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.
What would have happened if John Adams stood by his guns, and refused to allow those held in bondage, and didn't have the right to vote, be counted in congressional and electoral proportioning?
What would have happened if James Madison dug his feet in and refused to allow the "general welfare" clause or a standing army (he changed his mind on that position after Washington was burned)?
Did any of you dolts read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers? We were a nation built on compromise. Today's wingnuts think it's now a bad word, and not sticking by your guns is a sign that you're emasculated. It just shows that you're fucking idiots.
You haven't read them because I don't see anything in your post showing that you know what it is you are talking about.
What would have happened if John Adams stood by his guns, and refused to allow those held in bondage, and didn't have the right to vote, be counted in congressional and electoral proportioning?
What would have happened if James Madison dug his feet in and refused to allow the "general welfare" clause or a standing army (he changed his mind on that position after Washington was burned)?
Did any of you dolts read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers? We were a nation built on compromise. Today's wingnuts think it's now a bad word, and not sticking by your guns is a sign that you're emasculated. It just shows that you're fucking idiots.
You haven't read them because I don't see anything in your post showing that you know what it is you are talking about.
You haven't read them because if you had, you'd know how far the political divide was between the Federalists and Confederationists. You're a pathetic moron if you don't know that this great nation was founded on the compromise.
What would have happened if John Adams stood by his guns, and refused to allow those held in bondage, and didn't have the right to vote, be counted in congressional and electoral proportioning?
What would have happened if James Madison dug his feet in and refused to allow the "general welfare" clause or a standing army (he changed his mind on that position after Washington was burned)?
Did any of you dolts read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers? We were a nation built on compromise. Today's wingnuts think it's now a bad word, and not sticking by your guns is a sign that you're emasculated. It just shows that you're fucking idiots.
You haven't read them because I don't see anything in your post showing that you know what it is you are talking about.
You haven't read them because if you had, you'd know how far the political divide was between the Federalists and Confederationists. You're a pathetic moron if you don't know that this great nation was founded on the compromise.
For those few of us who might be interested in the specifics of what will be cut?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/legislative_reports/stareport.pdf
Read em and weap, kiddies.
You want a balanced budget, by god you're gonna get it.
Federalists would have hung Confederates in a flash.
The Hartford Convention (1814) was about amending the Constitution.
Charleston (1860) was about breaking up the country.
Well, if you are going to have a no compromise policy against the group who is dependent in some way because minimum wage isn't bring in enough $$$ to pay the bills and such, the of course people are going to vote against you.
They want someone to help enable them to stop having them be dependent and to have a job that will have an income that will take care of expenses.
These people aren't doing it because they don't want to work.
minimum wage is that the basis of your argue the minimum wage? Here's a hint the minimum wage was never meant to sustain a family on. trying to live on minimum wage is almost as bad as living on the government welfare plan.
You are forgetting that there ARE people who can't even land minimum wage jobs because of how bad this economy is.
Also employers continue to pay less and offer only minimum wage while demanding more.
The givers need to give more so the takers can become independent financially.
minimum wage is that the basis of your argue the minimum wage? Here's a hint the minimum wage was never meant to sustain a family on. trying to live on minimum wage is almost as bad as living on the government welfare plan.
You are forgetting that there ARE people who can't even land minimum wage jobs because of how bad this economy is.
Also employers continue to pay less and offer only minimum wage while demanding more.
The givers need to give more so the takers can become independent financially.
This statement beautifully sums up why these people have no understanding of reality. How can anyone be so stupid as to make a comment like this?
How can Newby because so unilaterally unbalanced to say something silly.
You are forgetting that there ARE people who can't even land minimum wage jobs because of how bad this economy is.
Also employers continue to pay less and offer only minimum wage while demanding more.
The givers need to give more so the takers can become independent financially.
This statement beautifully sums up why these people have no understanding of reality. How can anyone be so stupid as to make a comment like this?
Compromise is for pussies
Bring the country to its knees.......then the other side will compromise
Aside from the fact that to the left, "compromise" means "do what we want", the last thing I want government to do is agree.
Every time I hear someone say "let's get together on both sides of the isle to work on the problems facing this country" I just want to punch them in the face.
Government is not the solution to any problem. Just get the government out of the fucking way! When politicians get together, government NEVER gets out of the way.
LL and PF, honest and patriotic as they may be, simply don't get, but that's OK, because the great majority does get it, and compromise is coming.
Aside from the fact that to the left, "compromise" means "do what we want", the last thing I want government to do is agree.
Every time I hear someone say "let's get together on both sides of the isle to work on the problems facing this country" I just want to punch them in the face.
Government is not the solution to any problem. Just get the government out of the fucking way! When politicians get together, government NEVER gets out of the way.
I'm with you. GO GRIDLOCK!
minimum wage is that the basis of your argue the minimum wage? Here's a hint the minimum wage was never meant to sustain a family on. trying to live on minimum wage is almost as bad as living on the government welfare plan.
You are forgetting that there ARE people who can't even land minimum wage jobs because of how bad this economy is.
Also employers continue to pay less and offer only minimum wage while demanding more.
The givers need to give more so the takers can become independent financially.
This statement beautifully sums up why these people have no understanding of reality. How can anyone be so stupid as to make a comment like this?
Jarlaxle continues to demonstrate his ignorance. All the colonies until 1774 and 1775 were slave colonies. None of the middle Atlantic and NE states would have supported the South. That was very clearly in 1814, which was about amendments not secession. And in 1832, Jackson would have hung the South Carolinian leadership summarily if they had tried to take the state out of the Union.
Jarlaxle, don't revise history you flatly do not comprehend.
Aside from the fact that to the left, "compromise" means "do what we want", the last thing I want government to do is agree.
Every time I hear someone say "let's get together on both sides of the isle to work on the problems facing this country" I just want to punch them in the face.
Government is not the solution to any problem. Just get the government out of the fucking way! When politicians get together, government NEVER gets out of the way.
I'm with you. GO GRIDLOCK!
is that what the founders designed?
tea party smucks
LL and PF, honest and patriotic as they may be, simply don't get, but that's OK, because the great majority does get it, and compromise is coming.
You're dumb if you think the point of government is to pass every bill introduced.
Jarlaxle continues to demonstrate his ignorance. All the colonies until 1774 and 1775 were slave colonies. None of the middle Atlantic and NE states would have supported the South. That was very clearly in 1814, which was about amendments not secession. And in 1832, Jackson would have hung the South Carolinian leadership summarily if they had tried to take the state out of the Union.
Jarlaxle, don't revise history you flatly do not comprehend.
Even if the founding fathers did not support slavery and most of them were abolitionists themselves, they would have supported secession and the rights of states to leave the union. That was the whole point of the Revolution.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
That was the way they felt. It is honorable to dissolve the political bonds and declare the reasons why.
