Saturday open thread
Super-duper-busy today with non-bloggy things. Talk amongst yourselves and don’t put your feet on the table. 
Posted in: Uncategorized
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Obama, Geithner, Congress Squandering Confidence Needed For Recovery « Peace and Freedom Global Future
- Obama Budget Explodes Debt, Taxes, CBO Admits | OpenMarket.org
- Obama preparing to ‘overhaul financial regulation’ « Peace and Freedom Global Future
- AIG Sues Taxpayers for $306 Million - AIG paid $218 million in bonuses last weekend, higher than the $165 million that was previously disclosed « Goodtimepolitics
- Wall Street Journal: “Geithner Incapacitated;” President Voices Support « Peace and Freedom Global Future
- Hollywood Hero Chavez Seizes Airstrips and Ports by Force | The Great Illuminator
- The Next Dem Smokescreen: Fannie/Freddie Bonus Hype to Cloud Role in Financial Mess | The Great Illuminator
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Uncategorized
Big Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump Scandal
Villainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Big Government
» Why Isn’t Anyone Really Investigating ACORN?Big Government
» ACORN Scandal, Part 2: The Evidentiary PhaseMudville Gazette
» War costs money (2)Green Room
» Going Un-Framed?Mudville Gazette
» Surrender, he whispered
Yes, but I said Butler was the beginning of the process. “Shortly after Butler, in Helvering v. Davis, the Supreme Court interpreted the clause even more expansively, conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to its own discretion.” It went downhill from there…
Then maybe you should have quoted Helverling v. Davis. Because what general welfare means versus whether or not the tax and spend power is a distinct power are two wholly different questions. But I guess “the Davis did it” isn’t as catchy, hmmm?
But in any case, it is still not true that Congress is not restrained by the “general welfare” clause. The court just decided that Congress was probably a better judge of that than an individual state or the court. Which I am sure you would support. We don’t want activist judges, right?
Let’s pretend that this is true. If that’s the case, shouldn’t Michelle be leading the impeachment charge instead of organizing tea parties? Where’s Glenn Beck? Sean Hannity? Where’s Rush?
Also Papa Louie, I am curious if you could point to the “established precedent” that Butler supposedly overturned. Butler was the first time, I believe, the Court addressed the issue.
This would besome a part of her permanent record for sure, but I think you’re being a little harsh. She’s a sensitive creature who thinks of others, and is – for example – worried about the environment.
“Before I found out a rubbish burning plant was going to be built right underneath my window, I did not think about ecological issues at all….After it sunk in that I was going to have to breath in filthy air, I began reading a lot about the issue.”
If someone can convince her that nuking Poland would produce a retaliatory nuke under her window, she’ll read a lot about the issue.
“So I drink champagne after whisky. And wearing nothing but stockings and flag of Cuba. This is my way of finding adventures.”
And this woman worries you?
That is the sexiest thing I have ever read.
Chapoutier:
Disclaimer first; I am unfortunately ignorant of these court cases being discussed and do not know any more than what I read here. It is interesting, though.
That said, it sounds more like a failure of checks and balances to me, Chapoutier. The Supreme Court’s major function is to keep the other branches of the federal government from violating the constitution. If it sits there and says “The Constitution means whatever the legislative branch says it means,” we have a problem. Taken to an extreme, anything Congress says relates to that particular clause becomes okay. It’s for the general welfare, so let’s take the leader of our political opposition, search and vandalize his house without a warrant, take away all his property, and throw all his associates in jail! It improves the general welfare! It’s the Supreme Court’s job to provide the reality check and put a stop to that.
An activist judge would be a judge who makes rulings based not on what the law is, but on what that judge thinks it ought to be. For example, an activist judge sympathetic to PETA might sentence somebody to jail for wearing wool when that person comes to court for a speeding violation. More realistically, an activist judge might disallow the death penalty due to personal conviction even if the legislature has specified that it’s an option for that offense.
JT #63–Hilarious. I think I’ll give em Ben Dover & Seymore Butts. I may even ask them what the State tax rate is in NC–doubt they pay taxes. Obama wants to rush everything through before the fit hits the shan. I don’t believe he’ll last 6 months and the lame stream media will be so embarrassed they’ll turn on him–slowly starting to happen. Repubs are a bunch of kiss a## dirtbags too.
No. That is how the debate is often framed. An “activist” judge is one whose interpretation of an ambiguity in a statute (such as what exactly the hell does “general welfare” mean) happens to not coincide with the side doing the labeling.
You’re kidding, right?
The following is a poem allegedly written byFORMER Judge Roy Moore who had been sued by the ACLU and removed from the bench in Alabama for refusing to remove the Ten Commandments from the walls of his courthouse.
I have not taken the time to search on SNOPES or any other such site to see if whether or not he is the author is true, for whether or not he actually wrote it means nothing toards how true these words are, how how much more truthful they become with every passing day that the Obama Administration remains in office. Enjoy.
So, in case you are wondering about this country becoming a banana republic, here is a small example.
I absolutely am not. “Activist judge” is such a silly canard, at least 95% of the time. And anyone that understands anything about the inherent ambiguity and imperfection in the law and how difficult it is is to apply to real life situations would know that.
Later all. I am off to the bar.
Kinda like what the Democrats were aiming for when they wrote the bonus tax law, so it wouldn’t be easily over-turned; only thing is, I don’t think Jusitice Roberts will be quite so acquiescently naive.
Have a good time now chap and don’t drink and drive, be a good citizen, or is that asking you to be too much of a conservative?
that’s an opinion nothing more, I also don’t think your being honest with yourself about that statement, left leaning defensive maybe, but not an accepted known. How is it you libs always make your selves seem so much better than anyone else especially a conservative, as you did when closing your above quote?
I would like to bring up the whole Socialist/Marxist take over of this country since Obama took one of the Oaths of Office in January.
As Michelle told us all a few days ago, and as was once again shown a few comments up, Obama and his minions have decided the best thing to do is to go door to door, hit the malls, the grocery stores, parks and anywhere else people congregate and make them give over all their personal information such as name, address, e-mail, etc. as well as intimidating people who refuse by writing down whatever info they can and video taping the procedures. They are doing this as a way to have people “Pledge their LOYALTY to Obama and his agenda”
For anyone who feels this to be a harmless little ploy, I would like to point out that this is not a project that is unique. It is not something he just thought up and has never been done before.
In fact, it is a favorite ploy of Communists, Socialists and Fascists throughout history.
Ask the Vietnamese what happened to them after we left their country with the broken vow of coming back if the Commies broke their word. Ask those who lived through Nazi Germany, Pol Pot, Idi Amin etc., etc., etc. They all had to sign loyalty promises as well. Ask them what happened to those who refused to pledge their allegiance to their leader. Ask what happened to those who swore allegiance to their country, but refused to pledge it to a man.
Listen to that video and hear the words they are using. Listen to how they are directing their little Blue shirts…yes the color they have chosen is not brown or red, but blue like all his campaign garbage and logos…to act and the instructions they give. These people are beyond scary. They are devious and demented.
So the next time anyone tells you that your are paranoid or a racist for thinking or saying these things, just point out the historical aspects of what they are allowing to happen and tell them that they have no one but themselves to blame for it.
I know, I know…we are all just paranoid little conspiracy theorists, right? Of course there would never be any type of organization, group, website or anything out there that would advocate violence or anything else in the name of Obama.
Certainly not something that calls itself the Obama Forum. Why, they are just a grassroots organization that is spreading support for the President. And the Obama Youth Brigade is definitely not something that exists.
So you need not go and look at it and definitely do not call it one of the scariest websites on the net.
I will not submit! I will not answer their questions, I will not waste my time in conversing with them as some on here have suggested, in an attempt to take up their time. These type of actions taken by these indoctrinated kool aid drinkers may just be the start of the 2nd American Revolution.
If you get back in time, I’d like to see an example of the kind of case you’re thinking of. I do believe there is such a thing as “interpreting the ambiguity of a statute” in a way it is extremely obvious the legislature didn’t mean, but some laws are written badly, meaning imprecisely, too. I think you may mean a situation in which I, personally, would not call the person an “activist judge.”
I think it’s pretty obvious “general welfare” was not supposed to mean giving money to private individuals or incorporations because otherwise they might go bankrupt. (Thus, an “activist legislature.”) I also think it’s pretty obvious it was never supposed to conflict with the Bill of Rights, ie “Lock up guns for general welfare.”
And there it is kids…Der Fuhrer has now, officially, called for regulations on just how much money a person in allowed to earn.
The hallmark of Socialism/Communism itself, he has decreed that limits need to be placed on how much a private industry will be allowed to pay any of their employees.
All of this in only two months. Just imagine who will be next. What part of the population will be the next to be told how they are allowed to live, where they are allowed to live, how much money they are not only allowed to make, but to have.
Exactly how this could possibly be Constitutional escapes me, but things being Constitutional has never stopped the man who need not prove citizenship, nor does it seem to even matter in this country at all anymore.
So…have they begun to raise the price of ammo yet? You know…supply and demand and all.
I wonder where the Chinese get those clothes with those stupid little hats…might want to invest in that company while you still can.
So, did anybody have any Obama zombies lurch up to their door? Today was the day –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EglMVfUB74
I would like to impart a couple thoughts/opinions on events over the past few months.
1. The powers that be (Globalists, The Elite, Banks and International Corporations) have truly invaded our daily lives at an alarming pace.
2. Their agenda (One world economy and government) is on a fast track for implementation. You don’t have to listen to me. The media is broadcasting their agenda openly now. They really don’t care about what we think, say or do anymore.
3. The Tea Parties that are popping up all over the country, Glenn Becks 9/12 project and general civil unrest are all very noble and patriotic. I am starting to believe they have planned for this and are probably expecting worse (riots?).
4. We are heading into VERY hard times and I firmly believe it would be prudent to prepare as best you can.
5. Be very careful not to get caught up in the daily media circus that causes brief and quickly forgotten outrages. PAY ATTENTION to what is happening behind the scenes on a long term basis (weeks and months). This is what the powers that be don’t want you to see.
6. I don’t believe I am a conspiracy nut. I would like to believe I am a realist.
7. What are your thoughts on these matters?
Yes, wealth redistribution is actually “specific welfare.” When interpreting the clause, it is important to use the vernacularc of the era. This is an excellent blog entry on the topic, if you’re interested. http://www.connorboyack.com/blog/general-welfare
As for activist judges – the SCOTUS decision that allowed roadblocks for DUI checks is a prime example. The majority opinion clearly says that it is an allowable violation of our individual rights, meaning that our rights were no longer something we are born with. Now, they’re permissions.
Roe v Wade is another case of obvious judicial activism, as is the entire New Deal spending plan…which had been ruled unconstitutional multiple times previously.
I am very paranoid of the possibility of agent provocateurs in the ranks of the dissenters. Conservatives don’t riot and get violent by nature, but there are lots of whispers about revolution these days, and I fear it might be a ploy to take us out of the action.
It is absolutely surreal to think that I just typed that…to think that I believe that.
There is confrontation in the air.
On March 21st, 2009 at 10:49 pm, MarcoPolo said:
I am glad I’m not the only one daring to think (it does seem surreal) that this might be one huge set up. I hope I am wrong!!! I just have a bad feeling in my gut.
Ahhhhh….
I am beginning to see a number of “I’m just worried that some members of the Conservative movement might get… revolutionary…” posts on blogs here and there.
I wonder if the hand-wringers prefer the status quo.
It isn’t as if liberals haven’t been violent. Yet, nary a peep of concern from folks.
What exactly are people worried when it comes to Conservatives flexing their civil rights?
Who is John Galt?
Still no evidence in the local or national media about the Tea Party tax protests but everyone reported this.
Naturally, it was reported this way.
I guess it is not important to “journalists” that ordinary taxpayers are rising en masse to protest an explosion in wasteful government spending or that international communist organizers are staging public protests attended by professional protesters.
Sorry, wrong link. Let’s try it again.
I should have added that the protests they refuse to report are attended by tens of thousands while the ones they do report are attended by hundreds.
Geitner’s Assistant (Replacement) Coming
From the Chicago Tribune
95% eh? Yes I remember both Justice Steven Bryer and Bill Moyers pulled that number out of nowhere.
Just as Plussey v. Fergeson was wrong -activist Justices wanted segregation so made an Extra Constitutional ruling to achieve it- so ACTIVIST judges are wrong today to find Extra Constitutional ways to satisfy their personal views be it school busing, abortion or state budgets.
“…inherent ambiguity and imperfection in the law ” is no justification to make up law as we go along. That is a point some of my Conservative Law and Order types need remember. To a large degree we Conservatives passed the RICO laws the liberals use to bite us on the butt. With this Eric Holder at Justice I fear the Patriot Act will be used to silence Obama’s critics.
Our Founders put a lot of thought and effort to avoid …inherent ambiguity and imperfection in the law … and NOT rule by judge, prosecutor or King. They WANTED a cumbersome system-the purpose of the Constitution was to limit power; they feared a strong judiciary, President and Congress. Notice they deliberately avoided the British Parliamentary system.
Good Bye America-you will be missed.
—
Keep the change-I’ll keep my guns
Those are the phrases that worry me.
For one, the media will call them terrorists, and not patriots.
It will work against us in the court of public opinion.
On March 21st, 2009 at 11:19 pm, RogerCfromSD
“What exactly are people worried when it comes to Conservatives flexing their civil rights?”
Great question. The concern I am speaking of is not wether or not we conservatives have the right to assemble and voice our grievances to the government. My concern is that our “peaceful protests” could be artificially prodded into “violent protests”. The probable outcome of such an event (if it were to take place)would not be in the best interests of our constitutional goals.
Violent Protests/Revolutions should always be a LAST RESORT and never ever discussed lightly!
Which is why some of us thought it was such a horrible idea at the time.
What’s the Franklin quote – “Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither?”
Someone mentioned that gas prices are rising and oil rigs are coming down. I wonder if BO notices that there will be off shore drilling in Cuba and what affect it will have on our blessed green earth? Doesn’t BO realize we breath the same air as Cubans. I believe seriously we are in the last days and our freedsoms will erode as the coming of the true anti-christ is looming shortly.
Serious: Communists vs. The U.S. Constitution
Comic Relief: Dog Diary vs. Cat Diary
The media and the liberals are AT WAR with us ALREADY.
They will use their propaganda to make us look bad no matter what.
Worrying about having to make a certain type of appearance is what’s held us back from acting.
NO MORE. We will rally, we will march, and we will do whatever it takes to get our Republic back.
Because things are bad NOW. Not next year or next decade. Now.
So, those of use who have decided to take a stand won’t be hampered by what might be or could be. Just what will be.
If that makes people uncomfortable, good. Taking a stand is not an easy thing and should be viewed with seriousness.
It’s time we gave as good as we’ve gotten.
Marco,dddave,Roger,
Weird thoughts have been running through my mind as well. The Pres. is supposed to be a Constitutionalscholar. Isn’t it interesting that he and Congress keep doing things that don’t jive with our understanding of the constitution?
This latest bill concerning executive compensation is a good example; it is clearly not constitutional yet they, who swore to uphold the Constitution, signed it. Interesting that our Pres. was at the front of the protest mob out for the blood of these execs. Strange (unless on purpose)that our President is addressing everything butour financial problems. Eerie that he keeps encouraging class a warfare mentallity. Portentious that he has asked for far reaching powers because of this time of crisis. I saw a blurb on that last run across the bottom of the screen on FoxNews yesterday. Today across the screen ran the news that the Feds are nationalizing two Credit Unions. My conspiracy theories are; Obama will get veto power (already proposed by Sen Feingold, Cong. Ryan, and Sen. McCain regarding earmarks) and someone will start talking about extending presidential term limits. The veto power I predicted before he got elected. Lifting term limits is really crazy but I have a bad feeling in my gut which started when Obama was speaking in Germany (remember how much they loved him and wanted him to be ruler of the world?). Hope I’m wrong.
Yes, and I agree that we want to accomplish our goals peacefully and legally. Our Supreme Court is our best hope. Peaceful and loud protests are a way to get heard. Also calling, writing and emailing our elected officials, especially calling because it makes them uncomfortable to have to talk to a constituent.
I pray that we are wrong about Obama, and that things stay peaceful and legal.
However, he seems to be doing everything he can to prove us correct. Congressional Dems, as well.
We have to keep up the pressure or things will go awry.
Why? Because those of us who understand what is going on and who value freedom will not fit in Obama’s new society.
That means one of two things: We fight in whatever manner we are forced to fight, or we surrender our freedom.
I’m not a soldier. But I am a father. And, what I wasn’t willing to do when I was younger for myself and my country, I am more than will to do for them now.
So… If it means flying to Washington and demonstrating, or blogging, or participating in Tea Parties, I’m in. All the way.
I hope millions of other Conservatives are in, too. With sufficient numbers, the media will be unable to dismiss us, and Congress will have to take us seriously. We will show our so-called representatives, and our fellow Americans, that we mean business.
Sims,
The disregard for our constitution by congress and the POTUS has been ongoing slowly and quietly for decades. It is just blatant “in your face” in the last few years(includes Bush with his vast array of presidential directives). Your thoughts on veto power and term limits are very perceptive (look at Chavez). I hope you are wrong also!
I agree. It is not just blatant and in our faces but there now seems to be a tone of daring as in; what are you going to do about it?
It’s late and I gotta go. Thanks to all for the chance to get some “stuff” off my mind. I guess Glenn Beck has it right. We are not alone!
God Bless us all and God Bless the USA and the republic for which it stands!
On March 22nd, 2009 at 12:00 am, sims said:
Fascist Dictator Checklist
And there’s already a bill in Congress to repeal the 22nd amendment
(i.e., repeal Presidential term limits)
Wow, Red. Thanks for the link. My fear level just took off for Jupiter.
sims,
My advice?
Understand where fear comes from, and rebuke it.
This battle is a spiritual battle.
Godless Communists are trying to take down the greatest nation on Earth, the United States of America, a nation that was founded on the Bible and Judeo-Christian principles.
Spiritual Warfare is Real, but Don’t Worry…Be Happy
(havent read through any comments today)
Did anyone else catch this news story? We’re going to be having A LOT of “activists” showing up at everything and everywhere from now on.
For all of those independents and RINOs that didnt have a backbone when the Republicans were in charge, they are about to be overwhelmed by the tsunami that is going to hit them in about another month.
After what has gone on in our government for the past few months (especially the last week), I hate to admit it, but Bill Ayers may have been on to something………
So they aew already planning ahead to 2016, huh? Wow…talk about wishful thinking. If they think he will still be as popular as he is right now, regardless of how fast he is plummetting, or that he is even going to make it the first 4 years without people finally being fed up enough to where they are allowed to oopen his files and have him and the whole lot of those who knew and/or were involved with the action itself or at the very least, the cover-up, they truly are smoking some serious hippie lettuce.
The only way he will make it past the first 4 years is out of serious tampering with the elections and even greater fraud from all angles.
.
This is way too funny and bizarre! I sent this to Michelle already.
In case you haven’t already been amazed by the Obama and Unicorns Art Phenomenon, I thought you all might get a kick out of this.
http://rjart.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-and-unicorns.html
Wild, wacky stuff! Very funny and bizarre!
Enjoy!
USpace
.
absurd thought -
God of the Universe says
deify your dear leaders
they are supernatural
with magical qualities
.
Are we there, yet?
hey, uspace, how about this
They are afraid that Conservatives will turn “Revolutionary” Just what the hell does THAT mean? It seems to me that the Liberals have been calling for some sort of Revolution for nigh on 50 years now. Are we to understand that the onl form of revolution they will accept would be one that finds the Constitution of the United States of America in flames on the ground after being trod upon?
Are they or were they expecting that since we did not take to the streets in counter-protests against their childish temper-tantrums against Bush and Iraq that we would always stay silent and never stand up and defend this nation against them and their blatant destruction of the Constitution, this nation and everything that made Her great and powerful?
That’s got to be it. We have been quiet for so long, letting them get away with everything for so long, their temper-tantrums, their thrashing of our nation, it’s tenets, it’s historical figures and heroes and it’s very history, that they honestly have reached the point where they thought they could do and say anything without any repercussions. They just have reached the point where they assumed we would just sit idly by and let there grand messiah force through their Christmas Wish List that has been developed for almost 50 years.
They groomed Obama from the start, with the aid of the Main Stream Media got him put into office and are feeding him their agenda and allowing Reid and Pelosi to pull the strings. They weakened the Republicans over the last 8 years with lie upon lie, aided further by the media, allowing for the general public to feed on whatever the news and newspapers said, no matter how big the lie or how far-fetched the subject matter.
They created the “perfect storm” in Washington and, feeling emboldened by the things they have been allowed to get away with since the Clinton’s first took office and felt that the status quo would remain and the Conservatives and others on the Right-Wing would just sit by and let it happen.
Now that people on the Right have finally had enough, they are starting to show fear. Soon, they may even realize that they went too far. The fear is there, they are already beginning to have grumblings in The Congress to that effect, and the Rank and File Liberals are now coming out hoping that we do not fight back.
Well, fight we shall. I, like so many others here and elsewhere have had about all I can stomach of the Liberal agenda held strong by their Thought Police.
Revolution? Will it come to that? Time will tell. I may not be one that calls for it, but you can be damn sure that I will be right out in front if and when it starts.
Every Revolution starts with words, starts small. It only takes one small spark…that last straw that breaks the camel’s back to fire it off. Not sure yet what that will be, but rest assured, their messiah and his handlers are doing everything in their power to make sure that there will be plenty of straws available.
In 60 days he has brought this nation to the brink. There is no telling where we will be after 60 more, and I, personally, cannot even envision things going this way for another 4 years.
So yes, they should be scared. They should be very scared.
Why is this obvious? Often times helping a few benefits society as a whole. I don’t see how this point is arguable. As to your second example, I cannot think of one time the tax and spend power has ever been used to compel people to lock up their guns.
Marco, that link you provided was somewhat interesting for the first part, i.e., what is the proper definition of “general welfare”, though certainly not very deep. The best he could come up with was a Websters dictionary half a century older than the Constitution?
As to the second part of that discussion, it totally ignores the fact that many of the founding fathers held the exact opposite view of the tax and spend clause, i.e, that it was a power separate and distinct from the other enumerated powers. This was in fact the dominant view in Washington’s administration (especially Hamilton). And is the view that has been dominant throughout US history, and more or less codified in US v Butler.
Susie Chapstick really isn’t a drunken lawyer he just plays one on the internet.
sheesh.
Sufficient to say that “tea parties”, phone calls to congressmen, letters to editors, community rallies, local paper oped’s, civil disobedience, bumper stickers…and anything else you can think of…must be the daily plan of action from here on out. Make it impossible for the MSM to ignore the story!
Presidents of the LDS Church have been singing this tune since atleast the 1930s, calling Fascism, Socialism, and Communism 3 faces of The Adversary’s plan to enslave Heavenly Fathers’ Children. Particularly strong opponents were Pres. Spencer W. Kimbal and Ezra Taft Benson. Indeed, they fought against it, and had American Civics & Cobstitutional History classes set up around the Country to teach church members the beauty of our Republic. The Scouson [sp?] book “Five Thousand Year Leap: Constitutional Civic 101″ came from that effort.
Then the IRS rules were changed, and teaching Constitutional Studies became illegal. We’ll see if it comes back, though…
When I went to school, they (so very long ago) were taught as facits of the same system, and all “Leftist” as it were (though the term was different then…). Now, the NAZIs are taught as a varient of Conservatism? Talk abt rewriting history! And the Progressive movement, which lead to eugenics is lionized, even though it was one of the pillars of NAZIsm — along with the push to Vegitarian movement, anti-smoking, enviromental wako-ism. Just look at the State produced propaganda posters from Germany at that time. Everything we have today, incl. PC. Ol’Adolf would be proud to bust!
As a parent, who VOLUNTARILY pays taxes… This H.R. 1388 is pure SLAVERY! And I will not have any part of it, NOR WILL MY CHILDREN!!!!
And IF they decide otherwise… Let he who cast the first stone, come bring it!!!!!!
Four thousand attend Orlando Tea Party.
Still no reporting in the MSM. At least, unlike in LA, their local paper picked it up. Out here, they only report anti-war rallies attended by two guys named Joe and Naomi. If no one shows up, they report it anyway.
I saw a clip of BHO stating that the AIG situation was like a person straped with a bomb and who needed his finger eased off the trigger.
ACORN is protesting outside AIG exectuives’ homes. Just waiting to come to a neighborhood near you. Nothing like having unemployed, entitled people being used to promote the socialist agenda. When do the riots begin?
It’s been pretty obvious what has been going on in D.C.. First, they grab a “senator”, with no foreign experience, and very little national experience, then elevate him to the presidency. Meanwhile, in the background, they are telling him exactly what to do. How many times has that happened in world history? Too many times to count. Obama is, more or less, a “figurehead” president. He wants to be an 8+ year president badly. He’s already started a “campaign” for reelection. That’s another trick up their sleeves. He better jump, when they say “jump”, or find himself out of government entirely.
I thought it obvious because the Constitution was intended to set strict limits on the power of federal government, and the power to take individuals and “reward” or “punish”
them is a whole lot of potentially abusive power. The practice is usually associated with monarchies and dictatorships. In fact, the ability to write laws to apply only to certain individuals could be argued to undermine the rule of law entirely, and to even more directly undermine the principle of people being treated equally in the eyes of the law. Cronyism was something the Founding Fathers disliked about monarchy and were trying to avoid.
I do not see where it is arguable that I, who made the responsible choice to rent an apartment because I could not afford a house, should have money forcefully taken from me to “help out the few” who made irresponsible decisions and bought houses, in some cases extremely nice houses, they could not afford. It’s not even to help them eat and move into more affordable places for them; it’s to help them keep the houses, while people in their same financial situations who kept themselves within their means still have the less nice stuff they could actually afford! Essentially, punishing those who were responsible with their money. But “charity” and sob stories score political points; responsibilty and self-reliance, or encouraging them, don’t.
I use fictional examples of what could be in order to define terms and demonstrate precedents a law could be setting. I deliberately go a bit further than anything that I think actually happened in order to demonstrate the point, because if it already happened:
a) A detail could undermine the point. Here I am trying to define a term or demonstrate a concept, and somebody knows the one reason that case wasn’t an example.
b) Somebody obviously thought it was a good idea, and I won’t be able to properly define the term or demonstrate the concept to the exact audience I am most desirous of reaching! I wasn’t going to demonstrate the basic idea of what an activist judge did by using something some of the audience might think was okay. I needed very clear-cut examples to demonstrate what I thought the term meant. Even if I think a real-life case is clear-cut, somebody in my audience won’t, so if I use those cases, nobody is ever going to know what I think the terms mean, or how to argue me out of using the particular term in a particular case, or exactly what I mean I think has happened when I use the term.
I don’t even think I was talking about “tax and spend,” just the general welfare clause.
I do think that the “assault weapons ban” is a violation of the Bill of Rights. However, if I used that as an example, the immediate answer from somebody, somewhere, would have been “No, it’s not!” and I would not have gotten my conceptual point across.
I am now going to stop typing and ask if I’m making the slightest bit of sense, and if I’m not, where I’m not.
Mike.musculus:
Vegetarianism is reliant on the power to purchase the food one wishes to eat and is that form of capitalist protest known as a “boycott”. Little mustaches are not intrinsically evil, either.
I’m not disagreeing with the main point, however. Communism is fascism with good publicity.
The issue is not about rewarding or punishing. That is your emotion transposing itself on the decision. The issue is about whether or not Congress thinks that propping these entities up is essential, or even just beneficial to the US. You can debate the wisdom of their determinations as to how helpful this is, and certainly there is no mandate that Congress spend, even if something is undeniably for the general welfare. However, as the court in Helverling v Davis recognized:
Michelle, you are missing the boat by focusing so much on AIG, bailout, and bonuses while the House just passed HR 1388 which will eventually make volunteering mandatory, even for us older Americans. Unless I missed your article about it. It is truly frightening.
This is why we need to have more protests. Let’s do it until the watercooler chat is all about it.
Let’s have local protests too. The big ones at state capitals are good, but let’s also have them everywhere. That also lets people who otherwise couldn’t make it attend. (For example, Austin is 4-5 hours away for me, but Dallas is less than 1 hour.)
Let’s don’t stop there, Let’s spread this to smaller cities as well. If the media will not cover the story, then let the people themselves see it. If your town is too small for a protest, then have one at the county seat.
Put up signs, rent billboards, write to the local paper, bring up the topic with like-minded friends, make youtube videos, make tshirts…
Don’t be silly. Point to any provision in that law that even hints of mandatory service.
And while you are at it, since you seem to be paranoid about ridiculous things, can I sell you some robot insurance?
http://www.kathleensings.com
Kathleen Stewart singing “It Ain’t Your Money to Spend”
Great song!
Does AIG sell that? I’ in! Now to find a robot to insure.
“If we had some bacon, we could make bacon and eggs! If we had some eggs.” Curly Howard
Are you telling me you don’t think the AIG 90% taxations are punitive? At any rate, in a way, you’re right. It’s not about the rewarding or punishing itself, but the POWER TO reward or punish political friends and enemies. Power corrupts.
It’s not about whether Congress thinks propping up particular entities is essential or even beneficial to the US, either. It’s about whether they have any right to impose their views of what’s best indiscriminately on the fruits of the people’s labors. They don’t. They don’t have any more right to prop up Planned Parenthood or the banks than they have the right to prop up the Catholic church or the Rush Limbaugh show or any given entity you don’t like, Chapoutier. That’s individual rights. “You can debate the wisdom of their determinations as to how helpful this is, ” but it doesn’t change the argument of whether or not they have the right to do it, whether or not it is legal to do it, or whether or not it is safe for them to have the power to do it. It’s not about the merits of what they’re doing. It’s about them having too much power, and that’s what most people miss when they cry “For the children!” and “Don’t you have any compassion?”
The money should go to what the citizen who earned it thinks is beneficial and helpful, NOT to what Congress thinks is beneficial and helpful. The government taking as many of the people’s assets as they think are “necessary and beneficial” and throwing them wherever they think best isn’t good for anyone.
Chapoutier:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/house-readies-passage-volunteerism-critics-pricey-forced-service/
It is better than using the definitions that appear in dictionaries written 200 years after the Constitution was ratified. That’s the whole point.
We’re supposed to have a small Federal government. The government was created to protect us from our enemies, not from reality.
There were a plethora of SCOTUS cases that prohibited public funding of social causes. If the constitution hasn’t been amended, then the jusges that overturned their interpretation, largely because FDR was threatening to strip them of their powers, were activist judges.
Question to Chapoutier and NestingHawk:
Did either of you guys see the exchange between Texas Congressman Jeb Hensarling and AIG CEO Liddy during the House Financial Services Committee hearings last Wednesday? If you haven’t, do it now. It might help redirect your discussion into a more productive line of argument.
Rep. Hensarling completely demolished the “too big to fail” argument and cornered Liddy into describing what he is doing as a bankruptcy proceeding without bankruptcy law protections. Of course, he didn’t frame his answer that way but had had he been asked to define “bankruptcy”, Liddy would likely have provided that same answer in those exact words.
Anybody want to read a pretty cutting take on the financial meltdown? It’s from Rolling Stone, and the writer is left-leaning. He doesn’t come down hard enough on Washington, or dwell enough on the money that flows into the campaign coffers, but all in all it makes an excellent case for buying precious metals.
(OK, that last part I made up.)
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/1
The sad part is that he’s making the case for expanded federal power, when the best colution would be to allow each state to regulate, and keeping the federal government away from it all. We were fine before Washington took away the power of the states.
The money should go to what the citizen who earned it thinks is beneficial and helpful, NOT to what Congress thinks is beneficial and helpful.
Where can I see it, Pasadena Phil? I don’t have cable. My comp doesn’t always get along with video and I may be busy for the rest of today, but if you provide a link to a video I’ll try when I get a chance.
That cuts right to the problem. These companies grew to be “too big to fail” because regulators bought into the globalist argument that our banks needed to consolidate in order to successively compete against foreign banks. Lost in all of this consolidation were the very well-crafted checks and balances that kept the system afloat for over 60 years, the Glass-Steagall Act.
Once again, as in government, centralization has been proven to be a failed strategy. Big is not necessarily more efficient, especially if it stifles the cultures that create value when these companies are small. They just become wobbly corporate governments ruling over unmanageable assets they know little about. They lose sight of what business exactly they are in.
Correction: I meant “successfully compete” not “successively compete. (No matter how many times I proofread my comments, I always miss something.)
NestingHawk: I’ll try to find it. Be back.
Here it is.
His point that “AIG is a conduit for interparty transfers” is critical to this whole AIG bailout rather than forced bankruptcy.
Also note the word “disaggregation” as a euphemism for “breakup the company”.
This was a classic exchange. Rep. Corker opened these hearings with excellent point too.
Not everyone in Congress is crooked and/or stupid. Proper reporting would help. (Don’t hold your breath).
Nestinghawk,
That language has specifically been removed. See link here, which tracks the versions of legislation through Congress. Fox News is, unsurprisingly, wrong.
Those are stupid analogies. Rush Limbaugh is not the largest provider of reproductive health to low income women in the US. Nor is Rush Limbaugh the largest insurer in the United States and one of the largest in the world.
And for your information, I have no issue with Rush Limbaugh, or the Catholic Church.
After watching
Dolores Umbridge, Christina Romer, head of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, all weekend I am all sugared out. Lose the smile and bubbly attitude, lady, when talking of such absurd economic notions. It won’t make your musings any more coherent, but I won’t disdain the sight of your face so much…maybeAt least Rush Limbaugh isn’t a mass murderer and covering up for rapists.
And he’s a far less effective tool of the patriarchy than Planned Parenthood.Providing reproductive health to low-income women? Is abortion what you call reproductive health?
Is Rush Limbaugh the largest provider of political knowledge to low-income citizens?
AIG is NOT doing good by managing itself so badly it runs out of money. It’s bad at what it does, and if the free market were allowed to operate, it would be replaced by something better. I do not think putting money into AIG is a good use of my money at all. But at least Rush Limbaugh educates people about that waste, right?
However, again, with the argument that you feel Planned Parenthood and AIG doing good and you feel Rush Limbaugh is not, you’re making the argument that the government should do a particular thing because you feel it is best and you feel it contributes to the general welfare, not on whether the government ought to have the power to take away the money of private citizens to do these things. It makes me sick that my money funds abortion and embryonic stem cell research. A lot of people feel just as strongly as you do about their pet conservative organizations doing a lot of good for the general welfare, but does that give the government any right to take away your money to fund these things?
I’m unclear on something. Are you okay with government money going to the Catholic church? It kind of sounded like you were, but that would surprise me
Wrong. I am making the argument that Congress can make the determination as to whether subsidizing Planned Parenthood or whether ensuring the largest insurer does not fold is providing for the general welfare.
Wrong. I take no position on Rush.
Wrong. Again, I am saying the Constitution give Congress the power to determine if something is in the general welfare. I can certainly disagree whether or not what they do is wise or useful, but again, that is a question of wisdom, not power. I can also disagree as to whether something is or is not for the general welfare. Okay…but who ultimately should be given deference for that decision? Elected congress people? Or judges?
And…..Wrong. That is not my argument. That is pretty much the plain language of Article 1, Section 8. Go argue with the Constitution if ytou want, not me.
If and when the Catholic church performs duties that benefit the general welfare, such as adoption agencies or soup kitchens or whatever, I have no problem with them getting grants. I supported Bush’s decision to open up the grant process to faith based organizations. I support Obama’s continuation of that.
I sent this letter today to my Congressman and both Senators.
This week I observed something I thought I would never see happen in my country. I watched the Congress of the United States act like a lynch mob to cover up their total failure to do something they should have never involved themselves in; namely the bailout of selected companies in a free economy. People like me literally begged you not to do what you did last fall.
Rather than correct the situation you and the Executive Branch continue to attempt to manage something you are totally unqualified to manage. What exacerbates the situation is you are no longer public servants, whose first concern is your oath of office, the well-being of your constituents and the country.
Your punitive legislation to single out a small group of people and retroactively tax them and using rhetoric that resembled what you would hear from a mob is a clear indicator that you do not care what private citizens are summarily punished and endangered so that all three of you can protect you precious political careers.
In our society we uphold the principal that a person is innocent until proven guilty. You have turned your back on that human right. Did you ever care to consider that among those at AIG that you have “punished” there might be an individual who deserved a bonus of some kind for keeping his or her unit from imploding or doing extraordinary things that made a situation from going from bad to catastrophic? Just like Wake Island and Bataan there are principled men who do extraordinary things in a losing battle. We honored such men. There were Russians who conducted themselves with similar gallantry in WWII, but ended up being punished by the State, because their unit’s losing in battle embarrassed their government.
Congratulations gentlemen, because that is the kind of government you have become. President Obama appears ready to even more of the things I saw this week in the name of “social justice.” The day the government becomes the arbiter or “social justice” is the day the freedom we have cherished and so many have given their lives to defend dies, because those in power, not due process and the Constitution, determine what is just. That is the definition of tyranny.
Your vote to use the power of the government to bludgeon a group of people engaged in private commerce without any right of review and right of appeal shows me that you are support that march to tyranny. Rest assured I will be doing my utmost to see that you are never re-elected again, because years ago I took an oath to support protect and defend the Constitution. I have never forgotten my oath. It is obvious that you have.
He could be! While there’s a humorous slant that could go here, the real point that I want to make is that PP wouldn’t be so big if it wasn’t fed a steady diet of pork.
Which would have *never* grown so large if the federal government was actually restricted by the 10th Amendment. It is big government that creates these monstrosities.
Stupid is believing that bigger government will fix it.
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: Obama’s first judicial nominee is former ACORN fundraiser.
Abortions are not reproductive health. In addition, chapoutier, I find you to need asshole insurance.
Chapoutier, if you feel gyped because I’m summing up what I think are like arguments to ask a single question please tell me.
At what point, if any, do you believe the power of Congress to spend money on what it feels is the “general welfare” ends?
And, the mandatory provision…
Section6104 (b) 5-7, (5) The effect on the Nation, on those who serve, and on the families of those who serve, if all individuals in the United States were expected to perform national service or were required to perform a certain amount of national service. (6) Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
The text of the bill mentions “elementary”, “middle”, “secondary” schools, in addition to college. For the conservative children in our country this would be devastating to them psychologically and emotionally, and that is the WHOLE POINT of their actions.
Chapoutier,
My comp doesn’t like the website you linked to. Apparently, it shares some of my attitude towards the government
I am concerned that the exploration of mandatory volunteerism was in there at any point, especially since sometimes Congress throws things back in at the last minute. And it’s already being done in some high schools, especially advanced programs, so it’s not a ridiculous concern.
Hatfield – Not really. I expect a blank look followed by a “duh” followed by some socialist dogma, but I hope to use it as a springboard to get them to think. Hope springs eternal !
I participated in a program like that. I was exposed to rich people, poor people, women, black people, indians, asians, MBA’s, high school drop outs, recovering substance abusers, abused spouses, control freaks, lazy liberals, over-compensating short guys….
It was called “the job I had.”
Excellent oxymoron
The Nahant, MA public library had on display today a WWI German Maxim machinegun captured by SGT York. It had been brought back as a war prize by an Army clerk from Nahant and forgotten about until the library director tripped on it in the attic. The BATFE wanted to DESTROY the weapon because it had not been registered. They found a museum in TN able to take it. Today, the library had the gun there for the public to see.
That is certainly debatable but in any case, abortions are a very small percentage (3%) of the services they offer.
And sorry I crushed your paranoid mandatory service fantasy with actual fact, but there is no need to get nasty
. But the robots you do need to worry about. They are real and they will steal your pills.