Discussion in 'Opinion POLLS' started by Turin, Aug 9, 2023.
Cannot see a dime's worth of difference between them these days.
Go ahead and prove me wrong.
LOL, that's bullshit. the nation involves far more than just the people
well when one is that deluded, nothing will help. leftwing authoritarianism is genocide. prove me wrong
Go ahead and tell us all what else is involved in a nation.
/closes door...walks away
Wrong on all three counts.
1) Healthcare is not a right
2) Healthcare is not an "unenumerated right" under the General Welfare Clause
3) Healthcare is not protected under the 9th Amendment
As for your fanciful reading of the General Welfare Clause, the Founders made it quite clear that the Clause and the Constitution did not cut socialists a blank check a long time ago:
"With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
it's just a flesh wound!!
Still MISGUOTING Madison? That has already been DEBUNKED.
The Founding Fathers started a SOCIALIZED Healthcare system in the nation in 1798 because they UNDERSTOOD that they NEEDED healthy Americans in order for the nation to survive.
It is clear that their INTENTIONS for the Welfare clause encompassed the HEALTH of We the People.
General welfare IS about the people, but it's not about a person. Disaster relief is a good example. I would call the interstate system part of general welfare.
I would say the federal government is doing a shitty job caring for the general welfare. If they were doing a good job, Monsanto wouldn't have so much power over our food supply. That's another example.
I do not recall saying that it was about individuals, We the People is how the Founding Fathers phrased it.
We have Social Security and Medicare which fall under the heading of Welfare for We the People which are better than nothing but still that is a low bar. We need a basic income level for everyone and if corporations cannot pay their staff that minimum level then they must be taxed for whatever is needed to provide their workers with this basic income level. I am not talking about minimum wage but an income capable of covering the expenses for themselves and their dependents.
The reason the government FOR the people is doing a shitty job is because we have enabled corporations to buy our representatives. That must become ILLEGAL in all respects. Zero corporate funding for any aspect of any election and that includes BS like "issue adverts" which are just corporate disinformation election interference.
The term progressive has been vilified by the far right but when you look at ALL the recent PROGRESS that has been made in Congress and elsewhere it is the progressives who made it happen.
But most racists tend to be conservative.
wrong-black racists are prevalent and left-wingers. and liberals push the doubly racist institution of affirmative action. It is racist in the sense that Whites and Asians are discriminated against-and racist in the belief that blacks aren't smart enough to compete against whites and Asians
Yet, I didn't misquote Madison, and the author of the article published at the Loon Left Center for American Progress (LOLOL!!!!) didn't debunk anything, much less the text of the quote I cited.
As for this doozy in the article:
And yet, Ian Milhiser hypocritically fails to produce a single word, sentence or clause from the very text of the Constitution to support his own argument, which means he, like you, has nothing....except your fanciful socialist reading of the General Welfare Clause, which was never intended to be taken in the literal and unlimited sense, as James Madison pointed out.
To further compound his hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness, Comrade Milhiser goes on to hunt through the Framers' statements and cherry pick the ones he likes. Little wonder he deliberately neglected to quote this inconvenient statement made by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 83 (178:
"This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended."
Of course, Hamilton and Madison weren't the only Founders to speak to the limited scope of the General Welfare Clause:
"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
- Thomas Jefferson, 1798
LOL - How amusing to see Lefties trotting out this raggedy-assed old canard again.
This is what Congress established in 1798, and clearly this is a far cry from the socialized/nationalized government-run HC system that power-hungry, statist "progressives" want to ram down everyone's throats:
What Congress understood is that sailors were notorious for contracting communicable diseases in their travels, so they established what were essentially quarantine centers, funded by the sailors themselves, to prevent the spread of the diseases they brought back to port.
Clearly, there is nothing that indicates anything of the sort, be it in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers, etc..
You see, the Founders weren't socialists, or "levelers" in contemporary 18th-19th Century parlance:
The utopian schemes of leveling and a community of goods are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown. These ideas are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government, unconstitutional”
— Samuel Adams
You mean a liberal fascist country, the only fascist I know want government control, one party, put your opposition in jail on trumped up charges, high taxes and high government regulation and control of all industry and business and markets and that is the Dem party here in the US.
Any type of government, by itself, is a religion. It, has a dogma and a mechanism to control speech and thought. The fact that it would have any sort of police force or military cancels it's believe in liberal socialism. Any government that does not protect the rights of it's minority citizens, Free speech & thought, rights to property, freedom of association, or the rights of Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness which does not infringe upon the rights of another is not a government at all.
Never seen any NEWS articles?
Dirideo_te: Republicans are ARMING demented people with AR15's and ABUSING free speech to incite them into committing act of violence. That is well documented fact.
I asked you, where, and you gave me a list of gun violence in the U.S.A. I read and see gun violence in just about every major city with large black populations. The majority of gun violence is black on black. Not really a stronghold for Republicans to be hanging around and passing out AR 15's. Every police officer shooting is not a white Republican cop killing blacks or browns. Republicans are not encouraging young people or anyone to commit suicide. Republicans are not going around the country and preaching domestic violence in minority neighborhoods. You need to take off your two-colored glasses (white and colored) and make an honest assessment of what is fantasy and reality.
I know your going to use January 6th as an example . Lets look at that realistically. How many people marched on Congress with AR 15's? Please answer. How many people marched on Congress with guns? Please answer. How many people that marched on Congress opened fire and killed anybody? Please answer. How many people were taken hostage ? Please answer. How many fires were set? Please answer.
Shall we compare that to the real riots in Oregon, Minnesota, California, etc.
please tell us who were the National SOCIALIST Party?
If you knew anything about true conservatism, you would know that it is NOT about govt control. That would be socialism and fascists. Conservatism is about smaller govt and less central control and protecting personal liberty
Separate names with a comma.