Republican drive to end social programs UNCONSTITUTIONAL

[Liberty]

In Mickey's little mind, they just seem like big things. As government grows it becomes a thing onto itself. It feels it deserves to grow and control more and more. Eventually, it will strangle the people it was suppose to serve by taking too much.

So when will it be too much? Obviously as the population grows, there is more demand by government, not less. By stalling government action, we have fallen behind the civilized World and are headed for third world status. I suppose if you chose to live live like Mexicans or Indians, you can strive for less government, less intrusion. If three acres and a mule are your ideal lifestyle, you might be in the wrong country.

A big strong nation needs a big strong government.

wrong. a strong nation needs a strong industrious hard working PEOPLE.

 

[Liberty]

Do you view having to register at 18 years of age for selective service as unconstitutional because its required? Dpo you view having to pay a speeding ticket when you drive over speed limit unconstitutional because you have pay something you don't want to pay? Did you view Bush as acting unconstitutional when he continued a war in Iraq that was unjusitified and against the will of the majority of the citizens of the United States? My point dipshit is that there are a lot of thing that we as US citizens are already forced to do whether we like it or not and taxes is one of them so your questio is stupid as fuck, you see where I'm going with this?

Were you in the 82ed?

Yes I was and I used to be on the trail at Ft. Sill.

Amazing. You fight for freedom, but advocate tyranny. ...that's kind of depressing.

 

[Liberty]

I'm actually here in Germany and was born here and speak the language and I can vouch that the German health care system has not caused any of the problems that the Tea Bastards said would happen in America. The only reason there's any trouble with their social welfare system here stems the unification of West Germany with the former East Germany because the latter was so economically fucked up from the days of the Cold War, not to mention also that Germany has been bailing out all the other EU countries who's economies are fucked up because most of Europe is on one single currency the euro.

A daughter of a friend of mine is attending medical school in Germany.

It's costing her practically nothing to attend.

The Germans apparently understand that SUPPLY and DEMAND play a big part in keeping HC cost down.

We Americans think the solution is to just keep throwning money at the DEMAND side.

And we wonder why the cost of HC continues to climb so much faster than inflation?

Obama's solution was no solution, folks.

Yes it will give many people who do not have HC coverage that coverage.

But in the national aggregate his solution only reinforces the root cause of the problem...demand exceeds supply.

Obama's solution was intended to give poor people a chance to have access to good medical treatment because to many people die and get sick every year because of lack of medical coverage. No one should or have untreated illnesses because of their economic situation and no should get turned away by medical insurance companies who want to make money and keep costs down. That was the real reason for the health care bill, you can't say fuck it to the have nots and let health insurance companies continue to let people die and get sick while making piles of cash, everyone who's against the bil overlooks this.

How about give poor people the tools necessary to succeed in life, earn wealth, break out of poverty, AND BUY THEIR OWN GOD DAMN INSURANCE?

See what I am saying? GIVING SHIT AWAY just promotes sloth and is what keeps poor people down. Democrats, and on the other side of the coin, socialist marxists WANT CLASS WARFARE, and you just proved it flawlessly. They don't want equality, they don't want prosperity, they want people to fight economically to then create a foundation for tyrannical oligarchy...You are advocating the destruction of everything good about the human condition and society...do you even realize this?

 

[Flaylo]

Were you in the 82ed?

Yes I was and I used to be on the trail at Ft. Sill.

Amazing. You fight for freedom, but advocate tyranny. ...that's kind of depressing.

Tyranny is lobbying for thr rich and saying fuck the poor, aren't you conservatives supposed to bearers of the Bible? What about caring for the poor?

 

[editec]

A daughter of a friend of mine is attending medical school in Germany.

It's costing her practically nothing to attend.

The Germans apparently understand that SUPPLY and DEMAND play a big part in keeping HC cost down.

We Americans think the solution is to just keep throwning money at the DEMAND side.

And we wonder why the cost of HC continues to climb so much faster than inflation?

Obama's solution was no solution, folks.

Yes it will give many people who do not have HC coverage that coverage.

But in the national aggregate his solution only reinforces the root cause of the problem...demand exceeds supply.

Obama's solution was intended to give poor people a chance to have access to good medical treatment because to many people die and get sick every year because of lack of medical coverage. No one should or have untreated illnesses because of their economic situation and no should get turned away by medical insurance companies who want to make money and keep costs down. That was the real reason for the health care bill, you can't say fuck it to the have nots and let health insurance companies continue to let people die and get sick while making piles of cash, everyone who's against the bil overlooks this.

How about give poor people the tools necessary to succeed in life, earn wealth, break out of poverty, AND BUY THEIR OWN GOD DAMN INSURANCE?

The working poor will never be able to make enough money to do that as long as the rest of our society works the way it works.

Good idea, otherwise, though.

See what I am saying? GIVING SHIT AWAY just promotes sloth and is what keeps poor people down. Democrats, and on the other side of the coin, socialist marxists WANT CLASS WARFARE, and you just proved it flawlessly. They don't want equality, they don't want prosperity, they want people to fight economically to then create a foundation for tyrannical oligarchy...You are advocating the destruction of everything good about the human condition and society...do you even realize this?

I just want a system that actually works.

Clearly the one we had was failing, and I'm of the opinion that the one that Obama came up with with fail as well.

 

[Liberty]

Yes I was and I used to be on the trail at Ft. Sill.

Amazing. You fight for freedom, but advocate tyranny. ...that's kind of depressing.

Tyranny is lobbying for thr rich and saying fuck the poor, aren't you conservatives supposed to bearers of the Bible? What about caring for the poor?

private charity. government NEEDS NOT BE INVOLVED.

 

[Flaylo]

How about give poor people the tools necessary to succeed in life, earn wealth, break out of poverty, AND BUY THEIR OWN GOD DAMN INSURANCE?

And what are you conservatives doing to give the poor the necessary tools to succeed? Most of the poor are working people who put in long hard hours and take very good care of their families, health care is so fucking expensive that they just don't have any access to it. You seem to think that hard work will inevitably lead to wealth but that wealth has to come from some where, money just doesn't go magically appear.

See what I am saying? GIVING SHIT AWAY just promotes sloth and is what keeps poor people down. Democrats, and on the other side of the coin, socialist marxists WANT CLASS WARFARE, and you just proved it flawlessly.

Contrary to your fucked up opinion, providing affordable health care to the wporking class poor is not giving shit away and the working class are not sloth you dickhead, giving them affordable health care increases their productivity and keeps them in the work force. You dipshits have yet to prove that providing affordable health care and social programs to uplift the poor make poor people lazy and sloth and lacking in motivation.

They don't want equality, they don't want prosperity, they want people to fight economically to then create a foundation for tyrannical oligarchy...You are advocating the destruction of everything good about the human condition and society...do you even realize this?

Shove your partisan shit right back up the ass it came from.

 

[Flaylo]

Amazing. You fight for freedom, but advocate tyranny. ...that's kind of depressing.

Tyranny is lobbying for thr rich and saying fuck the poor, aren't you conservatives supposed to bearers of the Bible? What about caring for the poor?

private charity. government NEEDS NOT BE INVOLVED.

Great thinking, but since most of the wealth in the cou8ntry is controlled by a handful of very rich where is this private charity? The wealth of this country is such that there should be no poor people, but laissez-faire, capitalism automatically creates the situation that there will inevitably be have nots and haves, capitalism will never produce a society where everyone is going to be haves.

 

[saveliberty]

Flaylo, your a poverty enabler. I see a lot of people sitting back and working side jobs, while scamming unemployment. I don't see many people retraining. What I do see, is a large number of people who are waiting for manufacturing jobs to return. Not going to happen.

 

[Flaylo]

Flaylo, your a poverty enabler. I see a lot of people sitting back and working side jobs, while scamming unemployment. I don't see many people retraining. What I do see, is a large number of people who are waiting for manufacturing jobs to return. Not going to happen.

Big business robber barons are poverty enablers, capitalism as you see it in your fucked up dream world has never worked in this country. Most of those people getting unemployment are not fucking scamming, how the fuck to do you know? It takes money for retarining and those social programs that the government provides are key in helping people retrain

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

Would forcing something on the people that they do not want be insuring domestic Tranquility

Certainly. That comes from the Preamble, that begins with WE THE PEOPLE, and they duties we have to other people in our society. We The People, of the United States of America. In order to form a more perfect union. Establish justice, and ensure domestic tranqulity.......

This is our duty as citizens of this country to all the We the People. Domestic refers to tranquility in your home and in your society of We the People. It is more than just a duty to your family, but to the Union, towards a perfect Union, and if it isn't right, it is your duty as part of society to make it right. Justice isn't to you alone, but to We The People.

A good example might be, when a war comes up, do you leave home to defend only your family and only your families freedoms? Maybe you are too old to go. What then? Does someone else go for you to ensure domestic tranquility in your home and society? So you can see, the clause is about We The People, helping one another for the betterment of society.

You are so far off target I really do not know where to begin. To force a law on 65 percent of Americans is not insuring domestic Tranquility it creates unrest and anger

51% favor the provision in the health care law that fines all but small employers if they don’t offer health insurance to their workers. 47% disfavor. 3% don't care.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

65% of Americans do not want Obama Care

You lie.

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

obamacare is not what obama said it was going to be

You lie.

 

[Flaylo]

Trickle down economics has never worked and conservatives can provide no examples of a stable and productive economy that worked because of trcikle down economics.

 

[Liberty]

Flaylo...it sounds to me like you are advocating slavery. Not racial, but unequality, and slavery nonetheless. Take the topic of healthcare. Lets role play a bit. (I give credit to Andrew Wilkow for this unbreakable argument) There is person 'A' and person 'B'. 'A' is a poverty stricken American that does not pay taxes. 'B' is a successful mechanic who owns a small business and pays taxes, and lives a very comfortable life. If 'A' is entitled to health care for simply existing, and 'B' is responsible to 'A' to provide that entitlement via paying taxes, then what did 'B' do to deserve to fall into the debt of 'A'?

Even more important; What is 'A's responsibility having received the entitlement without contributing to the system for it....to 'B' having been forced by federal government to provide it? Does 'A' owe it to 'B' to live a healthy lifestyle that is to refrain from excessive drinking, smoking, sex with hookers which can lead to STDs, obesity or anything else that a person can make that contribute to their health and wellbeing? Will the government force people to modify their behavior?

In conclusion, it is obvious that this kind of a system is detrimental to the concept of liberty, equality, and responsibility. Three important factors in a free society. 'A's and 'B's liberty is not looked at equally by the federal government, that is to say 'B' cannot refuse their obligation impelled by the government and refuse to pay the taxes that will be levied against them for this new entitlement through threat of incarceration and/or penalties.

To preserve, strengthen, and defend liberty...or to submit and fall for the lies of tyrannical oligarchy and socialism. The choice is obvious for anyone who values the prospects and the potential of the human being.

I am not saying the current system is where we need to be, I am saying we need to look to our founding, and a literal representaion of the constitution...and cut everything that is hurting America and the people in the federal government to return to prosperity...and i mean prosperity for everyone. For if those poor people can say, create a business EASIER...would they not be more prosperous? The current government puts up road blocks to prosperity instead of PROMOTING the growth of the talents of an individual so they can be successful. You are stressing more government control and by that same token, road blocks. I am stressing less government control, and by that same token, freedom...by which it is easier to pull oneself UP from the clutches of poverty and UP from the clutches of despair.

The current issues in this country that you are discussing, are caused by the very thing that you promote: Government. You are in effect, arguing the destruction of what you say you value. This is why we are in such a poor state as a country at this present moment in time. Big over reaching leviathan government is the cause of the country's despair...not the solution. However, the government can be part of the solution if those in power decide to actually cut spending, cut programs, and dissolve bureaucracies that are destroying this country while claiming to be helping...

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

The Preamble

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.


Now I like for the Republicans and Tea bastards to prove that social welfare programs are unconstitutional and to justify voting and lobbying eliminate them. One good example in Social Security although there are others.

"Promote" vs "Provide"...

The first enumerated power of Congress grants it authority to tax and spend to provide for the general welfare.

 

[Flaylo]

Flaylo...it sounds to me like you are advocating slavery. Not racial, but unequality, and slavery nonetheless. Take the topic of healthcare. Lets role play a bit. (I give credit to Andrew Wilkow for this unbreakable argument) There is person 'A' and person 'B'. 'A' is a poverty stricken American that does not pay taxes. 'B' is a successful mechanic who owns a small business and pays taxes, and lives a very comfortable life. If 'A' is entitled to health care for simply existing, and 'B' is responsible to 'A' to provide that entitlement via paying taxes, then what did 'B' do to deserve to fall into the debt of 'A'?

Even more important; What is 'A's responsibility having received the entitlement without contributing to the system for it....to 'B' having been forced by federal government to provide it? Does 'A' owe it to 'B' to live a healthy lifestyle that is to refrain from excessive drinking, smoking, sex with hookers which can lead to STDs, obesity or anything else that a person can make that contribute to their health and wellbeing? Will the government force people to modify their behavior?

In conclusion, it is obvious that this kind of a system is detrimental to the concept of liberty, equality, and responsibility. Three important factors in a free society. 'A's and 'B's liberty is not looked at equally by the federal government, that is to say 'B' cannot refuse their obligation impelled by the government and refuse to pay the taxes that will be levied against them for this new entitlement through threat of incarceration and/or penalties.

Robber barons like those dickheads you want to give taxcuts to are like slavemasters and the shitheads that lobby for them are overseers. You see, the higher class wealthy big businesses need people at the bottom to pay low wages to so they in turn at the top can earn wealth. Those at the top have gotten richer but those at the bottom haven't botten significantly richer. Tax cuts should be for those who earn less or at least the biggest tax cuts should go to the working class and working poor. The business owners and so called job creators are not trickling down enough money from the generous tax cuts the government provides plus the big business owbers are giving jobs to people over seas because its cheaper and it generates more wealth for them, not the country.

 

[saveliberty]

51% favor the provision in the health care law that fines all but small employers if they don’t offer health insurance to their workers. 47% disfavor. 3% don't care.

Source please.

Obamacare support = 38.7%; against = 52.3%

RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Obama and Democrats' Health Care Plan

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

The Preamble

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.


Now I like for the Republicans and Tea bastards to prove that social welfare programs are unconstitutional and to justify voting and lobbying eliminate them. One good example in Social Security although there are others.

"Promote" vs "Provide"...

Have you given this ANY Thought?...

Have you considered the possibility that there were well established common law rules of construction in 1788?

Have you Researched the Founders on this?...

Have you researched the founders views on the well established common law rules of construction?

Had the Founders Intended on that Meaning "Welfare" as we Know it today, or Social Security, they would have Proposed them and Passed them into Law.

What's the difference between the meaning of "general welfare" then and now?

 

[Micky G. Jagger]

Had the Founders Intended on that Meaning "Welfare" as we Know it today, or Social Security, they would have Proposed them and Passed them into Law.

If the people had demanded Social Security in 1789, the way they did in 1936, Congress would have established it.