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.
As I said: You do not understand what I mean here.yet the peopleYeah, this was tried with a civil war between the states.This is true -- the states have the power to dissolve the federal government, while the federal government can do no such thing to the states.Wrong. The federal government exists due to the consent of the states and their people.the history of the "states" is one of bigotry and repression of individual rights.... hence troops being needed to integrate schools.
You clearly do not understand what I mean here.
I am not surprised.
get it, the people versus the states? The federal constitution was vetted and ratified by conventions of the people in each state, not by state governments.
no money in politics or in elections?funny how there's no choice for "there shouldn't be any money in politics".
not surprising.
We have a constitutionally protected right to petition our government. this equals spending money
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better.
Hilarious!
Why?
lol, do you libtards ever actually think for yourselves?
no money in politics or in elections?Billionaires bankrolling 2016 campaign to unprecedented degree Fox News
"Billionaires are bankrolling the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign to an unprecedented degree, with at least 40 of the wealthiest Americans plowing $60 million into super PACs aligned with the top tier of candidates.
The torrent of super PAC money is revolutionizing presidential politics in the wake of a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that opened the door to unlimited contributions from corporations, unions and individuals into these outside groups.
Super PACs backing 17 presidential candidates raised more than $250 million in the first six months of this year, roughly doubling the $125 million raised by the candidates for their campaigns, disclosure reports filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission show."
This is stupid. Corporations and the wealthy elites are trying to buy our elections.
funny how there's no choice for "there shouldn't be any money in politics".
not surprising.
We have a constitutionally protected right to petition our government. this equals spending money
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
no money in politics or in elections?Billionaires bankrolling 2016 campaign to unprecedented degree Fox News
"Billionaires are bankrolling the early days of the 2016 presidential campaign to an unprecedented degree, with at least 40 of the wealthiest Americans plowing $60 million into super PACs aligned with the top tier of candidates.
The torrent of super PAC money is revolutionizing presidential politics in the wake of a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that opened the door to unlimited contributions from corporations, unions and individuals into these outside groups.
Super PACs backing 17 presidential candidates raised more than $250 million in the first six months of this year, roughly doubling the $125 million raised by the candidates for their campaigns, disclosure reports filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission show."
This is stupid. Corporations and the wealthy elites are trying to buy our elections.
funny how there's no choice for "there shouldn't be any money in politics".
not surprising.
We have a constitutionally protected right to petition our government. this equals spending money
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better.
Hilarious!
You were born in 2001?quiet, loon.Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
the worst president in MY LIFETIME was baby bush. I don't know what planet YOU live on.
You were born in 2001?quiet, loon.Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
the worst president in MY LIFETIME was baby bush. I don't know what planet YOU live on.
Yeah, that sound about right.
no money in politics or in elections?
We have a constitutionally protected right to petition our government. this equals spending money
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better.
Hilarious!
Why?
lol, do you libtards ever actually think for yourselves?
The government is going to spend close to $3.5 trillion this year.
You want to reduce money spent on elections, you have to reduce the incentive.
Cut government spending by a couple of trillion.
do you libtards ever actually think for yourselves?
Libtards don't, but I'm to the right of Attila the Hun.
...she says, unwittingly proving my point better than I ever could.no, wackjob. but thanks for once again failing to impress....You were born in 2001?quiet, loon.Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
the worst president in MY LIFETIME was baby bush. I don't know what planet YOU live on.
Yeah, that sound about right.
Limit FREE SPEECH? Bull Shit!
...she says, unwittingly proving my point better than I ever could.no, wackjob. but thanks for once again failing to impress....You were born in 2001?quiet, loon.Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
the worst president in MY LIFETIME was baby bush. I don't know what planet YOU live on.
Yeah, that sound about right.
Thank you. Please continue at your leisure.okie dokie, loon....she says, unwittingly proving my point better than I ever could.no, wackjob. but thanks for once again failing to impress....You were born in 2001?quiet, loon.Yo, this is America Obama, if you don`t like it? Leave loser!!! I say, spend, spend, spend!!! We are a FREE COUNTRY, not China! About using Jimmy Carter for anything? He and Obama are battling it out for the worst President ever!!!
"GTP"
View attachment 47039
the worst president in MY LIFETIME was baby bush. I don't know what planet YOU live on.
Yeah, that sound about right.
the history of the "states" is one of bigotry and repression of individual rights.... hence troops being needed to integrate schools.
Wrong. The federal government exists due to the consent of the states and their people.
federal laws trump state laws if they are in conflict.
True, but that has nothing to do with an Article V convention. Have you read up on that?
you should probably get over it. because loony is what comes from the radicals in the "states".
And you are stereotyping millions of people as loons for simply advocating a Constitutional right?
Does that make you a loon, a hater, or just out of the loop?
fact (thank you jillian ): the history of the "states" is one of bigotry and repression of individual rights
This is WHY the people who ratified the US Constitution gave the power of 'trumping' rightsto the national government over that of the individual states
no money in politics or in elections?funny how there's no choice for "there shouldn't be any money in politics".
not surprising.
We have a constitutionally protected right to petition our government. this equals spending money
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better.
Hilarious!
how so?
I see citizens united as the worst court decision since dred scott
Former Justice Stevens has one rational solution which is about an amendment stating in regards to the first amendment, money is not to be confused with speech. The laws on campaign finance reform were all about limiting money, not taking it out. Public funding is not taking money out either.
and we should petition our government. that is separate from the desire to fund someone's candidacy. I think there should be a certain amount of money given to each candidate by the government once they obtain a base-level of signatures getting them on the ballot. I don't think that a few billionaires should fund their candidate of choice and I don't think that a candidate, once elected, should be beholden to the interests that paid for him or her to get elected.
as for petitioning one's government, i'm all for it. but I think that means sign a petitioin, write a letter, protest, carry signs and march, etc. it doesn't mean put seven zeros after the 1 on the check you write.
Why not, instead of giving them X amount of money, just let them have free access to a cable network, say an hour a day that anyone could DVR and watch when they want?
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better. If you want to help your candidate do it the old fashioned way and wear some leather off your shoes hitting the pavement.
The more we purge money from the electoral process the better.
Hilarious!
Why?
lol, do you libtards ever actually think for yourselves?
The government is going to spend close to $3.5 trillion this year.
You want to reduce money spent on elections, you have to reduce the incentive.
Cut government spending by a couple of trillion.
do you libtards ever actually think for yourselves?
Libtards don't, but I'm to the right of Attila the Hun.
amusing little exchange. i'll have to tell bill gates he doesn't know how to think for himself. apparently neither does warren buffet.
*shakes head and laughs at the wingerness of your statement*
yet the peopleYeah, this was tried with a civil war between the states.This is true -- the states have the power to dissolve the federal government, while the federal government can do no such thing to the states.Wrong. The federal government exists due to the consent of the states and their people.the history of the "states" is one of bigotry and repression of individual rights.... hence troops being needed to integrate schools.
You clearly do not understand what I mean here.
I am not surprised.
get it, the people versus the states? The federal constitution was vetted and ratified by conventions of the people in each state, not by state governments.
As I said: You do not understand what I mean here.yet the peopleYeah, this was tried with a civil war between the states.This is true -- the states have the power to dissolve the federal government, while the federal government can do no such thing to the states.Wrong. The federal government exists due to the consent of the states and their people.
You clearly do not understand what I mean here.
I am not surprised.
get it, the people versus the states? The federal constitution was vetted and ratified by conventions of the people in each state, not by state governments.
Thank you for proving it.
