THE POLITICAL ARENA!!! Political Gladiators Inside!!

[songsmith]

YOU MYOPIC PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL NIMROD.

Who you calling MYOPIC?

I had Lasik surgery.

That's awesome. I owe you a beer for that one.

[lonewolf]

With the deepening problems in Europe, a financial crises can come about at any time. For the time being, that would be good news for US interest rates because we are still considered the world's safe haven for the short term.

So predictable:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... bond+rally

[Banned]

"President Obama Thursday quietly notified Congress that the government needs another $1.2 trillion to continue operating.

That’s both irresponsible and unpatriotic of him.

How do I know? A presidential candidate named Obama told me."

http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/0 ... patriotic/

Ronald Hussein Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times. George Hussein Bush Jr. raised the debt ceiling 7 times.
Are we really re-litigating the events of last summer AGAIN? Shall we Youtube every candidate on their promises and such, because I bet Ronald Hussein Paul sent out a few newsletters that he regrets...

Notice he ignored the total hypocrisy of Obama. I do not think johnny boy is able to respond to anything about Obama without referencing Reagan and Bush.

I guess democrats and liberals find it OK to criticize something about another president, but then go ahead and do the same thing. No wonder they are going to get clobbered in this election.

[songsmith]

Notice he ignored the total hypocrisy of Obama. I do not think johnny boy is able to respond to anything about Obama without referencing Reagan and Bush.

Please use the Search function, and find a reference to your criticism of Bush during Bush's first or early second term. There is only support for Dubya, until the catasrophes starting coming on hard in 2007. By January 21st of 2009, you forgot who Bush was, or that he ever existed. Instead, suddenly, it was Obama's War, Obama's debt, Socialism, etc.
Frankly, I'm surprised you even mentioned Reagan and Bush. I thought they didn't exist.

I guess democrats and liberals find it OK to criticize something about another president, but then go ahead and do the same thing. No wonder they are going to get clobbered in this election.

I guess it's okay for extremophiles to defend and applaud the debt under an extremist rightwing regime, but then get all dicky because the next president does exactly what they forced him to do.
Obama vs Romney in November. Obama wins DECISIVELY.

[Banned]

Use the search function and you will find posts where I called for Bush to be impeached for acting like a democrat. Many times. Bush was much more of a democrat than a conservative. He should have been impeached for that alone.

You still have ignored the fact that Obama called Bush irresponsible and unpatriotic for raising the debt limit and then did the same thing. I guess hypocrisy is fine is you are born in Kenya.

[lonewolf]

In the final analysis, Bush was right up there with LBJ and FDR, with emphasis on LBJ.

Bush started more unpopular wars, but his big social programs weren't as big as LBJ's.

[songsmith]

Let's not forget the tax cuts and wars that put the debt where it is, and the cronyism/lack of oversight that scuttled the economy.

[songsmith]

Use the search function and you will find posts where I called for Bush to be impeached for acting like a democrat. Many times. Bush was much more of a democrat than a conservative. He should have been impeached for that alone.

You still have ignored the fact that Obama called Bush irresponsible and unpatriotic for raising the debt limit and then did the same thing. I guess hypocrisy is fine is you are born in Kenya.

I wasn't being rhetorical. You defended Dub-Dub VERY strenuously, until it became obvious even to the right that they weren't going to win because of him. Any suggestion on this forum that Bush be impeached at the time was met with howling accusals of treason and unpatriotic ideas. BY YOU. Any criticism of your boy got people called "Bush-haters," and we were all told to go live somewhere else if we didn't like it. Now, like all Tea Party-lovin' talkshow fans, you pretend you hated Bush the whole time.
You still have ignored that Reagan raised the debt limit EIGHTEEN TIMES. He also raised taxes more than Obama.
Love the Kenya references, too. Keep doing that, it really drives home to people where your head is. You need to stop viewing me less as pro-Obama, and more anti-YOU.

[Banned]

I wanted Bush impeached because of ideological difference, not because he might not win. I had thought he was a conservative, interested in smaller government. WOW, WAS I WRONG. He was no different than the Marxist Obama, government and government spending is the answer to all problems.

You did hate Bush. It was pathological. Same as your hatred of Sarah Palin. She has absolutely no control over your life, yet you bashed on her like you did on Bush.

You should have loved Bush, he increased government spending and the national debt. Not as much debt (in the first term) as your Kenyan, but more than enough to qualify him as a honorary democrat.

[lonewolf]

Let's not forget the tax cuts and wars that put the debt where it is, and the cronyism/lack of oversight that scuttled the economy.

Oh, and medicare and medicaid and "The Great Society" didn't have anything to do with it, I'll bet.

I didn't forget. Did you not comprehend this:

"Bush started more unpopular wars, "

[Banned]

Let's not forget the tax cuts and wars that put the debt where it is, and the cronyism/lack of oversight that scuttled the economy.

Oh, and medicare and medicaid and "The Great Society" didn't have anything to do with it, I'll bet.

I didn't forget. Did you not comprehend this:

"Bush started more unpopular wars, "

Yes, the lack of oversight of Fannie and Freddie, government run pseudo-corporations. The lack of oversight on the Federal Reserve System. The democrats in congress fight Ron Paul every step when he just wants to audit the FED, which has never been done in 98 years.

Yes, I agree, lack of oversight of this corrupt government has scuttled the economy.

[songsmith]

Don't cry, Emo-kid, Newt was on the case with Freddie Mac, so it's cool.

I've been waiting for something from you yay-hoos that still hasn't been approached... the entire field of rightwing candidates are career politicians. Even Mitt, who's been touting his years as a corporate raider, is in his SECOND run for president. Just two short years ago, it was all about throwing out the bums, and replacing them with new blood. Now, since the Tea Party couldn't get a dogcatcher elected, the hardliners just want more of the same.

I did hate Bush. I'd like to point out, however pointlessly, that I was right the whole time. You preened and pouted and accused me of wanting the terrorists to win. It wasn't pathological, you don't even recognize your own pathology. It was correct.

[Banned]

Who gives a flying fuck about Newt? Freddie and Fannie, darlings of liberal government destroyed the housing market, a prime cause of this economic slump.
FYI-- Newt is not a conservative. He is a big government republican, just like Bush, Romney, Perry..... Ron Paul is the only candidate who wants to limit the size of government.

As for long time politicians, look what a community organizer rabble rouser got us. Hey really knows what he is doing.

[Hawk]

Random thoughts on a Sunday morning.

Don't forget, Joe was FOR the Patriot Act before someone told him he should be against it. Given his propensity for relying on hindsight for his decision making (as apposed to foresight) what he says now has nothing to do with what he'll say next year.

Ron Paul has no chance of ever being President. There is safety in supporting someone who will never have to make decisions the president has to make. Leaving Joe free to be constantly in "attack mode".

As I understand it Fanny and Freddie were responsible for making long term mortgages possible. Like 20, 30 year terms. That was a huge boon to the housing market. It was the sale of bad loans by lenders who had no responsibility to "cover" the loans to companies that bought the bad loans (packaged and hidden with proper loans) that caused the bubble and eventually caused the bubble to burst.

The Supreme Court Judges are not elected (I know - you already know that) they are appointed. Super Pacs will buy congress and likely the Presidency and they in turn will appoint more supreme court justices. It was the Supreme Court that created the ability for Super Pacs to exist.

The US democracy will no longer exist as our founding fathers envisioned our representative approach by and for ALL of the people. They will represent the people who have lots of money.

If the Liberterians would only see that their liberty is being impacted by the congress that the Super Pacs bought and paid for... When we should be joining together to get big money OUT of government. I'm FOR people with big money including the 1 percenters. What I don't like is their greater influence on Government than the average man.

The grass roots revolution should be to get big money influence OUT of our federal government. Then the election process will be on a level field and the people can decide if people like Ron Paul belong in a presidents role.


By the way, I still think Mitt will pick Newt for VP. Super Pacs in conjunction with the behind the scenes Republican one percenters have chosen Romney (as I predicted a long time before the Iowa caucus) and they have (as I hear the likes of Limbaugh) picked Newt.

[songsmith]

Random thoughts on a Sunday morning.

Don't forget, Joe was FOR the Patriot Act before someone told him he should be against it. Given his propensity for relying on hindsight for his decision making (as apposed to foresight) what he says now has nothing to do with what he'll say next year.

Ron Paul has no chance of ever being President. There is safety in supporting someone who will never have to make decisions the president has to make. Leaving Joe free to be constantly in "attack mode".

As I understand it Fanny and Freddie were responsible for making long term mortgages possible. Like 20, 30 year terms. That was a huge boon to the housing market. It was the sale of bad loans by lenders who had no responsibility to "cover" the loans to companies that bought the bad loans (packaged and hidden with proper loans) that caused the bubble and eventually caused the bubble to burst.

The Supreme Court Judges are not elected (I know - you already know that) they are appointed. Super Pacs will buy congress and likely the Presidency and they in turn will appoint more supreme court justices. It was the Supreme Court that created the ability for Super Pacs to exist.

The US democracy will no longer exist as our founding fathers envisioned our representative approach by and for ALL of the people. They will represent the people who have lots of money.

If the Liberterians would only see that their liberty is being impacted by the congress that the Super Pacs bought and paid for... When we should be joining together to get big money OUT of government. I'm FOR people with big money including the 1 percenters. What I don't like is their greater influence on Government than the average man.

The grass roots revolution should be to get big money influence OUT of our federal government. Then the election process will be on a level field and the people can decide if people like Ron Paul belong in a presidents role.


By the way, I still think Mitt will pick Newt for VP. Super Pacs in conjunction with the behind the scenes Republican one percenters have chosen Romney (as I predicted a long time before the Iowa caucus) and they have (as I hear the likes of Limbaugh) picked Newt.

Truth.
Excellent post, Bill. There's no way to wriggle out of it that doesn't look like crazy back-peddling or soft-shoe.

[lonewolf]

The Supreme Court Judges are not elected (I know - you already know that) they are appointed. Super Pacs will buy congress and likely the Presidency and they in turn will appoint more supreme court justices. It was the Supreme Court that created the ability for Super Pacs to exist.

Yes, well, that's what activist courts who legislate from the bench do.

As long as they interpret the Constitution abstractly as they have done since 1937, you can expect these kinds of rulings.

As a Constitutionalist, I object to all decisions made with the abstract use of its text in the name of "implied powers". The concept of Implied powers is necessary, but it has been abused to to point of rendering the Constitution relatively useless.

[songsmith]

As a Constitutionalist, which I assume sees the Constitution as a static document, how do you feel about the Second Amendment?
Once upon a time, before the Civil War, it was viewed as enumerating a citizen's right to fight for his state militia, presumably against the FedGov. During Reconstruction, the FedGov wanted to disarm the former Confederacy (who had obviously lost the war, and were kinda pissed off), and the Second Amendment was used as their defense against disarming. In addition, state militias are no longer necessary, with creation of the National Guard.
So, is the original intent the REAL meaning, or is the current one; and how do you view the evolution of a static document?

[lonewolf]

Strict Constitutionalist view of 2nd amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State,

This preamble explains the scope of and the reason for the amendment. "State" refers to any of the several states and, presently, Federal law defines "Militia" as:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html

According to law, militia is NOT limited to National Guard.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed.

Since it specifies "the people", this phrase prohibits all governments within the United States from making any law prohibiting its citizens from keeping arms on their person without due process of law.

It does NOT grant Congress any right to regulate or prohibit arms whatsoever.

[f.sciarrillo]

Obama is counting on the super pacs to get him elected. I bet if there was a republican Pres. The supreme court would never had passed the law. Yep, it is a double standard.

[songsmith]

Strict Constitutionalist view of 2nd amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State,

This preamble explains the scope of and the reason for the amendment. "State" refers to any of the several states and, presently, Federal law defines "Militia" as:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html

According to law, militia is NOT limited to National Guard.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed.

Since it specifies "the people", this phrase prohibits all governments within the United States from making any law prohibiting its citizens from keeping arms on their person.

It does NOT grant Congress any right to regulate or prohibit arms whatsoever.

I'm not sure at what point I personally limited militia to the National Guard, though I did in fact say that militias are no longer necessary. The National Guard, directed by state governors, renders torch-and-pitchfork militias unnecessary. (As an aside, militias will be all the rage in about a year. )
Nor did I specify that the Second Amendment grant Congress the right to prohibit anything, only that the intent and focus changed from that of a declaration of the right of a people to rise up against the government, to a statement that individuals have a right to carry a weapon for any reason they want, anywhere they want.

How are you on the 14th Amendment? You must believe that if an illegal immigrant comes here and gives birth, that child is a US citizen, subject to the rights and privileges accorded US citizens (as well as the repsonsibilities, we may touch on that later). Right?
And the 4th Amendment? Is race probable cause for stopping brown people in Arizona? Doesn't that same amount of probable cause entitle government law agents to stop YOU?

I know, I know. Too many questions, I have to learn to toe your line and jump through your hoops 'cause you don't want to have to think too hard, but... give it a shot.

[Hawk]

Obama is counting on the super pacs to get him elected. I bet if there was a republican Pres. The supreme court would never had passed the law. Yep, it is a double standard.

Seriously ? The Republicans cheered the Supreme Court decision while the Democrats were against it. Where were you when this occurred ?

I don't like Super Pac money for Obama either. I don't like that influence on our government in any form.

[lonewolf]

Strict Constitutionalist view of 2nd amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of
a free State,

This preamble explains the scope of and the reason for the amendment. "State" refers to any of the several states and, presently, Federal law defines "Militia" as:

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html

According to law, militia is NOT limited to National Guard.

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
shall not be infringed.

Since it specifies "the people", this phrase prohibits all governments within the United States from making any law prohibiting its citizens from keeping arms on their person.

It does NOT grant Congress any right to regulate or prohibit arms whatsoever.

I'm not sure at what point I personally limited militia to the National Guard, though I did in fact say that militias are no longer necessary. The National Guard, directed by state governors, renders torch-and-pitchfork militias unnecessary. (As an aside, militias will be all the rage in about a year. )
Nor did I specify that the Second Amendment grant Congress the right to prohibit anything, only that the intent and focus changed from that of a declaration of the right of a people to rise up against the government, to a statement that individuals have a right to carry a weapon for any reason they want, anywhere they want.

How are you on the 14th Amendment? You must believe that if an illegal immigrant comes here and gives birth, that child is a US citizen, subject to the rights and privileges accorded US citizens (as well as the repsonsibilities, we may touch on that later). Right?
And the 4th Amendment? Is race probable cause for stopping brown people in Arizona? Doesn't that same amount of probable cause entitle government law agents to stop YOU?

I know, I know. Too many questions, I have to learn to toe your line and jump through your hoops 'cause you don't want to have to think too hard, but... give it a shot.

Who said my post was about YOU? Not everything is about YOU. As a matter of fact, very, very few things are about YOU.

You asked for a Constitutionalist's view on the 2nd amendment and you got it. Anything more than I put would just be supportive or redundant.

[lonewolf]

Amendment IV: I do not believe that race by itself is probable cause.
Amendment XIV: I suppose you mean the Section 1, 1st sentence:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United
States and of the State wherein they reside.

Not all persons born in the US are subject to its jurisdiction, nor to the state in which they were born.

Since nothing in the Constitution establishes these jurisdictions, you must move on to Section 5 of the amendment for the remedy:

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate
legislation, the provisions of this article.

This grants Congress the power to legislate the rules under which a person is subject to US jurisdiction. For instance, if Congress wants to deny jurisdiction to a person born to a foreign national, it has every right to pass such a law.

If a state law conflicts with such a federal law, the federal law trumps the state law via the Supremacy Clause.

[Hawk]

If a state law conflicts with such a federal law, the federal law trumps the state law via the Supremacy Clause.

I think the Giants are using the Supremacy Clause right now !


And corporate welfare / tax loopholes must be the Santa Clause.

[Don Hughes]

Use the search function and you will find posts where I called for Bush to be impeached for acting like a democrat. Many times. Bush was much more of a democrat than a conservative. He should have been impeached for that alone.

You still have ignored the fact that Obama called Bush irresponsible and unpatriotic for raising the debt limit and then did the same thing. I guess hypocrisy is fine is you are born in Kenya.

Um... since when is doing things against your political affiliation an impeachable offense???