It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Congressman : Let's install a ticking debt clock on the House floor

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded

Originally posted by aching_knuckles
I will answer that as soon as you admit that Republicans ask for as much money as Democrats in earmarks, as proven here:
www.hanlonsrazor.org...

Can you actaully look at unbiased facts, and admit that you have been spreading a lie?

If you can do that, I will answer your question.




Oh I dont disagree. These alleged Republicans are just as much to blame for earmarks as the Dummiecrats. But that is not what we are discussing. And you claim I change topics? Your trolling efforts are baffling!


Do you wish to discuss the 11,320 earmarks for a combined worth of 32 billion that was pasted last year alone now? And who was the president last year? Oh thats right....Obama.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)


You dont disagree? Ive never heard you, NOT ONCE, talk about Republican earmarks. NOT ONCE.

But you never hesitate to talk about Obama, Democrats, and earmarks, like the Democrats are spending money hand over fist, but the Republicans are trying to save money. Please.

Everyone here knows you and how you roll, I hope your buddy neo96 is having fun standing in the background and starring all your posts lol




posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded


You do realize that the Supreme Courts justices are liberally biased dont you? Just because their rulings in favor of these programs doesn't make them legal.


So what? IT IS THE LAW IN OUR LAND. If you dont like it, leave. "Just because their rulings in favor of these programs doesn't make them legal." Uh, according to the Constitution (you know, that thing you keep bringing up as the supreme law of the land) it IS legal.

Its so ironic...you are actually ignoring the parts of the Constitution that you dont like. Love it or leave it! You might be more at home in a military dictatorship or something.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Aggie Man
 





You know that congress has the constitutional power under Article 1, Section 1 to create laws, right?


Um, you may need to re-read Article 1 sect 1.


All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.


A1 section 1 suggests that the legislative powers be vested in the Congress.

Did you mean Article 1 section 8 yet again?


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.





Any you do understand that Welfare is a provision of the Social Security Act,


you answered your own statement, provision, not law.


thus Unconstitutional.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knucklesBut you never hesitate to talk about Obama, Democrats, and earmarks, like the Democrats are spending money hand over fist, but the Republicans are trying to save money. Please.

Everyone here knows you and how you roll, I hope your buddy neo96 is having fun standing in the background and starring all your posts lol





Actually, Im a registered independent. There are views of the left side, that I tend to agree with. Your generalization solidify your arrogance.
edit on 18-4-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

edit on 19/4/11 by masqua because: Trimmed quote



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


Again, this is YOUR PERSONAL INTERPRETATION.
If you think that it is wrong, file a court case. You will lose, and no lawyer would dare take your case, but go ahead and try.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
unconstitutional for this reason. we have property rights in this country

and when the government steal a persons private property(money) to give to someone else makes it unconstitutional.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
unconstitutional for this reason. we have property rights in this country

and when the government steal a persons private property(money) to give to someone else makes it unconstitutional.


Does that count for the land taken from the indians and given to settlers? Just wondering.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


Judicial interpretations are at best for people who are incapable of reading the document themselves.



No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.


Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded Your generalization solidify your arrogance.


What, you mean like this?


Originally posted by Whereweheaded

You do realize that it is your beloved liberal messiah that went into Libya right?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ViperChili
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


Judicial interpretations are at best for people who are incapable of reading the document themselves.



No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.


Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78


See, but again, you are going on the basis that YOU think that these programs are unconstitional.

Our Congress, with its powers granted BY THE CONSTITUTION, has enacted these programs by law, therefore making them lawful, and Constitutional. Im sorry you dont like it, BUT THATS HOW IT IS IN AMERICA.

Just because you think it is uncontitutional does not make it so! Im sorry, but you lost and you are wrong. Get over it.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by Whereweheaded Your generalization solidify your arrogance.


What, you mean like this?


Originally posted by Whereweheaded

You do realize that it is your beloved liberal messiah that went into Libya right?




Thats not a generalization, but more of an observation. But then again, your inability to decipher the two doesn't surprise me.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


well if you want to get technical about the indians never thought they owned the land to begin with

and the other aspect of that was the us gave the indians their own soverignty and made them exempt for the majority of us law.

and the indians have been compensated and still continue to be compensated for the past 200 years.


just how many americans are exempt from us law thesedays



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded

Originally posted by aching_knuckles

Originally posted by Whereweheaded Your generalization solidify your arrogance.


What, you mean like this?


Originally posted by Whereweheaded

You do realize that it is your beloved liberal messiah that went into Libya right?




Thats not a generalization, but more of an observation. But then again, your inability to decipher the two doesn't surprise me.


An observation? Alright, link me to where I said "Obama is the messiah". I'll wait.

Whereweheaded, you are now, in my eyes, the biggest liar on this board, and you cannot ever admit you were wrong, you always have to twist it and keep arguing....you must have a lovely marriage lol. You have lost so much respect from me today. Well, not that much, I didnt respect you all that much to begin with.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles



Our Congress, with its powers granted BY THE CONSTITUTION, has enacted these programs by law, therefore making them lawful, and Constitutional. Im sorry you dont like it, BUT THATS HOW IT IS IN AMERICA.

Just because you think it is uncontitutional does not make it so! Im sorry, but you lost and you are wrong. Get over it.


Huh?

You think Congress makes everything Constitutional simply by passing bills into law?

You cannot be serious.

If indeed you are serious, and have somehow remembered to breathe today, you have a gross misunderstanding of Constitutional law and governmental functions in general.

Wow, I seriously never thought anyone could actually be that ignorant while still choosing to debate a topic.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


well if you want to get technical about the indians never thought they owned the land to begin with



Oh, no worries, then I guess it was cool to rape and kill millions of them. Obviously a culture with no concept of ownership deserved to have everything taken from them.

Oh, and if being on a reservation is no big deal, I guess you wont care when Mexicans immigrate, take over, and put you and yours on a reservation for 200 years. No big deal, right?



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
wow i had it wrong all these years

i always thought congress powers were bestowed upon it by the people in this country.....

wow just wow i cant beleive i had it so wrong i am so glad i came to ats so people would set me straight.



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


A little historical context would be in order here [snip].

Indians were raping and killing each other long before Europeans ever showed up.

You act as if they are all victim and hold no responsibility whatsoever.
edit on 19/4/11 by masqua because: Removed childish name-calling



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by aching_knuckles
 


the only reason your sitting there right now is because of what they did deal with it.

or is it my fault because i am the evil conservative in this thread.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join