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.
Swingblade, if one reads the "Federalist Paper No.45" this addresses the reasoning behind the "State" appointing the Senator, it was due to the States believing they would lose their sovereign power to the federal government. By allowing each state legislator to appoint its Senator help maintain the balance of power between the federal and state governments.
Since the passing of the 17th amendment in 1912 we have seen the erosion of the sovereignty of the States.
You're going to drown in your own lies mister chad.
LIE! ("billionaires"? I'd like your source authority for that please). During the Reagan years (8), like in all other presidencies, only the House of Representatives is constitutionally authorized to appropriate money bills FOR SPENDING. Guess which of the two major parties controlled the House for ALL 8 YEARS ? The one and only 'we don't need no steenkin' demonRATic party.'[1]That's who. So Reagan was forced to deal with RAT power-broker Tip O'Neil to get done what he wanted out of Congress, which included rebuilding some of our military might as this comment notes..."It was more during the Nixon and Ford era that key programs were developed that are the backbone of today's military, and during the Reagan era they were procured,"[2]. For that reason Reagan never got direct credit as much as undeserved blame for his reviving the 60s StarWars initiative which never materialized, because...in the end it never worked. I say "undeserved", because it wasn't his fault that the scientist who claimed they could accomplish what they stated in the end couldn't. Of course, that doesn't matter to you lefties as you still love to make him the "whipping boy". You also don't recognize that Reagan's dedication to rebuilding our military helped to wear down the Evil Empire in trying to keep up.[2] Try checking an UNREDACTED American history book out of your local libraary. Make sure not to get the braille version by mistake.
[1] United States Presidents and control of Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] Reagan's Defense Buildup Bridged Military Eras
LIE! ("billionaires"? I'd like your source authority for that please).
The Prodigal Prez, Bubba Clinton, he of the you-know-what that even bent left, ONLY had PROJECTED SURPLUSES (LOL! They're like Obama promises!). In matter of real political fact he had deficits and in every year of his reign[3]
[3] The Myth of the Clinton Surplus (I've used this excellent expose of leftarded LIES on other sites and always give the same advice - SAVE FOR FUTURE USE. Not to you, but as reminder to myself you clowns. And so I have.)
A REPEATED LIE already proven! ("billionaires"? I'd like your source authority for that please).
At this point chad the merciful thing to do would be to stop responding to your lies to not embarass you even more. I'll continue though, because I have no pity for the "disloyal opposition".
Sorry about that. Wellll...upon reconsideration...not really! Let's go on.
LIE! You RATS just parrot one another on this one. Still, seeking to blame Little Georgie-boy Bush for everything and anything you incorrectly define "weapons of mass destruction" to highlight more lies. Anyone who wan't politically indoctrinated to the "sheeple" herd here in the USA knows that all the best available intelligence in the world stated the belief that Sadass Hussein had such "weapons".
[4]
[4] EXCLUSIVE: Saddam's Secret Tapes - ABC News
AGAIN THE SAME LIE ABOUT BILLIONAIRES! YOU really should be ashamed, but like most lefties you have no shame.
And then more sh*t with all of this which I'll leave un responded to, because it doesn't even rate a response.
In appreciation for all those lies I'll counter with a challenge to you. Can you prove that we DON'T HAVE a spending problem and support what YOUR Great Leader said[5]?
You are a member of a political party, that scientists call a "corporate propaganda group." Fox news and Rush radio tell you 100's of lies. Lies like global warming is not happening, or tax cuts for the rich, increase government revenues. You believe in 100's of corporate lies, designed to lower large corporations and CEO's tax rates.
You started off your post above, with a HUGE manipulation and lie, about a democrat congress, causing all of R. Reagan's financial problems.
When Ronald Reagan was elected, he was (very) popular with the American people. The democrat congress at the time of Reagan, had huge public pressure to do everything R. Reagan wanted. (The democrat congress you speak of, did everything Reagan wanted, because of public pressure.)
And now you lie and manipulate, that a democrat congress caused all of R. Reagan's financial problems, when public pressure was causing that democrat congress, to give Reagan everything he wanted
Your whole first paragraph was based, on a huge manipulation and lie.
Lie #2.
You said, "Bubba Clinton, he of the you-know-what that even bent left, ONLY had PROJECTED SURPLUSES"
You also lied and manipulated above, when you implied that Clinton did (not) have actual surpluses, only projected surpluses.
And you are also trying to use economic projections, to manipulate these facts.
Lie #3.
You quoted/said,
I said, Then Bush came out with his "weapons of mass (deception)" and attacked Iraq for nothing, and spent $1 trillion dollars doing it.
You said, "LIE! You RATS just parrot one another on this one. Still, seeking to blame Little Georgie-boy Bush for everything and anything you incorrectly define "weapons of mass destruction" to highlight more lies. Anyone who wan't politically indoctrinated to the "sheeple" herd here in the USA knows that all the best available intelligence in the world stated the belief that Sadass Hussein had such "weapons".
All of your above statements are lies.
GW Bush's White House made 935 false statements about Iraq.
You said "Anyone who wan't politically indoctrinated to the "sheeple" herd here in the USA knows that all the best available intelligence in the world stated the belief that Sadass Hussein had such "weapons".
Can you show a source, for your above "know nothing" armchair general statement? (no you can't, because it's another manipulation, and its not true.)
Almost everything else you said, was fact less, or just more lies and manipulations.
I feel sorry for any idiot, who gets sucked into your fact less, manipulating, winy, and schoolyard like bitchy manipulations and lies.
Swingblade, if one reads the "Federalist Paper No.45" this addresses the reasoning behind the "State" appointing the Senator, it was due to the States believing they would lose their sovereign power to the federal government. By allowing each state legislator to appoint its Senator help maintain the balance of power between the federal and state governments.
Since the passing of the 17th amendment in 1912 we have seen the erosion of the sovereignty of the States.
The states neglected their duty and did not protect their own sovreignty and then handed it away by supporting the amendment. On a side note the U S people have suffered greatly from the Wilson administration and the {D} lead congress. Including this there was the income tax and the creation of the Federal Reserve. And he kept us out war, oh wait WW1.
You are a member of a political party, that scientists call a "corporate propaganda group." Fox news and Rush radio tell you 100's of lies. Lies like global warming is not happening, or tax cuts for the rich, increase government revenues. You believe in 100's of corporate lies, designed to lower large corporations and CEO's tax rates.
You are redundant and ponderously boring with your mud-slinging. 1. Global warming isn't happening. It's a cyclical trend that must be traced back not in decades of years, but in hundreds and thousands. You are the brainwashed one. There are so many advocacies promoting Bad Al Gorithm's bull now that it gets hard to separate truth from fiction. Be honest genius! 2. At what income level does "rich" start? 3. You don't Increase government revenue by Increasing Taxes and thus Increasing unemployment, so the unconstitutional Fed has to print mo' money and devalue the dollar more than it has already.
Quote:
You started off your post above, with a HUGE manipulation and lie, about a democrat congress, causing all of R. Reagan's financial problems.
When Ronald Reagan was elected, he was (very) popular with the American people. The democrat congress at the time of Reagan, had huge public pressure to do everything R. Reagan wanted. (The democrat congress you speak of, did everything Reagan wanted, because of public pressure.)
And now you lie and manipulate, that a democrat congress caused all of R. Reagan's financial problems, when public pressure was causing that democrat congress, to give Reagan everything he wanted
Your whole first paragraph was based, on a huge manipulation and lie.
Wait just a minute now. With Obozo, Bush got all the blame, so now you're going BACKWARDS and re-writing history again to blame the "public pressure" on the people for liking Reagan and forcing a demonRATic Congress to spend money. How'd they do that? Did they avalanche their congresspeople with mail! Are you completely around-the-bend or what! And then to top off that lunacy YOU accuse ME of manipulations and lies. Oh sure...that'll work. Holt Jumpin' Jehosaphat! Look sport. You RATs had control of the HO-House for ALL 8 years of Reagan's presidency so stop telling tall-tales and for once take RESPONSIBILITY. Source: Your own> History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United StatesHoly Cow!
Quote:
Lie #2.
You said, "Bubba Clinton, he of the you-know-what that even bent left...
(gay source withheld for privacy concerns)
Quote:
, ONLY had PROJECTED SURPLUSES"
Quote:
You also lied and manipulated above, when you implied that Clinton did (not) have actual surpluses, only projected surpluses.
Clinton was President and in 4 years the Repubs controlled the House where money bills are passed(OOPS!) and for 3 years, the Senate, where such bills are affirmed. Bubba signed what the Repubs passed, so WHO gets credit? IBangedMyHead..., ROTFLMAO! WAIT A MINUTE Bub! You didn't tell the folks what happened in '93 and '94 and '95 and '96 and '97...DID YOU Bub? Wonder why gang?'cause Bubba had big RED deficits for each of those years. This is the funniest part chad. Dig this source> History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States Look familiar? I read all the years' data though! Are you yet?
Lie #3.
Quote:
You quoted/said,
I said, Then Bush came out with his "weapons of mass (deception)" and attacked Iraq for nothing, and spent $1 trillion dollars doing it.
You said, "LIE! You RATS just parrot one another on this one. Still, seeking to blame Little Georgie-boy Bush for everything and anything you incorrectly define "weapons of mass destruction" to highlight more lies. Anyone who wan't politically indoctrinated to the "sheeple" herd here in the USA knows that all the best available intelligence in the world stated the belief that Sadass Hussein had such "weapons".
All of your above statements are lies.
Well you haven't proven that with this trash partisan garbage, just like your usage of the (Annenberg) "FactCheck" fraud source.
Quote:
GW Bush's White House made 935 false statements about Iraq.
chads are like holes aren't they? LOL! And they usually are found hanging!
The old "935 False Statements" GOTCHA joke and by the CommunistNewsNetwork no less.
The 935 Lies They Told Us About Iraq - Truthdig You are too funny chad. "This" is copyrighted and from TruthDigs main page acknowledgement to show what they're all about in the "fairness" business> "A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion"
Quote:
You said "Anyone who wan't politically indoctrinated to the "sheeple" herd here in the USA knows that all the best available intelligence in the world stated the belief that Sadass Hussein had such "weapons".
Can you show a source, for your above "know nothing" armchair general statement? (no you can't, because it's another manipulation, and its not true.)
I did just that above loser!
____________________________________________
Quote:
Almost everything else you said, was fact less, or just more lies and manipulations.
I feel sorry for any idiot, who gets sucked into your fact less, manipulating, winy, and schoolyard like bitchy manipulations and lies.
You're going to drown in your own lies mister chad.
LIE! ("billionaires"? I'd like your source authority for that please). During the Reagan years (8), like in all other presidencies,
And then more sh*t with all of this which I'll leave un responded to, because it doesn't even rate a response.
In appreciation for all those lies I'll counter with a challenge to you. Can you prove that we DON'T HAVE a spending problem and support what YOUR Great Leader said[5]?
You are redundant and ponderously boring with your mud-slinging. 1. Global warming isn't happening. It's a cyclical trend that must be traced back not in decades of years, but in hundreds and thousands. You are the brainwashed one. There are so many advocacies promoting Bad Al Gorithm's bull now that it gets hard to separate truth from fiction. Be honest genius! 2. At what income level does "rich" start? 3. You don't Increase government revenue by Increasing Taxes and thus Increasing unemployment, so the unconstitutional Fed has to print mo' money and devalue the dollar more than it has already.
Wait just a minute now. With Obozo, Bush got all the blame, so now you're going BACKWARDS and re-writing history again to blame the "public pressure" on the people for liking Reagan and forcing a demonRATic Congress to spend money. How'd they do that? Did they avalanche their congresspeople with mail! Are you completely around-the-bend or what! And then to top off that lunacy YOU accuse ME of manipulations and lies. Oh sure...that'll work. Holt Jumpin' Jehosaphat! Look sport. You RATs had control of the HO-House for ALL 8 years of Reagan's presidency so stop telling tall-tales and for once take RESPONSIBILITY. Source: Your own> History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United StatesHoly Cow!
(gay source withheld for privacy concerns)
OK! Lets play your game again.
Clinton was President and in 4 years the Repubs controlled the House where money bills are passed(OOPS!) and for 3 years, the Senate, where such bills are affirmed. Bubba signed what the Repubs passed, so WHO gets credit? IBangedMyHead..., ROTFLMAO! WAIT A MINUTE Bub! You didn't tell the folks what happened in '93 and '94 and '95 and '96 and '97...DID YOU Bub? Wonder why gang?'cause Bubba had big RED deficits for each of those years. This is the funniest part chad. Dig this source> History of Deficits and Surpluses In The United States Look familiar? I read all the years' data though! Are you yet?
Lie #3.
Well you haven't proven that with this trash partisan garbage, just like your usage of the (Annenberg) "FactCheck" fraud source.
chads are like holes aren't they? LOL! And they usually are found hanging!
The old "935 False Statements" GOTCHA joke and by the CommunistNewsNetwork no less.
The 935 Lies They Told Us About Iraq - Truthdig You are too funny chad. "This" is copyrighted and from TruthDigs main page acknowledgement to show what they're all about in the "fairness" business> "A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion"
I did just that above loser!
____________________________________________
Its amazing how much you republicans lie.
Lie #1, You are telling this forum that global warming is not happening.
(But 98% of all climate scientists say "global warming is happening")
Lie #2, You said, You don't Increase government revenue by Increasing Taxes and thus Increasing unemployment.
(According to 100% of respected economists, "tax cuts do not increase government revenues.")
Yes, you increase government revenue by increasing taxes.
I could not read any further into your post, because arguing with you here is pointless.
Fox news and Rush radio have already told you what to believe.
And every economist in the world, could not make you change your mind.
You trust Fox news and Rush radio, more than economists and scientists.
(Yes) I can prove we don't have a spending problem.
Before Reagan and Bush cut rich peoples taxes and created deficits, our government had all the money we needed, to pay for (all) our social programs.
We don't have a spending problem, we have a tax revenue problem.
That assurance you gave EVERYONE was not fulfilled chad. You didn't PROVE anything. Your promise to do something is just like Obozo's. To prove means...to establish the truth of one's contention. Look it up. Your answer,
accurately translated, tells everyonethat you believe that taxing the rich is the way to pay for liberal social programs.
First I see that it is necessary and essential to define the term "deficit spending" for you since, it saddens me to observe that you know not whereof you speak. You are in fact, a fitting and microcosmic metaphor for how the government has failed the people in the "public" education system it has wrought. To continue..., Deficit spending starts when a government, business, or individual's spending exceeds it's available income[1]. In the case of government the word "income" is replaced by and interchangeable with "tax revenues" as that is the only source of government income.
[1] Governmental DeficitSpending
Your prior source table of surpluses means nothing in this modern era, because they don't take into account the many "off-budget" expenditures and the annual interest of the debt, whcih IF THERE IS A SURPLUS, it should be used to pay. Only in government can y o have expenses off-budget so they mysteriously diappear and don't show up in surplus/deficit analysis. Pure political shenanigans and why the founders were right to believe in the smallest, essentail government presence.
I must admit I especially love using your sources that you use to selectively cherry-pick information you thinks supports you. Then I retrace your steps and find the TRUTH and shoot you down with you own bullets. Will you ever learn? I previously called you a parrot and thank you for proving it, as with this last posted comment you get in bed with Obozo as partners in government-sponsored crime. To wit; your comment of...
"We don't have a spending problem, we have a tax revenue problem."
So allow me to explain, because you haven't yet and won't explain what you TRULY mean. Both chad and Obozo do not WANT TO CURTAIL SPENDING, so rather than use personally responsible DISCIPLINE they BOTH advocate for HIGHER AND MORE TAXATION. It's why we to the right and many in the middle call them the ..ready now....CHORUS...the "TAX AND SPEND DEMOCRATS." Given that propensity of behavior, Obozo's philosophy accurately stated is 'I'll continue spending, because I like to and want to and, since it isn't my money why should I care.'
The government, my intellectually challenged friend, hasn't had all the money it needed to pay for all of our social problems since they started DEFICIT SPENDING. That was done by BOTH parties, but especially a favorite agenda of your demonRATic party. Your party starts programs it has no money to pay for and then funds them with money it doesn't have> deficit spending. Obozo's rate of deficit spending has already overshadowed Bush's rate of accumulating red ink in the people's name. CBS
(CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.
The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.
Looks familiar chad, because I believe I posted it before and you ignored it.
More accurately, you can't win over people with these insane arguments.
...he is trying to win anyone over. It's been my experience that those who shroud themselves with scripture to bolster forecasts of gloom and doom are commited negativists simply exorcizing an inner frustration and reassuring themselves to that which they don't quite know how to deal with.
If they weren't they'd find some positive option to the two diametric opposite choices and advocate for such. Just thinking out loud.
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.
Rotflmao...
Holy Cow!
This is the funniest part chad. Dig this source> 
yet?
source.
!
CBS 
