of this is astonishing.

shuush...or do you want me to spank you in this thread too?

You haven't spanked anything other than your monkey, junior.

You really should concentrate on one argument at a time. You just scored the fail hat trick in the other thread. Do you get a special title with that?

 

[Oddball]

You'd do well to follow your own advice, slapnutz.

 

[Vidi]

The irony of this is astonishing.

shuush...or do you want me to spank you in this thread too?

Uh oh....

Sounds like we have another Black Knight (via Monty Python) on the board.

See the black knight was actually wounded.

Unfortunately as the two of you are currently unarmed, or shooting blanks, or whatever lame ass metaphor floats your boat...I am still perfectly intact and my argument still stands.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

repealing the 17th amendment without understanding why it was added in the first place is a knee jerk response of an uninformed mind.

So why did they enact the 17th amendment in the first place?





I feel bad for you two...its like fish in a barrel...so heres a REALLY BIG hint:

FBI: Illinois Governor Sought To "Sell" Obama's Senate Seat - ABC News

 

[Oddball]

Wow...Corruption in politics!...Whodathunkit?

Too bad that Blago doesn't explain away the original reason that Senators were appointed by and beholden to the state legislatures.

But don't let that stop you from your regularly scheduled self-congratulation and condescending chickenshit...Wouldn't want to break your rhythm.

 

[Listening]

The structural arrangement of the senate selection was put in place for a specfic reason. The need for those watchdogs may not have been as clear in 1913....but history shows us what a mistake it was for the states to give up something so necessary instead of fixing the issues of the time.

Those issues have not gone away with the passage of the 17th. You have corruption at all levels and you also have money and power mixed in D.C. at an unprecidented level.

Wishing for the republics watchdogs to return and the re-elevation of the 10th amendment is nothing more than making politics more personal and more local.