Good. Now, keep at it, and punch harder.
[Excerpt]
Obama Denounces GOP 'Pledge' as Echo of Failed Policies of Past
President Obama blasted the House Republicans' "Pledge to America" on Saturday, calling it the same old "worn out philosophy" of tax breaks for billionaires, cutting slack for Wall Street and other special interests, and letting the middle class "fend for itself. . ."
Read more at: Politics Daily
Obama: "America bad. Communism good."
ReplyDeleteHe remains on message, divisive, and against the Constitution, against the interests of the country, against the interests of the people. Always.
And now he's a pathetic whiney loser guy who knows he's toast. Recycled old class and race warfare speeches speak only to the delusioned that still share his twisted marxist vision (19% accoring to polls).
fyi- He punches like a metrosexual.
Huh? This lemon pledge of the GOP is about big business and rich people first. It is the failed policy of the past dressed up in a pretty new brochure. It ignores the recently white-hot issue of deficits in favor of the election season red meat of tax cuts.
ReplyDeleteAs for the metrosexual comment, you're talking to a HOMOsexual, Sofa, so let's just say that doesn't play here, mmkay?
A bit touchy on that topic, huh?
ReplyDeleteWhy do metrosexuals get you worked up?
Sounds like some bigotry issues on your end.
Don't hate them because they're different.
Judge them based on the content of their character.
***
The GOP pledge is as worthless as the many Obama pledges. It's candy for children. Much of it will be neutered by RINOs.
Having said that- The principles are the founding principles of the country. The principles haven't failed. They have been ignored. And now we're in this communist heap of rubbish. The long train of abuses accelerates and deepens.
"We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury."
Sic Semper Tyrannis
No, Sofa, I'm not particularly touchy on the subject. "Metrosexual" isn't an actual orientation--and I hold no bigotry--though I presume you meant it as a slur. I just wanted you to know who you're talking to.
ReplyDeleteThe founding fathers were big thinkers, and set up quite a great country. But they weren't gods. They were flawed, and even created a flawed document. They knew this, setting up the amendment process in order to change the constitution if necessary.
We don't treat black people as 3/5 of a person. We allow women to vote.
There are several things about this country at its founding that we don't probably want to return to. And Sofa, where WERE you 2+ years ago? Why did the tea party wait until after (RIGHT after) Obama was president to coalesce?
The founders were great thinkers and flawed, as all men are. And they created the best government ever, before or since. That's what people are asking for: Let's follow the Constitution, rather than laws repugnant to it.
ReplyDelete“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.”
— SCOTUS Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803
And where in the Constitution does it mention blacks or women? (not sure what you're trying to say)
***
"Why did the tea party wait until after (RIGHT after) Obama was president to coalesce?"
Because we went from slow and steady socialism, which pissed people off, to openly corrupt communism, which made it immediately resemble 1771.
The Tea Parties are a last ditch effort to avoid 1775.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
***
Where was I 2+ years ago? Arguing against Bush socialism, and killing jihadis.
Where was I 20+ years ago? Arguing against Bush socialism, and killing communists.
***
Where do you stand regarding these three quotes from 'founders':
"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government - lest it come to dominate our lives and our interests."
- Patrick Henry
“All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.”
— SCOTUS Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803
BTW- The 'metrosexual' comment was just an objective description. Surely you've noticed.
ReplyDeleteYou kill people? Do you mean you're a veteran? I won't presume to claim any knowledge in that arena, and will defer to you. Not only am I too old, too gay and too uncoordinated to be a soldier, I also have a depth perception problem, so I would've been a washout for several reasons.
ReplyDeleteHistoric quotes are often used to prove opposing points, much like bible quotes. Thomas Jefferson was so prolific, and wrote so many things, quotes can be pulled that make him appear to both support religion, and abhor it (for instance). I'd like to think that if Jefferson were alive to see the Robber Baron era, and the corporatist world of today, he'd think that governmental intervention and regulation of business was prudent.
There was also quite a dispute between the founding fathers, some wanting weak and some wanting strong federal government. The Constitution was designed to fix the weak central government originally in place, right? I took civics, government and US History an awfully long time ago, so I might be fuzzy on the details. But along with Thomas Edison and Albert Einstein, Jefferson was always a heavy favorite.
Your last quote is too vague, although I suppose that a SC Justice is endowed with the power to decide the constitutionality of the law. But they're the only ones who are. For you or me, what is "repugnant" to the constitution would be subjective.
And as I said, the "metrosexual" thing isn't an issue to me, unless you're trying to use it as an insult, a way of calling somebody gay as though it is a bad thing. But there's nothing objective about a term that is entirely subjective, invented, and sort of outdated.
"I suppose that a SC Justice is endowed with the power to decide the constitutionality of the law. But they're the only ones who are."
ReplyDeleteI am a man, not a serf, so I always retain the power to decide for myself. And those judges work for me. That's how we constituted their existence. When they are repugnant to the source of their power, then they render themselves Null and Void.
Many laws are repugnant, as is much of fed.gov. They have rendered themselves Null and Void, and committed many felonies.
If Jefferson were alive today to see Soros manipulate our Federal kleptocracy, he would call for ... Tea Parties, then Tar and Feathers, and then Liberty.
Here's a link about Soros being a good guy helping people dispose of their furniture: http://coordillum.blogspot.com/2010/09/soros-wages-war-for-profit-war-against.html
The 'robber-barons' you speak of are Dems using tools of fed.gov to try to steal from and enslave a nation.
"Stop, Theif!" say I.
***
Noticed you dodged the quotes about the role of government. The pablum about quotes and words having no meaning- is a doublespeak way of avoiding discussion of the points raised.
The quotes are there. Are you willing to discuss them?
Hamilton was the louse who wanted a strong central government and a national bank, and wide sweeping taxation. Patrick Henry said that we just fought a war against a tyrant, why would we replace one with another? (prescient)
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
- Frederic Bastiat
“Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal.”
– Martin Luther King Jr.
More quotes by people to ignore...
There are many more "Soros" types on the right, notably the Koch brothers. . .
ReplyDeleteBut you know what, Sofa? I'm a hobbiest blogger. I'm interested in politics, I'll comment on things that interest me, or where I think I might have some sort of input or unique perspective. I never claimed to be an expert on history or the Constitution. I blog mostly for fun, and this discussion has rather ceased to be.
You can consider my words pablum, or say I'm weasling out, or assign other motives to the way I've interacted with you. I don't care. I've simply lost interest. Please continue to read and comment if you wish. But I'm not going to argue 200+ years of history, the supposed "intent" of the founders, what laws are "repugnant", or your rather unusual views of Bush, Obama, socialism, communism. You're entrenched. Even if I scored a solid hit on one of your points, I suspect you'd never see it. It's just exhausting.
James,
ReplyDeleteI'm sincerely discussing to learn. I'm not 'entrenched' at all, but a true liberal, seeking reasoned debate based on facts.
The views I expressed of Bush, Obama, socialism, communism, the founders intent, and nullification- are mainstream midwest flyover country views, based on my constant travels. It's talking to one another and looking at data, rather than lamestream PR, that has middle America where it is.
Recent polling shows that only 20-30% think Obama is taking the country in the right direction (the same percentage of Torries who thought the King was on track, back in the day). As you are well spoken member of that group, I am sincerely seeking to understand your perspective. Sorry if I've been a pain in the ass. I just really want to get new facts, or get old arguments 'knocked down', so I understand better.
Apologies for being a nuisance.
No apology necessary. I simply spend a ridiculous amount of time online as it is, and was seriously at my limit the day I wrote that. And you vex me, Sofa. You're a liberal AND a tea partier? Bush a Socialist? It is difficult to argue when one isn't at all following the line of attack.
ReplyDelete20-30% think Obama is on the right track because ALL conservatives hate him with the white-hot fire of 1,000 suns (and have since day one). But about half of liberals think he's a CENTRIST, and timid, and we wanted a full-blooded progressive. We pinned a few too many hopes on him, and he performed about half as well as reasonable expectations would have dictated.
But I'd still vote for him over McCain/Palin. I'd have voted for the letter "D" from Sesame Street over a Republican in 2008.