|
Post by HawksStock on Sept 9, 2008 20:30:18 GMT -6
By now all of you know I hold the constitution over any political party and hold it far (Far Above any Party)
So the theoretical question is, What can we do to return to a constitutional republic.
1. Understand that we are the minority.
2. Do whatever you can to get republicans to vote, at least they understand that you have pretend to at least be constitutional to be viable.
3. Only strict constructionists can, they may not agree with you, but their disagreements will be a "constitutional opinion", ie death penalty is is cruel and unusual, their opinion will not in any way subvert the wording of the constitution. (it will be a true difference of opinion).
- You will also agree if their something in constitution that you agree with you will stump for an amendment, and in doing so understand that any congressional change in the law that violates the wording is wrong. Amend it. Or deal with it.
_any deviation brings the possibility of mob rule. THIS INCLUDES THE PATRIOT ACT. those provisions were put in place for a purpose.
Be an American, drive those dumb repubs to the polls, but know who the real threats are.
Were you to ask me who was the biggest threat, Obama or bin laden, keep in mind Killing the constitution is far worse than anything else. Buy it's time to understand that the fed can only legally tax for 3 thing... and anything else is treason.
the constitution is the law of land, thank you Madison.
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Sept 9, 2008 21:02:06 GMT -6
Nothing can be done to restore a constitutional republic. Once the cat was out of the bag on Commerce Clause jurisprudence, there was no putting it back in. Don't worry, Obama has promised to review unconstitutional laws, I'm sure he'll go back and analyze the coercive Executive Branch FDR ran and undo laws the Supreme Court accepted under duress. Then, the Social Security and Medicare liabilities that will confiscate one-fifth of the national resources of anyone under 40 years old will disappear.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Sept 10, 2008 7:18:08 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by HawksStock on Sept 10, 2008 20:01:45 GMT -6
If you truly believe I''m a repub than you should have hope.
1 trillion would have gone a long way in building nuclear plants. Choose Voting or choose capturing is the question.
I read all of your suggested reading and you have read the one i asked you to (I assume). you see the countries hinge as president, I see the hinge as the SCOTUS. I am sure of that you are not an idiot, and when I treated you as such, I did not realize you could change your name... we're both aware of that.
But knowing the values of libertarians, excuse me, repubs who can not stomach the vomit it requires to vote repub, than you know are position. Constitution in the literal sense first.
So why use the term libertarian, when placed so incorrectly. I sincerely hope we would be gaining ground on the repubs... 1 % to 2%. You're kind are our biggest enemies, but were not looking to take votes from socialists, were looking to take votes from capitolists (pretending to be capitolists..
Socal, we want to return power to states, systematically strip power from the legislature, and be within a stones distance from where our money is going. We are polar opposites, disagreement is ok, why ride the middle. Some day the lukewarm will see my side over yours. at least I will believe it.
Then we will have true debate, until then lay off, let racists like obama be racosts he stand no chance. Then reactionaries like me and socialists like you will have a chance for true debate.
A few days ago (NO LIE) i had repub tell me Ron Paul was scary, she brought up civil union, It was then that I realized the closeness and the distance between our ideology. I support absolute freedom, you support freedom where someone is able to take away the fruits of your labor and give it someone else.
there is some common ground, the patriot act, social "liberalism" etc. (DON'T IMPEDE ON ME AND i WONT CARE.
Let us be us, the quotes "" around liberalism or libertarianism display ignorance. "we don't like the cost of the war either"
You already got a clue, start displaying it, instead of pretending that any strict constructionist could ever vote for our satan (obama). Vote for him fine, but ally us with those big gov. repubs, and your just an idiot spouting bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Sept 10, 2008 20:25:05 GMT -6
Vote for him fine, but ally us with those big gov. repubs, and your just an idiot spouting bullshit. I have no idea where I would have made the connection... Perhaps #2 in your list of things to do, along with other posts where you allied yourself. ...Or maybe it was just a dream.
|
|
|
Post by socal on Sept 10, 2008 20:33:38 GMT -6
A follow-up:
|
|
|
Post by HawksStock on Sept 10, 2008 20:39:15 GMT -6
#2- no you are correct, for me who gets my vote I ally myself, for others it my be who I drive to the polls. In accepting (what I consider the lesser of 2 evils)a candidate who at least promises strict constructionists, I drive Mccain supporters to the polls.
#1-m you are right my beleif that anyone who cares would look for a stripped down federal gov. That is not the case. just remind yourself when it comes to gay union, abortion, free speech, reduction of our physical influence overseas, etc. I am on your side. And think it is ridiculous for anyone who claims for fiscal responsibility would support the current US obligations. We need to represent, only ourselves.
What costs less is morally correct, I'm not Stephen colber and this is not a joke, what would a trillion dollars do for our people, enough said. Anyone still supporting war, please read the last sentence...
What would 1 TRILLION do?
|
|
|
Post by socal on Sept 10, 2008 21:23:31 GMT -6
#2- no you are correct, for me who gets my vote I ally myself, for others it my be who I drive to the polls. In accepting (what I consider the lesser of 2 evils)a candidate who at least promises strict constructionists, I drive Mccain supporters to the polls. #1-m you are right my beleif that anyone who cares would look for a stripped down federal gov. That is not the case. just remind yourself when it comes to gay union, abortion, free speech, reduction of our physical influence overseas, etc. I am on your side. And think it is ridiculous for anyone who claims for fiscal responsibility would support the current US obligations. We need to represent, only ourselves. What costs less is morally correct, I'm not Stephen colber and this is not a joke, what would a trillion dollars do for our people, enough said. Anyone still supporting war, please read the last sentence... What would 1 TRILLION do? Less than HALF of the money spent in Iraq would have paid for every single project dreamt up (from formal proposal to doodles on the backs of napkins) by City/State governments. Instead... not so much. Where you are misguided - is that I could care less about this wasteful spending. Unlike you (in the most generic sense), I can recall countless arguments I've made over the past many years - about the rampant waste. For an example, I'll go back 4 years to the non-perfect statement by Kerry: "I voted for it, before I voted against it".... Those easily distracted by the shiny object that was his artless sentence - failed to look at the realities contained in that statement. And the repercussions. The bill he voted for was an Iraq supplemental that had a clause asking for oversight on the $18 billion assigned for Iraqi reconstruction. The bill he voted against was an Iraq supplemental with the same exact $ amount going to the same things... but didn't have that supplemental included. .......And what happened to that $18 billion? A good portion of it - (363 tons of $100 bills) was palletized by the Federal Reserve and flown to Iraq and promptly lost/stolen/given away. Either way, the money was wasted. (Shortly after taking power, questions were finally asked: abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2852426) But again... 4 years later, people are being distracted by the shiny objects strewn about by the McCain campaign. In the end, if the money is going to be spent... I'd rather it be spent in the US - on its citizens, than literally given away in 100lb bricks to someone that might (and likely did) use it to kill our soldiers. Or given back to the citizens in the form of improved infrastructure / schools / (and my new favorite argument... mass transit), instead of thrown away in the rampant cronyism & big oil subsidies (which now seem to be paid back by cocaine/sex/kickback schemes for the regulators). After that, we can discuss how best to argue for/against items on this chart: www.wallstats.com/poster/Such as... is the ultimate morality/good behind Social Security (which would be perpetually stable if the surplus wasn't being used to keep the Government's lights on) better or worse than the outlays for Iraq and a missile defense shield in Poland? FYI/FYA... I started at this site (below) a while back ($82 million researched so far... but I've been slacking of late). www.sunlightfoundation.com/
|
|