President Obama is a disgrace (unemployed, dollars, school, education)
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.
You talk like this was a hostile takeover. GM came to the government begging and pleading to be bailed out. The government's resulting superior interests were then upheld in reorganization proceedings. What's your problem?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Telling private business how much they can pay an employee.
When were minimum wage laws first passed? Have any of those been struck down?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Showing favor to unions over bond holders in the G.M. takeover, which was illegal (by law, bond holders interests come first).
Bond holders come first before stockholders. They do NOT come first before the holders of contractual debt.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Forcing people to buy health insurance, whether or not they want it or need it.
What did the Supreme Court say about mandatory purchase of retirement insurance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Forcing banks to take money they don't want, then requiring them to pay it back with interest.
No one was forced. Those who originally felt they didn't need it agreed to take it anyway after the totality of the program was explained to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Forcing States to take money they don't want.
Again, no one was forced. After flapping their jaws for the stooges, they all quietly changed their minds and took the money voluntarily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Telling States they must implememt an unconstitutional health care system.
Which state cannot opt out and create its own system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Stealing money from one class of people for the specific purpose of redistributing it to others who did not earn it.
Yeah, I remember how mad you were when produtivity gains were all being sucked up as corporate profits while the real median household incomes of everyone not at the top of the income scale FELL between 2000 and 2006. Boy, were you steamed about that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
You need to read the Constitution. The powers of the Federal Government are limited, and those which are not specifically granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution are left to the States.
The 10th Amendment does not contain the word "specifically". The authors of that amendment knew of the word and its meaning. They were free to include it, but they deliberately didn't. You don't have the option of trying now to pretend that they did.
You talk like this was a hostile takeover. GM came to the government begging and pleading to be bailed out. The government's resulting superior interests were then upheld in reorganization proceedings. What's your problem?
The governments "resulting superior interests"? The law provides for bankruptcy. Period. The law does not provide for government to "bail out" private business. G.M. should have filed for bankruptcy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
When were minimum wage laws first passed? Have any of those been struck down?
I don't recall, nor do I see in this thread, any mention of "minimum wage laws". Do you have a point in bringing it up?
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Bond holders come first before stockholders. They do NOT come first before the holders of contractual debt.
Well I'll let you argue that point with Judge Andrew Napolitano (a lawyer and judge with excellent credentials) who says you are wrong. Take it up with him. He discussed this in full at the time these negotiations were taking place. Obama usurped the law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
What did the Supreme Court say about mandatory purchase of retirement insurance?
No one was forced. Those who originally felt they didn't need it agreed to take it anyway after the totality of the program was explained to them.
Again, no one was forced. After flapping their jaws for the stooges, they all quietly changed their minds and took the money voluntarily.
Social Security was not originally called "insurance". But I do realize, this is the approach they will take to try to beat any court fight. They will try to make that comparison.
The problem they will have is the burden on the states, and the cost. States have good reason to nullify this law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Which state cannot opt out and create its own system?
Show me where it says they can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Yeah, I remember how mad you were when produtivity gains were all being sucked up as corporate profits while the real median household incomes of everyone not at the top of the income scale FELL between 2000 and 2006. Boy, were you steamed about that!
Care to provide me with some quotes. I have no idea what you are referring to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
The 10th Amendment does not contain the word "specifically". The authors of that amendment knew of the word and its meaning. They were free to include it, but they deliberately didn't. You don't have the option of trying now to pretend that they did.
Let's splt hairs, shall we. It changes nothing.
Go back to your Carl Sagan books. He seems to be of the same mindset(he was a total fool).
Last edited by nononsenseguy; 05-01-2010 at 05:19 PM..
I'm so sick of this president trying to tear this country apart with his racial comments and sick ideas for this country!!!!! He is a socialist and a racist. Wake up America!!!!!!!!
Calm down and take your medicine. If you take over the counter medication, cut it out, many cause aggrivation; reduce your caffine.
Biofeedback may help.
I'm so sick of this president trying to tear this country apart with his racial comments and sick ideas for this country!!!!! He is a socialist and a racist. Wake up America!!!!!!!!
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,331 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
Sorry "burdell". It isn't "opinion"; It's the law. Judge Andrew Napolitano (who has excellent credentials as an attorney and judge) covered this in detail at the time these negotiations and decisions about G.M. were made. He was outraged that these bondholders were "screwed", and he said that it violated the law. I'm no attorney, but it was always my understanding that bondholders got paid first in such situations.
Once again I'll ask: IF this alleged case has any real merit, WHY aren't the lawyers climbing over each other attempting to file?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
But, I guess if you are Obama, the law doesn't matter. He took care of his union thug friends first. He owed them. But, hey; screw the U.S. Constitution, Federal Law, etc. "I won" ... right? You love this scoundrel, don't you?
I guess if you don't like Obama you favor guilty until proven innocent. Odd since even Saddam got a trial
I'm so sick of this president trying to tear this country apart with his racial comments and sick ideas for this country!!!!! He is a socialist and a racist. Wake up America!!!!!!!!
Hilarious! Just completely ignore the FACT that paying back bailout money with more bailout money IS NOT actually paying anything back. Keep those eyes and ears closed.
Why is that NOT paying it back, dont understand what you mean!
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.
