The Tea Party loves the Constitution?

[Sallow]

Wow. You really do live in a fantasy world.

Well..point by point. Disprove what I have posted.

I look forward to spirited debate..and salient facts.

 

[Liberty]

Wow. You really do live in a fantasy world.

Well..point by point. Disprove what I have posted.

I look forward to spirited debate..and salient facts.

Im growing tired of always being the one to destroy other peoples' arguments. How about you attempt to dismantle mine for once? Also, it is just factually incorrect. You have no source, and are just making up shit. So it doesn't take a fucking rocket scientist to say you are living in a fantasy world. It is a pretty accurate statement.

Also, it's a volunteer military, dumbass.

 

[rightwinger]

Principle 5. Limited Government

3. "Limited government" is a key term in the American philosophy. Its great significance is indicated by describing the purpose of limiting government's power in these words: Limited for Liberty. This summarizes what is meant by the statement in the Declaration of Independence about governments being limited in power "to secure these rights"--to make and keep them ever secure. "Limited" means limited by a written Constitution adopted by the sovereign people as their basic law--never changing in its meaning, as originally intended by The Framers and Adopters, except subject to change by the people only by amendments at any time and to any extent they may see fit. All governments in America are thus limited by written Constitutions--by the United States Constitution as the "supreme Law of the Land" and, as to each State government, by that States' Constitution. (Note again Par. 4 of Principle 3, regarding the first eight, or Bill of Rights, amendments being intended to apply against the Federal government only.)

Limited Powers, Duties, Responsibilities and Limited Threat to Liberty

4. The few and limited powers of the United States government are enumerated and defined in the people's fundamental law--the Constitution, as amended. This is the basis of Rule-by-Law (basically the people's fundamental law, the Constitution) in contrast to Rule-by-Man. The limited quantity of its powers means it is limited in potential threat to the people's liberties. These "just powers," being few and limited, automatically define the limits of the duties which the people assign to this government. It can have no duties, no responsibilities, other than those consistent with the limits of the powers granted to it by the people in the Constitution, as amended, It is equally as violative of the Constitution for government to assume duties--to pretend to have responsibilities--as it is to grasp powers, beyond these prescribed limits.

Wow......impressive
You are very good with the Google. Nice cut and paste from an ultra conservative website trying to "rescue the republic". Homeschool material for those trying to raise little Republicans
Doesn't mean anything....but nice effort on your part

Now that you have discredited the messenger, care to source a counter to the message?
Or perhaps all you have is red herrings left?
Trading words with you is pathetic in how easy it is to dismantle everything you say. You are so naked in intellect that the very hint of a rational thought entering your pea sized brain is anathema to the unfortunate infestation of ignorance that is the main component of your tragic life. Pitiful doesn't begin to describe.

LOL

Very nice vocabulary. I am indeed impressed. Still doesn't make up for you posting a right wing conservative home school text as proof of your right wing conservative non-schooled opinions

 

[jillian]

true conservatives would rather keep abortion a state issue, or a constitutional amendment. Can you name one, just one individual choice in liberty that is not abortion or gay rights? Anything at all that you are for besides those?

Also, I could have swore I have educated you on the true meaning of the 3/5ths clause before. Are you seriously throwing that out just to keep a talking point? (and an ignorant one I might add) Come on now...

of course they would rather keep it a state issue because they halve the number of places where abortions are legal.

constitutional rights are not a state issue in that no state can give fewer rights than the feds because of the supremacy clause.

the states' rights issue has long ago been determined. if we wanted the states to be paramount, we would still be living under the articles of confederation. and if there was the slightest question left, the civil war and the civil rights era put it to rest.

people who want to limit individual rights always say it's a 'states' rights' issue.

but the reality is the right of privacy cases like griswold and loving and roe are central to individual rights... which is why the right hates them. the say they believe in individual rights but then they oppose them in every way possible.

 

[Liberty]

true conservatives would rather keep abortion a state issue, or a constitutional amendment. Can you name one, just one individual choice in liberty that is not abortion or gay rights? Anything at all that you are for besides those?

Also, I could have swore I have educated you on the true meaning of the 3/5ths clause before. Are you seriously throwing that out just to keep a talking point? (and an ignorant one I might add) Come on now...

of course they would rather keep it a state issue because they halve the number of places where abortions are legal.

constitutional rights are not a state issue in that no state can give fewer rights than the feds because of the supremacy clause.

the states' rights issue has long ago been determined. if we wanted the states to be paramount, we would still be living under the articles of confederation. and if there was the slightest question left, the civil war and the civil rights era put it to rest.

people who want to limit individual rights always say it's a 'states' rights' issue.

but the reality is the right of privacy cases like griswold and loving and roe are central to individual rights... which is why the right hates them. the say they believe in individual rights but then they oppose them in every way possible.

Is there any other individual rights that you are for besides abortion and homosexual? Anything at all? Also, 10th amendment.

 

[Sallow]

Wow. You really do live in a fantasy world.

Well..point by point. Disprove what I have posted.

I look forward to spirited debate..and salient facts.

Im growing tired of always being the one to destroy other peoples' arguments. How about you attempt to dismantle mine for once? Also, it is just factually incorrect. You have no source, and are just making up shit. So it doesn't take a fucking rocket science to say you are living in a fantasy world. It is a pretty accurate statement.

Also, it's a volunteer military, dumbass.

There's nothing to dismantle. You made the ad hoc post. Nothing specific. You addressed nothing..but made an accusation.

And it seems you are ignorant of military history. It has not always been voluntary.

But I am assuming you are young..and skipped history in junior and high school..and went right to the internet as your source of information.

Spend a little time in a library.

 

[Liberty]

Wow......impressive
You are very good with the Google. Nice cut and paste from an ultra conservative website trying to "rescue the republic". Homeschool material for those trying to raise little Republicans
Doesn't mean anything....but nice effort on your part

Now that you have discredited the messenger, care to source a counter to the message?
Or perhaps all you have is red herrings left?
Trading words with you is pathetic in how easy it is to dismantle everything you say. You are so naked in intellect that the very hint of a rational thought entering your pea sized brain is anathema to the unfortunate infestation of ignorance that is the main component of your tragic life. Pitiful doesn't begin to describe.

LOL

Very nice vocabulary. I am indeed impressed. Still doesn't make up for you posting a right wing conservative home school text as proof of your right wing conservative non-schooled opinions

Hey, stop the red herring and critique the message. Come on, you can do it.

 

[Liberty]

Well..point by point. Disprove what I have posted.

I look forward to spirited debate..and salient facts.

Im growing tired of always being the one to destroy other peoples' arguments. How about you attempt to dismantle mine for once? Also, it is just factually incorrect. You have no source, and are just making up shit. So it doesn't take a fucking rocket science to say you are living in a fantasy world. It is a pretty accurate statement.

Also, it's a volunteer military, dumbass.

There's nothing to dismantle. You made the ad hoc post. Nothing specific. You addressed nothing..but made an accusation.

And it seems you are ignorant of military history. It has not always been voluntary.

But I am assuming you are young..and skipped history in junior and high school..and went right to the internet as your source of information.

Spend a little time in a library.

dude ive destroyed your argument countless times in quite a few threads, but hey even this one. check the pages, look at your cowardice in addressing my points when they disprove your claims beyond doubt of a logical mind.

and when did i say it has always been voluntary? Again, you are making shit up and making yourself more of a fool. Nice. And yep, I am young and skipped history. That is why I am starting for my JD from a top University next fall and have earned a BA in History and a BS in Business with a 3.8. (Dual major 5 years blah). I might even apply to OTS first and serve my country before I do though. But hey, you must know more about me. After all you are on the internet, you know everyone instantly! Get the fuck out...you embarrass yourself.

 

[Sallow]

Im growing tired of always being the one to destroy other peoples' arguments. How about you attempt to dismantle mine for once? Also, it is just factually incorrect. You have no source, and are just making up shit. So it doesn't take a fucking rocket science to say you are living in a fantasy world. It is a pretty accurate statement.

Also, it's a volunteer military, dumbass.

There's nothing to dismantle. You made the ad hoc post. Nothing specific. You addressed nothing..but made an accusation.

And it seems you are ignorant of military history. It has not always been voluntary.

But I am assuming you are young..and skipped history in junior and high school..and went right to the internet as your source of information.

Spend a little time in a library.

dude ive destroyed your argument countless times in quite a few threads, but hey even this one. check the pages, look at your cowardice in addressing my points when they disprove your claims beyond doubt of a logical mind.

and when did i say it has always been voluntary? Again, you are making shit up and making yourself more of a fool. Nice. And yep, I am young and skipped history. That is why I am getting starting for my JD from a top University next fall and have earned a BA in History and a BS in Business with a 3.8. (Dual major 5 years blah). I might even apply to OTS first and serve my country before I do though. But hey, you must know more about me. After all you are on the internet, you know everyone instantly! Get the fuck out...you embarrass yourself.

Um..okay..

And I bet you have playboy models as girlfriends and drive a ferrari.

Is that you Mr. Bond?

Cheers.

 

[Liberty]

There's nothing to dismantle. You made the ad hoc post. Nothing specific. You addressed nothing..but made an accusation.

And it seems you are ignorant of military history. It has not always been voluntary.

But I am assuming you are young..and skipped history in junior and high school..and went right to the internet as your source of information.

Spend a little time in a library.

dude ive destroyed your argument countless times in quite a few threads, but hey even this one. check the pages, look at your cowardice in addressing my points when they disprove your claims beyond doubt of a logical mind.

and when did i say it has always been voluntary? Again, you are making shit up and making yourself more of a fool. Nice. And yep, I am young and skipped history. That is why I am getting starting for my JD from a top University next fall and have earned a BA in History and a BS in Business with a 3.8. (Dual major 5 years blah). I might even apply to OTS first and serve my country before I do though. But hey, you must know more about me. After all you are on the internet, you know everyone instantly! Get the fuck out...you embarrass yourself.

Um..okay..

And I bet you have playboy models as girlfriends and drive a ferrari.

Is that you Mr. Bond?

Cheers.

Well, better luck next time I guess.

 

[Sallow]

dude ive destroyed your argument countless times in quite a few threads, but hey even this one. check the pages, look at your cowardice in addressing my points when they disprove your claims beyond doubt of a logical mind.

and when did i say it has always been voluntary? Again, you are making shit up and making yourself more of a fool. Nice. And yep, I am young and skipped history. That is why I am getting starting for my JD from a top University next fall and have earned a BA in History and a BS in Business with a 3.8. (Dual major 5 years blah). I might even apply to OTS first and serve my country before I do though. But hey, you must know more about me. After all you are on the internet, you know everyone instantly! Get the fuck out...you embarrass yourself.

Um..okay..

And I bet you have playboy models as girlfriends and drive a ferrari.

Is that you Mr. Bond?

Cheers.

Well, better luck next time I guess.

Have fun storming the castle..

 

[Intense]

The Revolution was not about small government

It was about wanting our own government

Seems we are still waiting. You obviously don't have a clue, and wouldn't understand the rule of law or due process if you tripped over it, which you seem to do every day. Now tell us more about how you know everything and we know nothing. It's nice make believe. Tell me another story about evil conservatives and how collectivism is Constitutional. Tell us about how we hate the Constitution. Idiot.

Hmmmmmm....interesting

No facts, no point of view, nothing to refute except "You are an idiot"

I will take that as a complement, come back when you have something to add to the discussion

What effect do facts have on you? Fact that the Constitution originally stipulated that Senators be elected from the State Legislators, not the General Population. What does that or anything else have to do with your fantasy claims????? How about you focus on speaking for yourself, rather than speaking for us?????

 

[Intense]

Conservatives were on the side of the King then....they would support the king now (there was more money to be made)

The Colonists were the biggest Liberals on the planet

So you're saying the big government statist collectivists of today would have been the small government individuals of the Revolution?

That's completely irrational.

the pretend constitutionalists today are not 'small government' because they want government to legislate the things THEY wanted legislated. For example, they want the government to interfere with my body and force me to carry a child to term even if i am raped or the victim of incest.

they want to prohibit a next of kin from making the final decisions about a loved ones' end of life choices if THEY disagree with them

they aren't small government at all.

and i don't think we'd be very accepting of the founding fathers' idea of government either... one where women couldn't vote and blacks weren't even considered full people and slavery was legal.

I'm conservative, yet I don't want those things for you, Jillian.

 

[rightwinger]

Seems we are still waiting. You obviously don't have a clue, and wouldn't understand the rule of law or due process if you tripped over it, which you seem to do every day. Now tell us more about how you know everything and we know nothing. It's nice make believe. Tell me another story about evil conservatives and how collectivism is Constitutional. Tell us about how we hate the Constitution. Idiot.

Hmmmmmm....interesting

No facts, no point of view, nothing to refute except "You are an idiot"

I will take that as a complement, come back when you have something to add to the discussion

What effect do facts have on you? Fact that the Constitution originally stipulated that Senators be elected from the State Legislators, not the General Population. What does that or anything else have to do with your fantasy claims????? How about you focus on speaking for yourself, rather than speaking for us?????

17th Amendment fixed that. Imagine the uproar if the public was told they could no longer elect their own Senators and that the State would make that decision for them.

Only a wingnut would propose taking away the vote from the people

 

[Intense]

Hmmmmmm....interesting

No facts, no point of view, nothing to refute except "You are an idiot"

I will take that as a complement, come back when you have something to add to the discussion

What effect do facts have on you? Fact that the Constitution originally stipulated that Senators be elected from the State Legislators, not the General Population. What does that or anything else have to do with your fantasy claims????? How about you focus on speaking for yourself, rather than speaking for us?????

17th Amendment fixed that. Imagine the uproar if the public was told they could no longer elect their own Senators and that the State would make that decision for them.

Only a wingnut would propose taking away the vote from the people

You have no clue as to what I want or don't want. You seem to be obsessed with wing nuts. You are proof that there is more than one variety. I think it's a good idea that the Election be about what the people want and not the Party. You should try that sometime. You know, putting the people first. We are a Federalist Constitutional Republic. Federalist, can you say that?????? F-E-D-E-R-A-L-I-S-T. Good... that's it. You will one day get it.

 

[daveman]

Conservatives were on the side of the King then....they would support the king now (there was more money to be made)

The Colonists were the biggest Liberals on the planet

So you're saying the big government statist collectivists of today would have been the small government individuals of the Revolution?

That's completely irrational.

The Revolution was not about small government

It was about wanting our own government

...which the FF built small on purpose.

You really should stop trying to insist that the Founding Fathers would approve of our current bloated Federal government. It makes you look foolish.

 

[daveman]

Then your opinion on warrantless wiretaps, denial of speedy trials, suspension of Habeas, torture, and secret prisons is what..exactly?

Perhaps..starting there would be a good point.

Not interested in playing your silly little games.

Not playing games. Just asking for clarification and specifics.

Without establishing those..there is no real point to start from.

If only I could believe that you wanted serious discussion.

But I can't.

 

[daveman]

Concrete? I pointed to two people, both republican, that I think would not be at home in today's GOP. Don't know how much more concrete one can get then that.

Do you know what "speculation" is?

Okay.

Start with how you feel their ideas and orientation would fit in today's GOP.

And that would be more speculation.

 

[daveman]

Conservatives were on the side of the King then....they would support the king now (there was more money to be made)

The Colonists were the biggest Liberals on the planet

So you're saying the big government statist collectivists of today would have been the small government individuals of the Revolution?

That's completely irrational.

the pretend constitutionalists today are not 'small government' because they want government to legislate the things THEY wanted legislated. For example, they want the government to interfere with my body and force me to carry a child to term even if i am raped or the victim of incest.

they want to prohibit a next of kin from making the final decisions about a loved ones' end of life choices if THEY disagree with them

they aren't small government at all.

and i don't think we'd be very accepting of the founding fathers' idea of government either... one where women couldn't vote and blacks weren't even considered full people and slavery was legal.

I don't agree with the Federal government legislating any morality. Some questions, like abortion and gay marriage, should be left to the States.

 

[rightwinger]

What effect do facts have on you? Fact that the Constitution originally stipulated that Senators be elected from the State Legislators, not the General Population. What does that or anything else have to do with your fantasy claims????? How about you focus on speaking for yourself, rather than speaking for us?????

17th Amendment fixed that. Imagine the uproar if the public was told they could no longer elect their own Senators and that the State would make that decision for them.

Only a wingnut would propose taking away the vote from the people

You have no clue as to what I want or don't want. You seem to be obsessed with wing nuts. You are proof that there is more than one variety. I think it's a good idea that the Election be about what the people want and not the Party. You should try that sometime. You know, putting the people first. We are a Federalist Constitutional Republic. Federalist, can you say that?????? F-E-D-E-R-A-L-I-S-T. Good... that's it. You will one day get it.

I'm the one supporting our Constitution as it is currently written. I would not change a thing. Nor would I advocate taking away the direct election of Senators by the people