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.
What is it with these Republican women: Palin, Bachmann and Angle? I respect, though I disagree with, many Republicans, however I cannot respect these three. Their either completely crazy, unbelievably stupid, or both.
I'm not just throwing around insults. People seem to like them because they're crazy and stupid. Are these really the best people for high office? The people whose job it is to write and administer laws?
There are plenty of arch-conservatives who are much stronger grasp of the issues.
Like seeks like. Some are not smart or sane enough to see how horrible these people are as representatives...come to think of it, these whackos actually do represent some of the fringe.
Quote:
There are plenty of arch-conservatives who are much stronger grasp of the issues
Never mind a grasp of the issues, they do not have a grasp on reality.
People seem to like them because they're crazy and stupid
True enough. Their enemy is my enemy so they are my friend. The crazier the better.
They approach things in a SIMPLE way, that's what attracts people to them. They talk about things in SIMPLE ways and have SIMPLE ideas about them so you don't have to work up a mental sweat. Almost everything can be delt with by being "American", applying "the Constitution" (their SIMPLE idea of it anyway...may not agree with SCOUTS) and by making everything black or white.
Bachmann is not only wrong here, she is engaging in fearmongering that encourages people to break the law. And in doing so, she's falsely telling people that the Constitution would support them. In fact, the Washington Times reporter followed her answer by saying, "Well, I'm going to take your hint then and that'll save me some time." And so we feel it's necessary to rate this one Pants on Fire.
it gets down to, is she really this ignorant and paranoid? Either way it's baaaad news for the sheep.
Congress may have additional criteria, but the US Constitution only requires the number of people to be counted, not their ethnic background, their sex, their religion, or any other nonsense Congress seems to crave for social engineering purposes.
If ignorance is truly bliss, you must be one happy camper.
So you believe we should all be slaves and work for just food and a place to sleep....do we get indoor toilets or do you want to go all the way back to the 1800's??
I'm curious what your opinions of her are. I always see her hanging around with these Republican big-wigs, especially at the 'rally' the other day.
What is your opinion of her? Favorable/unfavorable?
And why do you think she is important/not important?
Feel free to ramble as well.
I think she is a darling of the Conservative Movement and she should run for President in 2012. Between Sarah Palin and her it would be entertaining as hell as they drove each other farther and farther to the political right.
So you believe we should all be slaves and work for just food and a place to sleep....do we get indoor toilets or do you want to go all the way back to the 1800's??
Ar you saying if we abolish minimum wage McDonald's and WalMart will switch to slave labor?
Congress may have additional criteria, but the US Constitution only requires the number of people to be counted, not their ethnic background, their sex, their religion, or any other nonsense Congress seems to crave for social engineering purposes.
If ignorance is truly bliss, you must be one happy camper.
Whoooosh! Right over your head (didn't read the link, did you?)
Bachmann's point was that since the Constitution only requires enumeration, any further information can be ignored on the basis that it is unconstitutional. However, since the Constitution clearly empowers Congress to enumerate in such manner as they shall by Law direct (Article I, Section 2, clause 3), the idea that requiring the submission of further information is unconstitutional is unfounded. Indeed, all you need to do is look at the Census of 1790, conducted a mere two years after the ratification of the Constitution, to see that the founders of our nation (who occupied all levels of government at the time of that census) did not consider anything more than mere enumeration to be unconstitutional, for they did more than merely enumerate themselves.
The reality, as opposed to the feverish paranoid fantasies of Michele Bachmann, who you so strenuously defend, is that all of the 23 censuses conducted in this nation's history have done more than merely enumerate. Yet for all of her (and your) bleating, you'd think the census of 2010 was the first to do so.
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.
