Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, "united". But that didn't mean one collective. It meant a federation/confederacy of soveign states bonding together in a common alliance for mutual defensive and economic benefit. That is the reason only very limited powers were delegated to the central government...and the reason for the 9th and 10th ammendment. The founding fathers (especially the Southerners) feared central control much more than anything else....
Quote:
If the Constitution was a ceiling we wouldn't be able to add to it and make changes to it like we are allowed to
There is nothing wrong with ammending the Constitution within the said limits. What I was referring to earlier is the Bill of Rights and checks and balances and limits on federal power. That was the main purpose of it.
Yes, "united". But that didn't mean one collective. It meant a federation/confederacy of soveign states bonding together in a common alliance for mutual defensive and economic benefit. That is the reason only very limited powers were delegated to the central government...and the reason for the 9th and 10th ammendment. The founding fathers (especially the Southerners) feared central control much more than anything else....
There is nothing wrong with ammending the Constitution within the said limits. What I was referring to earlier is the Bill of Rights and checks and balances and limits on federal power. That was the main purpose of it.
And thus is why you have a federal government and a state government.
What you're failing to undestand, no doubt purposely, is that Blue states pay for virtually everything while Red states hardly ever pay more than they take. Blue states economically support most of the worthless red states by a wide margin. Blue states ARE the producers and red states are the takers.
It's completely the opposite of your stupid statement.
LMAO I am not failing to understand anything. But I admit I have a hard time -- in fact, hard to not burst out laughing -- as to how -- in your estimation -- the Blue states "outproduce" the Red States. Please provide figures and stats proving it, void of that neat little trick involving the feds role in it all.
And by that, I don't mean the feds redistributing wealth, I mean in concrete terms of which states provide the food, energy, and business friendly policies, low tax rates, etc, which actually create wealth? Actually creating wealth seems to be something those on the left care little to nothing about...only how to "spread it around".
And I say again, if it ever really came right down to it (and I pray feverently it never does), the Blue states wouldn't have a chance in either military nor economic competition with the Red states.
Utter BS. The only people who care about gun rights are white males in the southern states. Hunters and games-men who use guns as a hobby, are another white segment.
Even if they were forced to turn in their gins they would DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT IT. They are browbeaten and broken. When they fought against blacks getting voting rights in the south, it didnt take but a few years to brake their back in half and turn the Klan against each other.
When white males, fought to keep segregation in schools, by creating, districts, busing busted their backs. When white males in the south used religion to their cause like abortion and gay marriage, in their face , gay marriage and roe v wade was forced on them
When white males fought against Interracial marriage, their own women fought them!
White males are broke...........if deeply held religious beliefs being trampled on didn't make them rise up DO YOU REALLY THINK GUNS ARE GOING TO DO IT? lol./
At this point anything we would like of white males we get. Whether it be top positions in companies with no experience, mass American citizenship to 12 million illegals, or your very wives and daughters........we will get. We have completely broken the will to fight of white males. Taking away their mossbergs, barrettas, winstons and remingtons ain't going to change a dam thing!
Wow. Just wow. I don't think I will read any further because I think this post may be right, unfortunately.
LMAO I am not failing to understand anything. But I admit I have a hard time -- in fact, hard to not burst out laughing -- as to how -- in your estimation -- the Blue states "outproduce" the Red States. Please provide figures and stats proving it, void of that neat little trick involving the feds role in it all.
And by that, I don't mean the feds redistributing wealth, I mean in concrete terms of which states provide the food, energy, and business friendly policies, low tax rates, etc, which actually create wealth? Actually creating wealth seems to be something those on the left care little to nothing about...only how to "spread it around".
And I say again, if it ever really came right down to it (and I pray feverently it never does), the Blue states wouldn't have a chance in either military nor economic competition with the Red states.
You know the military and military bases belong to the US not the state that they are in right? States don't actually have any military.
That second pic was just dirty, I need to go take a shower for clicking on it. The first pic is pretty bad a ss
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
