Why I dont want the govt to send checks to americans

[berg80]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.

Only a Trumpleton could call Big Fat Don's plan to send helicopter money a far left policy. BTW, it isn't unconstitutional nitwit.

 

[TNHarley]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Another ignorant poster who can't help but share his ignorance with anyone and everyone. There is NOTHING in the constitution that prohibits the gov't from sending money to its citizens.

The constitution gives the govt enumerated powers. Its not about "prohibiting" them.
The irony in your personal attack is astounding. Good job dumbfuck

Is there anything in the US Constitution (or State Constitutions) about requiring drivers to have a valid driver's license or having stop signs at intersections or posting speed limits on highways? Is that all unconstitutional too?

Drivers licenses are a state issue except for CDLs because of commerce.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Is there anything in the US Constitution (or State Constitutions) about requiring drivers to have a valid driver's license or having stop signs at intersections or posting speed limits on highways? Is that all unconstitutional too?

As it relates to the Federal Government, yes, it would be unconstitutional for the Federal Government to delve into powers reserved to the States.

They do it all the fucking time, but no one challenges them, so they get away with it.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Drivers licenses are a state issue except for CDLs because of commerce.

A very clear example of the reservation of powers to States, except as they ACTUALLY relate to interstate commerce (commercial long-haul truck drivers).

.

 

[Mustang]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Another ignorant poster who can't help but share his ignorance with anyone and everyone. There is NOTHING in the constitution that prohibits the gov't from sending money to its citizens.

The constitution gives the govt enumerated powers. Its not about "prohibiting" them.
The irony in your personal attack is astounding. Good job dumbfuck

Is there anything in the US Constitution (or State Constitutions) about requiring drivers to have a valid driver's license or having stop signs at intersections or posting speed limits on highways? Is that all unconstitutional too?

Drivers licenses are a state issue except for CDLs because of commerce.

If this was a court of law, your post would be deemed unresponsive to the question asked.

 

[TNHarley]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.

Only a Trumpleton could call Big Fat Don's plan to send helicopter money a far left policy. BTW, it isn't unconstitutional nitwit.

Where does the constitution give the gov the power to give taxes to americans for relief?

 

[TNHarley]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Another ignorant poster who can't help but share his ignorance with anyone and everyone. There is NOTHING in the constitution that prohibits the gov't from sending money to its citizens.

The constitution gives the govt enumerated powers. Its not about "prohibiting" them.
The irony in your personal attack is astounding. Good job dumbfuck

Is there anything in the US Constitution (or State Constitutions) about requiring drivers to have a valid driver's license or having stop signs at intersections or posting speed limits on highways? Is that all unconstitutional too?

Drivers licenses are a state issue except for CDLs because of commerce.

If this was a court of law, your post would be deemed unresponsive to the question asked.

Thats only because you are ignorant.
If this was a court of law, you would have already been disbarred

 

[JustAnotherNut]

What I see wrong with this stimulus and the staggering debt...……..like with Bush's stimulus, it will be expected to be paid back and/or heavily taxed in the end.


There really is NO other way, regardless of who's in office or which side did what. This country needs that package now, but we'll also get hit with the bill from it later

 

[rightwinger]

I don't expect anyone touting the all-encompassing power of the General Welfare clause to answer my question on interstate commerce, because it will overtly expose them.

Consider yourselves exposed.

.

Your interpretation of the Constitution is extreme and not consistent with current legal case law.

If you want to pout about it, you are welcome to do so

 

[Pogo]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.

Only a Trumpleton could call Big Fat Don's plan to send helicopter money a far left policy. BTW, it isn't unconstitutional nitwit.

Where does the constitution give the gov the power to give taxes to americans [sic] for relief?

Article 1, Section 8.

Now I've given away the answer to the riddle in post 105. Didn't think it was that hard.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If this was a court of law, your post would be deemed unresponsive to the question asked.

And on redirect, I would have asked TNHarley to explain his answer to your bullshit question, to which he would have properly responded as he did in that response. So, take your bullshit cross-examination questions and shove them up your pussy. We're not in court. He correctly answered your question and gave you more detail.

 

[initforme]

People are going to need help to survive but some of you would forsaken your fellow citizens. Well even our President knows better than this....he is doing a great job, probably the best week of his presidency as far as leadership, he is supporting a check to each citizen. He gets it.

 

[sparky]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

It's the S word.....socialism

and it's because trump wants to buy our votes

~S~

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Your interpretation of the Constitution is extreme and not consistent with current legal case law.

If you want to pout about it, you are welcome to do so

Well, how do you know what my interpretation would be. You won't answer that simple question:

Is growing food in your own backyard for your own consumption in your own home and nowhere else considered "interstate commerce" allowing the FedGov can regulate?

I am asking. You won't answer because you have deficient knowledge and you are way out of your league.



I will answer for you.

In Wickard v. Filburn (1940s), the SCOTUS (8 of the 9 justices were appointed by commie FDR) INCORRECTLY determined that it WAS interstate commerce and the FedGov could regulate it. That Court ignored the specific limitations the Founders intended and basically expanded Interstate Commerce to mean ANYTHING Congress wants to control and NOTHING to the States.

FINALLY, that bullshit holding was overturned in the 1990s, but it took THAT LONG to correct bullshit from the commie-appointed Court. The Correct holding from the 90s Court was that if EVERYTHING is Interstate Commerce, the FedGov has NO LIMITS on power, which is CLEARLY contrary to the intent.

Now, given the CORRECT interpretation of the Commerce Clause, how should the SCOTUS interpret the General Welfare clause??? Should it mean ANYTHING Congress wants to control, or do we continue to try ignoring the 9th and 10th Amendments?

Explain your answer, if you can.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

People are going to need help to survive but some of you would forsaken your fellow citizens.

Oh, don't give me that appeal to emotion horseshit. I don't owe SHIT to anyone but my own family.

Well even our President knows better than this....he is doing a great job, probably the best week of his presidency as far as leadership, he is supporting a check to each citizen. He gets it.

Unlike many, I do not swing from Trump's nut sack. When he is misbehaving, I hold his Yankee bitch ass responsible.

.

 

[OnePercenter]

Total bullshit.

Solid retort.



Again, is growing food or pot in your own backyard for your own consumption "interstate commerce"?

Your answer to this question tells all.

I wouldn't transport pot across State lines.

You have not answered the question.

The question is this:
Is growing food in your own backyard for your own consumption in your own home "interstate commerce" which FedGov can regulate?

Food No, Pot Yes.

 

[OnePercenter]

The money would certainly help a lot of Americans that are not working right now and are struggling to pay bills and buy groceries, especially service workers that rely on tips more than they do an actual wage or salary. The amount of people it would help would outweigh the people that will abuse the $1,000 or don't need it as badly as others but a one size fits all approach like that may not be as effective. In my personal opinion having large amounts of loans sent to small and medium size businesses around the country so that they can continue to meet payroll and pay people while at home would be ideal. I would also suspend federal income tax temporarily so that people are taking home a little more money each week. Just a thought.

Besides miketx buying tranny hookers, how would one "abuse" the $1000.00?

"abuse" might have been the wrong word choice but I guess I meant people who would simply take advantage of the $1,000 versus the people who need it for actual financial survival due to this crisis.

How would someone take advantage?

 

[Lakhota]

Not only is it unconstitutional, it will normalize the freakazoid far left's policies.
People are against it now but start having the govt hand out "free" money to these imbeciles and their politics will change.
"Hey man, this aint so bad. Lets vote for these extreme leftists and get more free shit"
A perfect example is democrats and the welfare system. The "new plantation" as some call it.
Dependence on the federal govt is regressive and flat out stupid.
The "progressives" want to take us back to the 13th century england. A crisis is a perfect way to do it!
Now that you read this, go back to the medias fear mongering.
Good day.

Donate yours to the Biden campaign or poor people. It'll make you feel better.

 

[Dick Foster]

You see young'un, the Constitution doesn't spell out what the government can do. It spells out what the government CAN'T do.

Get your mouth off Obama's dick.

.

He has one? I thought Michelle had it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Food No, Pot Yes.

Why pot? How is that any different than food?

.