you are being prescious againQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
|
you are being prescious againQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
If you want to use the word precious, then at least have enough sense to learn how to spell it.
Or perhaps "prescious" in Aussie land means "reasonable and correct"? That would certainly be appropriate. I think I can go with that one!!
I pay taxes and would do it voluntarily, knowing all the wonderful efforts my taxes support and pay for.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
For thirty years in Libraryland, I met and chatted with many wealthy library patrons who usually held their nose when they talked about poor people.Quote:
How do you know that?
what it means here is being a dlckheadQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The usual liberal claptrap. If you love paying taxes so much, have you ever paid MORE than was asked, or called for a tax increase for YOU, or voted for a pol that promised to raised taxes on YOU? I didn't think so.Quote:
I pay taxes and would do it voluntarily, knowing all the wonderful efforts my taxes support and pay for.
Rather than post such an absurdly empty reply, why not just admit you have no evidence whatsoever? Wouldn't that be better than looking so silly?Quote:
For thirty years in Libraryland, I met and chatted with many wealthy library patrons who usually held their nose when they talked about poor people.
Yep, just did on November 3rd.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
In what way? I'll tell you even before your answer that I kind of doubt it.
general welfare clause . What did the framers mean by it ? What it meant according to Madison(whose portrait is my avatar here ) was that Congress was authorized to spend money on the general welfare BUT ONLY in relationship to the other spending authorities enumerated in art 1 sec 8 . Hamilton thought it gave Congress a carte blanche .That dispute has raged on ever since .
What both framers agreed was that the legislative power for the general welfare resided in the 10th amendment powers of the states.
There has not been any law upheld by SCOTUS on the grounds of the General Welfare clause .
Here's the deal . IF the framers wanted an unlimited government then they would not have gone through the efforts of specifically defining what Congress may spend money on. If they had intended Congress should have the power to do virtually anything and everything to promote the general welfare, they wouldn’t have bothered to include specific powers.
Even Hamilton conceded in Federalist 83."This specification of particulars enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8 evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.".
Madison was more emphatic in Federalist 41
"For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? "
Madison also wrote ... If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one subject to particular exceptions.
As far as intent goes . Madison was the correct one .
The truth is that the clause was never meant to be dissected and bisected . The key words are General and Common .The clause means that any tax collected must be collected to the benefit of the United States as a whole, not for sectional or special interests. The federal government may promote the general welfare, or common good, but it must do so within the scope of the powers delegated and without favoritism. It certainly was never meant as green light to play Robin Hood .Quote:
provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States,
He's luckier than most that encounter the jackboots of government. If they don't shoot 'em 41 times, they just choke 'em out.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Exactly correct.Quote:
The truth is that the clause was never meant to be dissected and bisected . The key words are General and Common .The clause means that any tax collected must be collected to the benefit of the United States as a whole, not for sectional or special interests. The federal government may promote the general welfare, or common good, but it must do so within the scope of the powers delegated and without favoritism. It certainly was never meant as green light to play Robin Hood .
You don't think I do any research, do you. You think I'm just another witless female, don't you.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Your record is that you do very little.Quote:
You don't think I do any research, do you.
Another? No. But here's your chance to prove your "wit". Answer the question. In what way?Quote:
You think I'm just another witless female, don't you.
You refuse to accept ANY of my responses, no matter what. I think I'll change my AMHD user name to Wally or Jimmy.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Apparently you don't have a dictionary.Quote:
Another? No. But here's your chance to prove your "wit". Answer the question. In what way?
Excuses, excuses, excuses.
"Wit" was a play off of "witless". One way or the other, you passed on it as you usually do.
Why do wingers always beetch about po folks taking money while you give guy rolling in dough even mo' money? If you didn't rig the system you wouldn't have po' people to give money to in the first place.
great point tal, but jl revels in the rigged system because it advantages him over those poor people. he is, afterall, that legendary bird and very preciousQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Prescious!! Pay attention!
Jesus had a word for those who placed money over human life.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
as I said precious, and you are being very precious todayQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Actually, he seems to be prescient at times.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:47 AM. |