Beto O’Rourke Not Sure the Constitution Still Works

From the same crowd that still is concerned with Bush?

Hold on...I'll let you google "hypocrisy".

 

Weak, very weak. Bush's war and stupid tax cuts are beyond debate. Obama's legacy is looking better all the time considering the moron you have elected. Nothing makes a President look better than being followed by a traitor.

 

Beto O’Rourke Not Sure the Constitution Still Works.

That pesky constitution keeps hamstringing those law makers. The founders wanted limited government and Beto and his ilk want all they can get. I really miss that greatest generation.

 

Beto O’Rourke Not Sure the Constitution Still Works
No candidate in 2020 should be disqualified for wondering if our Constitution still works. After experiencing six years of Republican obstructionism against Obama, and two years of ineptitude & incompetence under Trump, I'm wondering whether the Constitution still works myself. Instead of harassing those who care enough to wonder, maybe we should be more concerned about those who don't.

 

Essentially, what he has hit upon is that the U.S.functions in an extra-constitutional manner. That has been the problem for a long time, and what many have objected to without necessarily having used this exact terminology. Especially conservatives, I think, are upset with most of these aspects. Certainly, a huge standing army and such extensive foreign involvement of it is not enshrined in the founding documents.
The very fact that the government gets shut down at all should merit firing every member of government responsible for it, from Representatives to Senators to Presidents. They are not carrying out their Constitutional obligations. And where does the Constitution turn over every aspect of government to two corrupt parties?
Beto or not Beto is not the question.
Whom we can vote for with a good feeling inside while doing it is the question.
In any case, we would have to go beck to the Constitution and work by it for a while to see if it needs an update.

 

Why do you keep saying Bush's war when the woman you voted for also voted for the same war?

Once again, Hillary Jr. I ask you to google "hypocrisy".

lol

 

Um perhaps because Hillary wasn't President and didn't deliver the lies to justify the war. Try googling stupidity in case you need to undersatand the futility of your equivocation.

 

Of course Hillary wasn't President...she was just a vote for the war. She had two options: Yes, and No.

She chose "Yes".

Happy to cite not only her vote, but her reasoning behind it!

Keep in mind...you voted for her

 

Keep in mind you voted for a President who has now lied 8,000.00 plus times in two years. Including but not limited to claiming that North Korea is no longer a nuclear threat and of course his latest bit of stupidity that ISIS has been defeated.

 

Well that was quite the deflection...

I believe you were the one who defended Hillary's vote for the war in Iraq?

Or are you claiming she was much dumber than Obama (he voted 'no')?

If that's the case, I would agree.

 

Lord knows Beto doesn't want to be pinned down to principles, laws or the Constitution too early. Did he cover boxers or briefs yet?

 

Sorry but it was your claim that voting for the war by Hillary was the same as Bush's starting a war that was absurd. And by the way if you actually bothered to read the resolution that Hillary voted for you will rapidly learn that she did not vote for a war but rather voted to give Bush the authority to do what he deemed necessary to protect America.

Try reading the actual resolution. Education will be your friend.

 

I'll debate it. What was stupid about them?

 

She supported using our military to remove Saddam by force, by war.

 

So you want to get rid of the Constitution too not preserve and protect it as would be required under the oath of office. Maybe instead of a President and a Congress a King?

 

Try reading the actual resolution. It will only take you a few minutes.

 

They accomplish nothing except raising the defecit. And yes they did raise taxes on capital gains for about one year after Bush did it and then government revenues fell off a cliff. And yes Trump got a few quarters of increased GDP but look at forecasts for 2019. And Trumps corporate tax cuts went over 80% to share buybacks and dividend increases while having little or no impact on Capital expenditures or employment.

So to put it simply the tax cuts do make the rich much richer at the expense of the deficit.

 

The rate cuts were passed with a four year phase in they didn't go into immediate effect. And that was a mistake they should have been. But they corrected that in 2004 and fully implemented them in 2004 and revenues growth went through the roof and the deficit fell to a measly $161B. We collected DOUBLE the capital gains tax revenue at Bush's 15% rate than at Clinton's 29% rate.

And we have one of the best economies ever with everyone working and paying taxes and expansion across the board.

Simply put they work everytime we us them. Its the HUGE government spending increases and tax rate increases that don't work as the Democrats proved starting in 2008.

 

When you can actually post any evidence that they work you will be worth listening to . Meanwhile it is beyond dispute that they add to the deficit.

And which hugh tax rate increases did the Dems impliment in 2008?

 

I just did when you can refute the facts you will be worth listening. Meanwhile it is beyond dispute that not only did they contribute to the revenue explosion during Bush43's term, 15% in 2005, and that paltry $161B deficit in 2007 they also worked for Gingrich and Kasich where they actually produced budget surpluses. I said HUGE spending increases, their 10% in 2008 and 20% in 2009 along with their tax increases. Even Bill Clinton's tax rate increase slowed the rate of tax revenue growth.

 

Did it authorize military force to be used to remove Saddam and his government? Yes. Did Hillary support that? Yes. Go read the resolution and her speech.

Or perhaps listen to her go against and argue with Code Peak who went to her asking her not to vote for the war and her unequivocal response that Saddam would never disarm, that he had a passion to posses WMD and the we had to lead the way.

You can skip to 6:30

 

I have no clue how you concluded that from my post. That's exasperating. Of course I support the Constitution, though I recognize it's not perfect. It's worked rather well for America for 232 years. But it's had its failures too, such as four minority Presidents elected thru the Electoral College system--two in the past 20 years. That simply doesn't reflect the will of the American voters, or our "democracy." I have no enthusiasm for abandoning the Constitution, but I would like to see it updated in support of democracy instead of the status quo--at least for Presidential elections.

 

No it didn't. It authorized Bush to do what he thought was necessary to protect the US. It was solely Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq. And you can find no wording in the resolution saying otherwise.

And the disarm was about chemical/ biological weapons not nuclear which was Bush's war justification. And of course no chemical or biological were gound either despite that lying SOB Powells TV bit of hypocrisy.

 

….and who says Democrats aren't racist?

 

I wouldn't worry about Beto too much.

UNLESS, he can't raise money and nobody votes for him.