U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It also doesn't say they can't.

Does the constitution give authority to take control of failing banks?

That's not how the Constitution works. Only those powers stated in the Constitution are legitimate powers of the federal government.

No.

I have a feeling we aren't going to agree on this. The federal government, imo, has a duty to provide for the general welfare of the country. Therefore they are within their rights to seize institutions that threaten the stability of the country until that time that they no longer pose a threat.

You can disagree with me whether or not you think they should have the power to take over these institutions, but I'm not sure you can disagree with it being unconstitutional. The general welfare clause was not meant to give the federal government the authority to do whatever it wants so long as it can make an argument that it's in the general welfare of the nation. The framers of the Constitution specifically listed what the powers of the federal government are, and taking over private businesses was not included in that list. If they feel that that's necessary, and I'd disagree with them, then they are free to attempt to pass an amendment to the Constitution which would then give them that authority.

 

[Gunny]

It also doesn't say they can't.

Does the constitution give authority to take control of failing banks?

That's not how the Constitution works. Only those powers stated in the Constitution are legitimate powers of the federal government.

No.

I have a feeling we aren't going to agree on this. The federal government, imo, has a duty to provide for the general welfare of the country. Therefore they are within their rights to seize institutions that threaten the stability of the country until that time that they no longer pose a threat.

Of course you aren't going to agree. Your opinion however is contrary to the facts.

 

[editec]

The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to the document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Huge mistake. This is worse than feeding the failures cash. Let the market weed them out. It is not the failed banks that is going to revive the economy. If they want to throw around cash like that it would be better to start a massive government sponsored venture capital fund and let the businesses roll. The odds of getting a real return are certainly better than buying junk bonds.

That's not a bad idea, FF.

Basically that's what I believe the FED should have been doing all along.

 

[Ravi]

That's not how the Constitution works. Only those powers stated in the Constitution are legitimate powers of the federal government.

No.

I have a feeling we aren't going to agree on this. The federal government, imo, has a duty to provide for the general welfare of the country. Therefore they are within their rights to seize institutions that threaten the stability of the country until that time that they no longer pose a threat.

You can disagree with me whether or not you think they should have the power to take over these institutions, but I'm not sure you can disagree with it being unconstitutional. The general welfare clause was not meant to give the federal government the authority to do whatever it wants so long as it can make an argument that it's in the general welfare of the nation. The framers of the Constitution specifically listed what the powers of the federal government are, and taking over private businesses was not included in that list. If they feel that that's necessary, and I'd disagree with them, then they are free to attempt to pass an amendment to the Constitution which would then give them that authority.

I do disagree with you on the constitutional issue as well. No, the federal government can't do whatever it wants...it can't pass a law that violates the constitution, which is why some of the provisions in the Patriot Act are unconstitutional. But Congress does have the power to regulate the financial system...

 

[Ravi]

That's not how the Constitution works. Only those powers stated in the Constitution are legitimate powers of the federal government.

No.

I have a feeling we aren't going to agree on this. The federal government, imo, has a duty to provide for the general welfare of the country. Therefore they are within their rights to seize institutions that threaten the stability of the country until that time that they no longer pose a threat.

Of course you aren't going to agree. Your opinion however is contrary to the facts.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Oh as for the proposal for expanded powers for oversight. That may have some good in it but they want to pervert and weaken the FDIC in order to fund its operations.

The FDIC is the last line of defense for the individual.

Geitner states that he wants to honor contractual law when it comes ot exec bonuses yet is eager to pervert the purpose and obligations of the FDIC.

They have already weakened the FDIC by increasing it's exposure by 150%

BINGO...

What you're pointing to is the Achilles heel of this entire fiasco.

The Bailout maintains that the State is the source of all potential cure... It pretends that the State has the infinite means; in terms of wisdom and resources to effectively solve the problem; when in truth, THE PROBLEM is caused BY THE STATE.

The run on the banks of the 1930s was SOLELY the result of the policy known as "Fractional Banking." A policy which was established BY THE FEDERAL RESERVE... which allows Banks to operate with a fraction of capital, in reserve, against their total liabilities. The Run was created when individuals with deposits in those banks, demanded those deposits at a rate which the banks were not able to meet due to their LACK OF SUFFICIENT RESERVES. And despite the banks having, in almost every case, more than sufficient reserves to meet the thresholds required BY the Federal Reserve, they simply didn't have NEAR enough to meet the needs of their depositors, inducing a panic, which spread throughout the respective regions...

As I've stated MANY times, this failure was a function of left-think; it was a certain sign that the Federal Reserve was wrong and that Fractional Banking should be scrapped... but No NO! The Progressive Advocates of Social Science concluded that it was not Leftism which had failed, it was that it had not gone FAR ENOUGH! (Remember: Progressivism/Fascism; Socialism; Communism...) The failure, as it is said today, was said THEN to be the result of CAPITALISM>>> that the State did not have ENOUGH CONTROL OVER CAPITALISM... so they relieved the banks of their responsibility to their depositors to simply have sufficient reserves on hand to meet their liabilities and placed that responsibility on the State, through the FDIC.

In the Mortgage Crisis scenario... Fannie and Freddy played the role of the FDIC... and what happened to Fannie and Freddy? They went busted, Right? And why did they go busted? They went busted because the liabilities which they had guaranteed, vastly exceeded their means to warrant. And what was the conclusion drawn from this failure? The crisis wasn't a result of the failure inherent in the Left-think plan to over-ride sound actuarial thresholds... No NO! The failure was a result of the State NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT CONTROL OVER THE GREEDY CAPITALIST. The simple resolution OF which is to establish GREATER CONTROL... Relieving the simple minded capitalist of THEIR RESPONSIBILITY and PLACING THAT RESPONSIBILITY UPON THE STATE... Which necessarily requires WHAT? It requires MORE POWER! Power which can only lead to what? Power which is DESIGNED to prevent the individual from exercising their UNALIENABLE RIGHTS... BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BE TRUSTED... Which is a great idea, because if ya can't trust the LEFTIST STATE... WHO CAN YA TRUST? Right?

Gietner's extending of the FDIC liability did precisely the same damn thing... it's just that at this point, that hasn't been tested yet... so it appears solvent; but in fact it is guaranteeing a volume of deposits which it cannot HOPE to sustain WHEN the crisis that WILL challenge it, inevitably comes along.

Gietner and Comrades have just moved the cones farther back, extending the scope of the SAME failed plan to cover EXPONENTIALLY MORE liability; again this ALL REST upon the fundamentally flawed premise that THE STATE DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL! Completely setting aside the certainty that IF the State COULD control it AT ALL, IT COULD CONTROL LESS OF IT, BETTER THAN IT CAN CONTROL MORE OF IT!

The new wrinkle is NOT that they want more power to seize private property... its that they're NOW WRITING BAD CHECKS, AGAINST WHICH, THEY ISSUE BONDS, NOTES and BILLS AND THEY'RE WRITING MORE BAD CHECKS TO BUY THOSE BONDS FOR WHICH THEY WROTE THE BAD CHECKS TO FUND IN THE FIRST PLACE. <<< For you leftists who may, on the off chance, be reading this: THAT'S BAD!

They NEED the power to seize those institutions, because when those institutions fail... it will stress the economic house of cards that they have built. The power to seize that private party is simply their BET, that they are smart enough to seize them BEFORE THEY FAIL. <<< Leftists: THAT'S BAD.

Friends... remember how amazed we were that Bernie Maydoff had scammed all those rich folks out of tens of billions of dollars? Well, if you were AMAZED by THAT scam... You simply will not BELIEVE what your about to see when this scam, which is working off of the SAME stupifyingly erroneous PRINCIPLES, crumbles... and the reason you will not be able to believe it is because everything you have is tied up in it. Your house, business, cars, college fund, retirement, savings and checking accounts... down to the very cash in your pocket and the change under your seat cushions.

Please think about this: What on earth REALLY serves the reasoning which says that Tim Gietner; who came to power in a flurry of desperation, where it was discovered that he had made an accounting error in the calculation of his income taxes... Please set aside the rationalization as to what the circumstances were surrounding that error resultant from his calculating the tax on his few million dollar income... just note that it was an error.

Now this SAME GUY, we're told, is the smartest guy in the whole wide world; an economic scientist, who is supposed to be able to CORRECTLY distribute TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS... He's suppose to possess the intellectual means, to have collected sufficient knowledge to seize HUGE, but troubled businesses and fix 'em! Businesses which were built by MANY VERY smart and capable people... but who, for whatever reason (Fractional Banking, for instance), were lead astray of reason and ran their businesses into the ground; but TIM GEITNER, the guy who could not correctly weave through the incomprehensible maze that is TURBO-TAX... is smarter than ALL THOSE people who DESPITE their knowing their troubled business like the back of their hand, managed to allow their liabilities to exceed the demands being placed upon their existing capital reserves?

Understand, that NO reasonable person can believe that... yet that is what the left NEEDS us to believe. But this is because, the point is NOT to fix those companies which President Hussein wants the power to seize; the point is to REDISTRIBUTE THE ASSETS OF THOSE COMPANIES... BEFORE THEY FAIL; BECAUSE IF THEY FAIL THAT FAILURE WILL CAUSE A CRISIS WHICH WILL ONCE AGAIN EXPOSE THE SCHEME, to being recognized as the ongoing failure that it is.

Now, WHEN that happens... will the Left FINALLY COME TO REALIZE THE ERROR OF THEIR PLAN and admit that they were WRONG, that SOCIAL SCIENCE is NOT the answer to our economic challenges; and that CENTRAL CONTROL is NOT the WAY to MANAGE an incomprensibly large and complex economic engine?

Nope...

They will look at that failure and CONCLUDE that they didn't have ENOUGH CONTROL! And demand in THAT crisis that they be given MORE CONTROL... that they need to seize MORE businesses farther down the chain... which caused the snow ball which lead to the failure of whatever asset(s) that made the waves, that eventually flipped the economic boat.

Economics is a lot like Golf friends... it's counter intuitive. By all appearances, what is needed to adequately strike the ball in such a way that rmakes that ball fly 300 yards IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION and land WHERE YOU NEED IT TO LAND... appears to require one to tightly grip the club and SMASH THAT BALL WITH GREAT STRENGTH; CONTROLLING EVERY FACET OF THE PROCESS THROUGH A THOROUGH and OVERT, INTENTIONAL MANIPULATION OF PHYSICS.

When in truth... the key to striking that ball so that it complies with your desires, rests in understanding and cooperating WITH the simple principles at play and doing as LITTLE as one can possibly do to control that ball; trusting in the certainties that those principles establish... a soft grip; a light touch... and a stance which respects and complies with those incontestable principles; which allows the club to fall through the arch, striking the ball at apogee... where maximum, natural momentum compresses the ball off the squarely applied club face; which possesses, within its intrinsic design, the appropriate angle of attack to release the ball at the predictable angle for the desired flight; all of which determine the predictable distance; which predictably places the balls flight in the proper direction, landing in the desired location.

Left-think economics is the golf equivalent of a Saturday afternoon golf-Beer-fest... where hundreds of golf clubs are death gripped and thousands of golf balls are launched into the predictable but undesirable flight paths; landing them into the surrounding hazards; with every erroneous swing being executed with a tighter grip, a more violent turn of the club than the last; where the singular conclusion drawn from their chronic failure being that they just DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL!

 

[sealybobo]

The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to the document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What did I say Del?

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Seize up all the companies you want government. This is our government, working for us, and it is the corporations who have reaked havoc on the economy over the last 8 plus years. Actually, it all started with Reagan.

So we finally won our country back. And we may have to smack a couple of companies around in order to get the other companies to fall back in line.

They think they run the country del! They don't. We do. Obama is our leader.

I don't give a fuck about IBM, AT&T, Ford, etc.

I only care about the people that work for them.

And there is a such thing as being too rich for democracy

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to the document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What did I say Del?

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Seize up all the companies you want government. This is our government, working for us, and it is the corporations who have reaked havoc on the economy over the last 8 plus years. Actually, it all started with Reagan.

So we finally won our country back. And we may have to smack a couple of companies around in order to get the other companies to fall back in line.

They think they run the country del! They don't. We do. Obama is our leader.

I don't give a fuck about IBM, AT&T, Ford, etc.

I only care about the people that work for them.

And there is a such thing as being too rich for democracy

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Now I want to state flat out, that I have IN NO WAY CONSPIRED WITH THIS LEFTIST TO ADVANCE this screed so as to prove my point.

There is nothing that can be said which could possibly lead this imbecile to conclude that business is designed to earn as much money as the market will provide; that in so doing, each business , comprised of free individuals, is compelled by bed-rock principle to execrise their rights in such a way that their right to earn a profit, does not usurp the right of anyone else to do the same... that the process is imperfect because it is being exercised by imperfect beings, but it is the adherence to the PRINCIPLES which sustain the system, holding each other accountable to our inherent responsibilities, in defense and as a direct result of our mutal and common rights.

Meaning that the principles are the only source of perfection, and are that which all must be measured against.

And what does the Leftist Suggest we do to solve the problems which are a natural result of our existance? >>> TOSS THE PRINCIPLES! Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!



Some people would DEMAND that my position did not fairly represent the position of the left... So it REALLY helps when we get a leftist to vomit their most closely held feelings in demonstration of that truth!


BRAVO Bobo...

 

[sealybobo]

The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to the document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What did I say Del?

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Seize up all the companies you want government. This is our government, working for us, and it is the corporations who have reaked havoc on the economy over the last 8 plus years. Actually, it all started with Reagan.

So we finally won our country back. And we may have to smack a couple of companies around in order to get the other companies to fall back in line.

They think they run the country del! They don't. We do. Obama is our leader.

I don't give a fuck about IBM, AT&T, Ford, etc.

I only care about the people that work for them.

And there is a such thing as being too rich for democracy

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Now I want to state flat out, that I have IN NO WAY CONSPIRED WITH THIS LEFTIST TO ADVANCE this screed so as to prove my point.

There is nothing that can be said which could possibly lead this imbecile to conclude that business is designed to earn as much money as the market will provide; that in so doing, each business , comprised of free individuals, is compelled by bed-rock principle to execrise their rights in such a way that their right to earn a profit, does not usurp the right of anyone else to do the same... that the process is imperfect because it is being exercised by imperfect beings, but it is the adherence to the PRINCIPLES which sustain the system, holding each other accountable to our inherent responsibilities, in defense and as a direct result of our mutal and common rights.

Meaning that the principles are the only source of perfection, and are that which all must be measured against.

And what does the Leftist Suggest we do to solve the problems which are a natural result of our existance? >>> TOSS THE PRINCIPLES! Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!



Some people would DEMAND that my position did not fairly represent the position of the left... So it REALLY helps when we get a leftist to vomit their most closely held feelings in demonstration of that truth!


BRAVO Bobo...

I don't even know what you said, and no one else is going to read that crap either, so bravo to you sir.

Bravo for saying nothing.

 

[sealybobo]

The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.

The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.

Giving the Treasury secretary authority over a broader range of companies would mark a significant shift from the existing model of financial regulation, which relies on independent agencies that are shielded from the political process. The Treasury secretary, a member of the president's Cabinet, would exercise the new powers in consultation with the White House, the Federal Reserve and other regulators, according to the document.

The administration plans to send legislation to Capitol Hill this week. Sources cautioned that the details, including the Treasury's role, are still in flux.

U.S. Seeks Expanded Power to Seize Firms

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

What did I say Del?

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Seize up all the companies you want government. This is our government, working for us, and it is the corporations who have reaked havoc on the economy over the last 8 plus years. Actually, it all started with Reagan.

So we finally won our country back. And we may have to smack a couple of companies around in order to get the other companies to fall back in line.

They think they run the country del! They don't. We do. Obama is our leader.

I don't give a fuck about IBM, AT&T, Ford, etc.

I only care about the people that work for them.

And there is a such thing as being too rich for democracy

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Now I want to state flat out, that I have IN NO WAY CONSPIRED WITH THIS LEFTIST TO ADVANCE this screed so as to prove my point.

There is nothing that can be said which could possibly lead this imbecile to conclude that business is designed to earn as much money as the market will provide; that in so doing, each business , comprised of free individuals, is compelled by bed-rock principle to execrise their rights in such a way that their right to earn a profit, does not usurp the right of anyone else to do the same... that the process is imperfect because it is being exercised by imperfect beings, but it is the adherence to the PRINCIPLES which sustain the system, holding each other accountable to our inherent responsibilities, in defense and as a direct result of our mutal and common rights.

Meaning that the principles are the only source of perfection, and are that which all must be measured against.

And what does the Leftist Suggest we do to solve the problems which are a natural result of our existance? >>> TOSS THE PRINCIPLES! Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!



Some people would DEMAND that my position did not fairly represent the position of the left... So it REALLY helps when we get a leftist to vomit their most closely held feelings in demonstration of that truth!


BRAVO Bobo...

I find it funny when guys like you say things like this, "Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!"

Really? After 8 years of Disaster Capitalism and Bush spying on us and torturing and taking away habius corpus and the new Supreme Court Justices not following stari decisis.

After all that, you are worried about this new government abusing its power?

Relax.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

What did I say Del?

If you want to play the game of business, we've said in the US since 1784 (when Tench Coxe got the first tariffs passed "to protect domestic industries") then you have to play in a way that both makes you money AND serves the public interest.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Seize up all the companies you want government. This is our government, working for us, and it is the corporations who have reaked havoc on the economy over the last 8 plus years. Actually, it all started with Reagan.

So we finally won our country back. And we may have to smack a couple of companies around in order to get the other companies to fall back in line.

They think they run the country del! They don't. We do. Obama is our leader.

I don't give a fuck about IBM, AT&T, Ford, etc.

I only care about the people that work for them.

And there is a such thing as being too rich for democracy

How Rich is Too Rich For Democracy?

Now I want to state flat out, that I have IN NO WAY CONSPIRED WITH THIS LEFTIST TO ADVANCE this screed so as to prove my point.

There is nothing that can be said which could possibly lead this imbecile to conclude that business is designed to earn as much money as the market will provide; that in so doing, each business , comprised of free individuals, is compelled by bed-rock principle to execrise their rights in such a way that their right to earn a profit, does not usurp the right of anyone else to do the same... that the process is imperfect because it is being exercised by imperfect beings, but it is the adherence to the PRINCIPLES which sustain the system, holding each other accountable to our inherent responsibilities, in defense and as a direct result of our mutal and common rights.

Meaning that the principles are the only source of perfection, and are that which all must be measured against.

And what does the Leftist Suggest we do to solve the problems which are a natural result of our existance? >>> TOSS THE PRINCIPLES! Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!



Some people would DEMAND that my position did not fairly represent the position of the left... So it REALLY helps when we get a leftist to vomit their most closely held feelings in demonstration of that truth!


BRAVO Bobo...

I find it funny when guys like you say things like this, "Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!"

I've absolutely no doubt that you do find it funny; as the reason that you find it funny is that your ignorance is born of stark intellectual limitations... which your subconscious defends through the inducement of laughter in response to any exposure to that which you do not understand; which no doubt and rather sadly, explains that chronic smile you always seem to imply.

Of course you don't understand it... you're a leftist. If you had the means to understand it, you would be something other THAN a leftist.

Now that's fairly simple... so perhaps you can get your head around that.

Below we find yet ANOTHER demonstration of your inability to understand the relevant issues.

Really? After 8 years of Disaster Capitalism and Bush spying on us and torturing and taking away habius corpus and the new Supreme Court Justices not following stari decisis.

"Disaster Capitalism,' 'Bush spying on us', 'torture,' 'Habeus Corpus' and Stare decisis... Now all that amounts to is a cliche packed litany to no-where. Which is necessarily followed by the absurd, non sequitur expressed through a flaccid platitude found below...

After all that, you are worried about this new government abusing its power?

You're entitled to your vacuous opinion sis... but where you're found within ten miles of a voting booth is tantamount to a crime against humanity.

(Notice friends... they can't address the argument... EVER; as to do so requires that they THINK and to do THAT, can only undermine their escape clause: "I didn't KNOW! This disaster is an UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE of our good intentions..."

But ya have to remember, Leftist all suffer from HIV... the Human Intellectual-deficiency Virus; it is known to be spread by contact... generally the result of one dumbass, climbing upon another dumbass, through an act of procreation which results in their dumbass spawn. Other times, it's just an accident of nature; inevitably proving that the Creator has a RIPPING sense of humor... but no matter what causes it, it proves the unwavering principle that SHIT HAPPENS!)

 

[midcan5]

Oh no, the sky is still falling!!! Listen folks dictator Dick and his trusty sidekick Georgie are gone, no need to worry about false imprisonment and taking money from the poor to give to the rich any longer. Relax, take two aspirins and you'll be fine in the morning.

The Conservative Nanny State

"The reality is that conservatives have been quite actively using the power of the government to shape market outcomes in ways that redistribute income upward. However, conservatives have been clever enough to not own up to their role in this process, pretending all along that everything is just the natural working of the market. And, progressives have been foolish enough to go along with this view. "

 

[sealybobo]

Now I want to state flat out, that I have IN NO WAY CONSPIRED WITH THIS LEFTIST TO ADVANCE this screed so as to prove my point.

There is nothing that can be said which could possibly lead this imbecile to conclude that business is designed to earn as much money as the market will provide; that in so doing, each business , comprised of free individuals, is compelled by bed-rock principle to execrise their rights in such a way that their right to earn a profit, does not usurp the right of anyone else to do the same... that the process is imperfect because it is being exercised by imperfect beings, but it is the adherence to the PRINCIPLES which sustain the system, holding each other accountable to our inherent responsibilities, in defense and as a direct result of our mutal and common rights.

Meaning that the principles are the only source of perfection, and are that which all must be measured against.

And what does the Leftist Suggest we do to solve the problems which are a natural result of our existance? >>> TOSS THE PRINCIPLES! Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!



Some people would DEMAND that my position did not fairly represent the position of the left... So it REALLY helps when we get a leftist to vomit their most closely held feelings in demonstration of that truth!


BRAVO Bobo...

I find it funny when guys like you say things like this, "Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!"

I've absolutely no doubt that you do find it funny; as the reason that you find it funny is that your ignorance is born of stark intellectual limitations... which your subconscious defends through the inducement of laughter in response to any exposure to that which you do not understand; which no doubt and rather sadly, explains that chronic smile you always seem to imply.

Of course you don't understand it... you're a leftist. If you had the means to understand it, you would be something other THAN a leftist.

Now that's fairly simple... so perhaps you can get your head around that.

Below we find yet ANOTHER demonstration of your inability to understand the relevant issues.

Really? After 8 years of Disaster Capitalism and Bush spying on us and torturing and taking away habius corpus and the new Supreme Court Justices not following stari decisis.

"Disaster Capitalism,' 'Bush spying on us', 'torture,' 'Habeus Corpus' and Stare decisis... Now all that amounts to is a cliche packed litany to no-where. Which is necessarily followed by the absurd, non sequitur expressed through a flaccid platitude found below...

After all that, you are worried about this new government abusing its power?

You're entitled to your vacuous opinion sis... but where you're found within ten miles of a voting booth is tantamount to a crime against humanity.

(Notice friends... they can't address the argument... EVER; as to do so requires that they THINK and to do THAT, can only undermine their escape clause: "I didn't KNOW! This disaster is an UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE of our good intentions..."

But ya have to remember, Leftist all suffer from HIV... the Human Intellectual-deficiency Virus; it is known to be spread by contact... generally the result of one dumbass, climbing upon another dumbass, through an act of procreation which results in their dumbass spawn. Other times, it's just an accident of nature; inevitably proving that the Creator has a RIPPING sense of humor... but no matter what causes it, it proves the unwavering principle that SHIT HAPPENS!)

I don't even know what you are saying. You are trying too hard to come off as smart. Very Dennis Millerish.

Know what DVR stands for? Don't Vote Republican.

 

[sealybobo]

Oh no, the sky is still falling!!! Listen folks dictator Dick and his trusty sidekick Georgie are gone, no need to worry about false imprisonment and taking money from the poor to give to the rich any longer. Relax, take two aspirins and you'll be fine in the morning.

The Conservative Nanny State

"The reality is that conservatives have been quite actively using the power of the government to shape market outcomes in ways that redistribute income upward. However, conservatives have been clever enough to not own up to their role in this process, pretending all along that everything is just the natural working of the market. And, progressives have been foolish enough to go along with this view. "

I agree

"The reality is that conservatives have been quite actively using the power of the government to shape market outcomes in ways that redistribute income upward. However, conservatives have been clever enough to not own up to their role in this process, pretending all along that everything is just the natural working of the market. And, progressives have been foolish enough to go along with this view. "

But you know how good cons are at arguing. I've probably pointed this out a million times.

How does a con come back?

1. Ask for a source and then call the source too liberal when provided with facts

2. Spin the conversation

3. Attack me as partisan, which we all know is true, but irrelivent.

4. Attack the way I spell irrelavent.

5. Blame Clinton

 

[Indiana Oracle]

Agree with Annie:

They are fascists, not communists. The reality will sink in too late.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I have a feeling we aren't going to agree on this. The federal government, imo, has a duty to provide for the general welfare of the country. Therefore they are within their rights to seize institutions that threaten the stability of the country until that time that they no longer pose a threat.

You can disagree with me whether or not you think they should have the power to take over these institutions, but I'm not sure you can disagree with it being unconstitutional. The general welfare clause was not meant to give the federal government the authority to do whatever it wants so long as it can make an argument that it's in the general welfare of the nation. The framers of the Constitution specifically listed what the powers of the federal government are, and taking over private businesses was not included in that list. If they feel that that's necessary, and I'd disagree with them, then they are free to attempt to pass an amendment to the Constitution which would then give them that authority.

I do disagree with you on the constitutional issue as well. No, the federal government can't do whatever it wants...it can't pass a law that violates the constitution, which is why some of the provisions in the Patriot Act are unconstitutional. But Congress does have the power to regulate the financial system...

Except that the powers of the federal government are stated in the Constitution, and only those powers listed are legitimate powers of the federal government. The general welfare clause gave no powers to the government. No where in the Constitution does it say that Congress can regulate or take over financial institutions.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I find it funny when guys like you say things like this, "Empower the government to strip us of our responsibilities; and in so doing remove our means to exercise our rights!"

I've absolutely no doubt that you do find it funny; as the reason that you find it funny is that your ignorance is born of stark intellectual limitations... which your subconscious defends through the inducement of laughter in response to any exposure to that which you do not understand; which no doubt and rather sadly, explains that chronic smile you always seem to imply.

Of course you don't understand it... you're a leftist. If you had the means to understand it, you would be something other THAN a leftist.

Now that's fairly simple... so perhaps you can get your head around that.

Below we find yet ANOTHER demonstration of your inability to understand the relevant issues.



"Disaster Capitalism,' 'Bush spying on us', 'torture,' 'Habeus Corpus' and Stare decisis... Now all that amounts to is a cliche packed litany to no-where. Which is necessarily followed by the absurd, non sequitur expressed through a flaccid platitude found below...

After all that, you are worried about this new government abusing its power?

You're entitled to your vacuous opinion sis... but where you're found within ten miles of a voting booth is tantamount to a crime against humanity.

(Notice friends... they can't address the argument... EVER; as to do so requires that they THINK and to do THAT, can only undermine their escape clause: "I didn't KNOW! This disaster is an UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE of our good intentions..."

But ya have to remember, Leftist all suffer from HIV... the Human Intellectual-deficiency Virus; it is known to be spread by contact... generally the result of one dumbass, climbing upon another dumbass, through an act of procreation which results in their dumbass spawn. Other times, it's just an accident of nature; inevitably proving that the Creator has a RIPPING sense of humor... but no matter what causes it, it proves the unwavering principle that SHIT HAPPENS!)

I don't even know what you are saying. You are trying too hard to come off as smart. Very Dennis Millerish.

Know what DVR stands for? Don't Vote Republican.

You can't discern the point of a message written in your common language, but you feel perfectly qualified to speak to matters of governance...

That reconfirms that you're a leftist... so everything's workin' fine. The problem is on your end ma'am... please consult your manufacturer.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Agree with Annie:

They are fascists, not communists. The reality will sink in too late.

I believe the term STATIST says it best....although Marxist fascist works for me...totalitarian is kinda a mouthful....but they all apply to this administration....

Have you read Levin's new book Liberty and Tyranny.....number 1 on Amazon right now

 

[Ravi]

You can disagree with me whether or not you think they should have the power to take over these institutions, but I'm not sure you can disagree with it being unconstitutional. The general welfare clause was not meant to give the federal government the authority to do whatever it wants so long as it can make an argument that it's in the general welfare of the nation. The framers of the Constitution specifically listed what the powers of the federal government are, and taking over private businesses was not included in that list. If they feel that that's necessary, and I'd disagree with them, then they are free to attempt to pass an amendment to the Constitution which would then give them that authority.

I do disagree with you on the constitutional issue as well. No, the federal government can't do whatever it wants...it can't pass a law that violates the constitution, which is why some of the provisions in the Patriot Act are unconstitutional. But Congress does have the power to regulate the financial system...

Except that the powers of the federal government are stated in the Constitution, and only those powers listed are legitimate powers of the federal government. The general welfare clause gave no powers to the government. No where in the Constitution does it say that Congress can regulate or take over financial institutions.

It doesn't state it but the commerce clause and the neccesary and proper clause taken together mean that yes they can. I'm pretty sure SCOTUS decided this back in the 1800s...and how else do you think the Federal Reserve exists?

Like I said, I don't think we'll agree on this.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I do disagree with you on the constitutional issue as well. No, the federal government can't do whatever it wants...it can't pass a law that violates the constitution, which is why some of the provisions in the Patriot Act are unconstitutional. But Congress does have the power to regulate the financial system...

Except that the powers of the federal government are stated in the Constitution, and only those powers listed are legitimate powers of the federal government. The general welfare clause gave no powers to the government. No where in the Constitution does it say that Congress can regulate or take over financial institutions.

It doesn't state it but the commerce clause and the neccesary and proper clause taken together mean that yes they can. I'm pretty sure SCOTUS decided this back in the 1800s...and how else do you think the Federal Reserve exists?

Like I said, I don't think we'll agree on this.

Wait... You mean the federal government decided that these "clauses" in the Constitution allows the federal government to have more power? I'm shocked.

The Federal Reserve exists unconstitutionally.