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.
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by OldCorp
You really don't know anything about this country do you? It is ALREADY 50 little countries, as it was DESIGNED to be by the Framers. Each state is an independent, Sovereign State (note the capital S) that has a Chief Executive (Governor) and army (National Guard.) The "individual states" came together for mutual protection and economic benefit; BUT a state may secede from the Union at any time, or reject any Federal legislation they desire. Read the 9th and 10th Amendments.
And it probably worked great for 13 colonies and 1.3 million people.
200 years ago.
Originally posted by IrVulture
Well, I'll tell ya, There are still a lot of us out there, (Behind every OTHER blade of grass), who still have a grip on reality..
A good step in the RIGHT direction would be, Bring back "The Fairness Doctrine"
When the Reagan administration trashed that, That is when things started spinning out of control and we started getting all this ultra right-wing, fascist propaganda from the likes of Foxnews, Micheal Savage, Rush Limbaugh, (and the list could go on and on) under the guise of "Entertainment", And the Republicans will never allow it to be reinstated...Why IS that?
By the way, I consider myself a "Realist", neither left, right or middle. I want what is best for EVERYBODY!
Originally posted by jaynkeel
Originally posted by Annee
Originally posted by OldCorp
You really don't know anything about this country do you? It is ALREADY 50 little countries, as it was DESIGNED to be by the Framers. Each state is an independent, Sovereign State (note the capital S) that has a Chief Executive (Governor) and army (National Guard.) The "individual states" came together for mutual protection and economic benefit; BUT a state may secede from the Union at any time, or reject any Federal legislation they desire. Read the 9th and 10th Amendments.
And it probably worked great for 13 colonies and 1.3 million people.
200 years ago.
And one could say it worked so well that it expanded way beyond the original 13 colonies and 1.3 million people for over 200 yrs.
people that think like you that want the constitution gotten rid of and everything rewritten are now considered terrorists under the homeland security guidelines, you know rebels, dissenters, funny how that blade swings both ways isn't it?
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Destinyone
Is that the best you can do?
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Why would you want to do that? So that media like Air America and Al Franken could still be on the air despite having NO AUDIENCE? Don't even argue this point, my friend - it is simple economics of the broadcasting business. No audience = no show. Why do you think people like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and the people you quote below have huge audiences? Because people like what they say and agree with them. Nobody listened to Franken because his views were extreme left. He failed because a very few number of people liked what he said. Explain to me how that could be, since at least half of people in America are liberals like yourself?
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by AwakeinNM
You give Limbaugh too much credit. He is the howard stern of politics. The majority of the reason people listen to him is not because they agree with what he says, it is because they want to see what asinine thing he is going to say next.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Why would you want to do that? So that media like Air America and Al Franken could still be on the air despite having NO AUDIENCE? Don't even argue this point, my friend - it is simple economics of the broadcasting business. No audience = no show. Why do you think people like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and the people you quote below have huge audiences? Because people like what they say and agree with them. Nobody listened to Franken because his views were extreme left. He failed because a very few number of people liked what he said. Explain to me how that could be, since at least half of people in America are liberals like yourself?
I'll tell you why Al Franken didn't get big ratings. Because liberals don't watch a lot of TV or listen to a lot of talk radio- they're more intellectual. Which explains why the right-wing shows get such high ratings. The less intellectual you are, the more TV you watch. And that's a fact, Jack.
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Wow. Do you really believe that? Why didn't Al Franken just write a book instead of hosting a radio show? Surely he must know this 'fact' about liberals.
I must be a freakin genius because I haven't had cable for the last DECADE. Can YOU say the same?
Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Originally posted by IrVulture
Well, I'll tell ya, There are still a lot of us out there, (Behind every OTHER blade of grass), who still have a grip on reality...
A good step in the RIGHT direction would be, Bring back "The Fairness Doctrine"
Why would you want to do that? So that media like Air America and Al Franken could still be on the air despite having NO AUDIENCE? Don't even argue this point, my friend - it is simple economics of the broadcasting business. No audience = no show. Why do you think people like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and the people you quote below have huge audiences? Because people like what they say and agree with them. Nobody listened to Franken because his views were extreme left. He failed because a very few number of people liked what he said. Explain to me how that could be, since at least half of people in America are liberals like yourself?
See above response. Supply and demand, bud. Simple as that. No one wants to listen to socialist propaganda. The fairness doctrine forces that crap down everyone's throat. Guess what? Even if the FD were still around, NO ONE would listen to those shows.
By the way, I consider myself a "Realist", neither left, right or middle. I want what is best for EVERYBODY!
You want what's best for everybody, as long as they are liberal? I highly doubt you are middle of the road, given the fact that you are pushing the fairness doctrine and bashing conservative radio hosts. If I were to guess, I'd say you were really a flaming liberal.
I thought the Patriot Act violated our God given constitutional rights, I thought sending 165,000 troops to invade another country without declaring war was unconsitutional.......but assassinating American citizens that are chosen for death by the President????
Forcing every American to purchase something that is chosen by the President???? WTHFS (and any other abbreviation you can think to put in there)
Obama’s disrespect for the U.S. Constitution is breathtaking. Not only does he disrespect it — he defies it!
After unilaterally appointing Richard Cordray as director of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), President Obama proceeded to appoint three new officials to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) declaring “I can’t wait.”
While recess appointments are not uncommon, these appointments are only constitutional when the Congress is, in fact, in recess. Obama made these four appointments while the Congress was in session, thereby circumventing the advice and consent of the Senate. This direct violation of the Constitution is a blatant, in-your-face abuse of power and a breathtaking violation of the separation of powers.
President Obama has said many times that he believes his goals are so important that he intends to implement them with or without Congress, through executive or administrative usurpations.
President Obama, it would seem, has crossed into new territory and his Administration, unhappy with the constitutional constraints on Executive authority to direct spending, is now openly violating the Constitution.
The highest law of the land constricts Team Obama’s ability to spend taxpayer money on pet projects that have never been part of any appropriation bill. However, the Obama Administration routinely spends money that has never been appropriated and routinely exceeds the spending limits set by even this spendthrift Congress.
A recent example can be found at Health and Human Services (HHS). Auditors discovered that the agency has routinely spent taxpayer money on projects that were not appropriated by Congress. Of course, the Obama’s Administration is violating the Constitution when it takes these actions. The Anti-Deficiency Act compels large fines and possible jail time for individuals within the Administration that are caught spending money that has never been appropriated.
On Wednesday, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin Dempsey told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the Obama administration would seek “international permission” before engaging in war in Syria. Besides the possibility that it is merely a ruse — as there is growing evidence that the United States may already be covertly involved in Syria’s war — for the United States to seek permission from other nations to go to war is unconstitutional. For that reason, Representative Walter Jones (R-N.C., left) has just introduced House Concurrent Resolution 107, calling for the impeachment of the President if he declares war without congressional approval
Originally posted by Exsisto
reply to post by OldCorp
By the way, so what if Obama is Muslim? Why do you care what religion he is? I mean it's not like any religion has the market cornered on good faith.
Originally posted by OldCorp
Originally posted by Exsisto
reply to post by OldCorp
By the way, so what if Obama is Muslim? Why do you care what religion he is? I mean it's not like any religion has the market cornered on good faith.
I DON'T care what religion he is; but I DO expect him to be honest about it.