alright, TA, responding to the second half.
ok, now, what programs do you have a problem with?
taxation is necessary.
so all we need is reform and oversight.
again, back up the founding fathers argument. show me where they were specifically against the specific things that you have a problem with.
and show me exactly where the founding fathers outlined EXACTLY what they intended...
NWO order hell... fear mongering! wow...
alright, you're right, i do have to deal with all of the crap of what you're doing.
...they didn't really go out to war over taxation...they went to war over REPRESENTATION. they had no problem with taxation, just taxation WITHOUT
now, show me exactly where the constitution says that these things you keep telling me it says. you often bring it up... but you don't cite the
you say you know that much about it... but do you?
it's not just through amendments...
are you aware that we have an airforce... yet an airforce isn't mentioned in the constitution?
you might be saying: "so what?" well... it mentions a ground force... and a naval one. quite specifically...
but nothing about an airforce...yet, we have one. do we need to make an amendment for that one?
Article 1: Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and
general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States
emphasis added... laws dealing with the general welfare... like a universal healthcare law, would be constitutional right there...
airforce is added under common defense
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this Constitution
in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
elastic clause, they can make laws not specifically mentioned in the constitution, yet have to do with it in a way.
now, combine these two parts, and you can add quite a bit without having to go through the amendment process...
that's for the growth in the size and roles in government.
you're kind of wrong here, i just pointed out where the constitution shows you're wrong.
actually... it would be in the role of the states... but promoting the general welfare
amendment 1: free speech and whatnot...
...wait. wait. the constitution is what this country was founded upon?
and then you asked how I
got through school?
this country was FOUNDED on the articles of confederation... which were scrapped when we realized they didn't give the federal government enough
i don't agree COMPLETELY with the constitution. i agree with parts. this does not make me a domestic enemy, it makes me someone who is pushing for
you don't want me to come back?! you need dissent. this country wasn't founded on the constitution, it was actually founded on dissent...
you keep telling me it's so good... and that things would be better would be better if you followed it to the letter and things would coming together
how? show me a line of causation
...dissolve an institution that promotes the general welfare? the good doctor clearly hasn't read article one.
education in the hands of parents?
well, clearly voting on education is stupid. example: science. science isn't democratic... there is a very vocal 40-55% of this nation that doesn't
believe in science, and they would put a stranglehold on the proper teaching of biology... oh, i forgot that ron paul doesn't believe in
[short tangent] i kind of care if a candidate wishes to embrace reality... this one fails to[/short tangent]
we've seen things hijacked... and then there are the book banners... parents tend to be outraged over small things like a book that mentions graffiti
that is a 4 letter word... honestly, you'd put education in the hands of the book banners and ignorant. education shouldn't be handled by the
general populace of a nation that is quite...well...ignorant.
blind leading the blind and all that.
you'd also create a problem... failing schools. this system fails to address schools that are failing the students. they'd still lack funding...
even more so without federal funds. many schools are so starving for the federal government funds that they would entirely fail without them.
the parents shouldn't be telling students what they need to be learned.
we may need education reform, but the american people aren't educated enough.
here's your provision: promote the general welfare. i already quoted it before. add the elastic clause.
show me a successful free market healthcare system that is superior to the system in france... or how about one superior to the one i'm currently in,
this isn't about protecting people from themselves... it's for drug companies to not deceive people.
you've yet to think outside the box on this issue. you're compartmentalizing this.
see... you used the word "believe". now, back up that belief.
and then you go on a tangent about "if the constitution was followed" etc etc.
but you can't necessarily say where we'd be. nobody can... because nobody is omniscient in that way.
oh, you're right. we should get rid of the standing army. biggest reduction we could make. we could put the money into the hands of the people AND
put forth my policies!
now, you've been earnest and i understand where you're coming from... but i don't see any reasoning behind it. show me something harder. you talked
about substance... now put some into your responses.
and you said the income tax isnt' constitutional...
well... i hate to break it to you:
Amendment 16 (1913)
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and
without regard to any census or enumeration
it's 100% legal. it's right there in the constitution. a strict constitutionalist would be forced to follow it.
[edit on 1/9/08 by madnessinmysoul]