For Fox news fans.

bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
The 10th was probably created because of the limitations on the States as defined by Article 1, Section 10 -
 
inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
 
I've never researched the history behind each of the Amendments of The Bill Of Rights.
 
"The Powers not delegated to the federal government by the constitution" - How exactly are these 'powers' defined? How convoluted and confusing would the Constitution be if the Founding Fathers were to specifically state in detail what their expectations of 'powers' would be? The kind of power the Federal Govt. had when the Constitution was created is NOTHING compared to what the Federal Govt. is today. The Creators could have never perceived in their wildest dreams how this country would evolve over the last couple of centuries since its inception. I'm sure the Founding Fathers would have never imagined there would be a Dept. of Transportation, Dept. of Education, Dept. of Rural Affairs, FEMA, and the hundred other government agencies we have today. Whose to say that group didn't fully expected future generations to modify the Constitution to 'fit the current times and situations' facing the American people at any specific point in time? Do we have documented proof that has Thomas Jefferson saying, "The Constitution should NEVER be changed, specificall y the Bill Of Rights."?
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/120#post_3303662
 
Gads, guess I am a radical constitutionalist too. I think the constitution means what it says and has historically been interpreted to mean. If your local government passes laws you don't like you can move to another locale more to your liking. Little harder to do when it's the state or feds passing the lame laws.
 
How ridiculous is that. I've been a native Texan all my life. I have no desire whatsoever to move anywhere else simply because I don't like a law. So I'm supposed to just shut down a very profitable business, tell my wife to leave her job of 15 years, move out of a house that I had custom built to my specifications, tell my two daughters they have to uproot their lives, simply because of some local law? How about I GET THE LAW CHANGED. If the Feds enact a law and you don't like it, GET A MAJORITY TO HAVE IT CHANGED. See how democracy works? You try making it sound like the Feds are this Demi-God association of individuals that can create laws that can never be changed or repealed once they're enacted. If a representative of yours doesn't follow your bidding, VOTE HIM/HER OUT.
 
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
 
I've never researched the history behind each of the Amendments of The Bill Of Rights.
 
"The Powers not delegated to the federal government by the constitution" - How exactly are these 'powers' defined? How convoluted and confusing would the Constitution be if the Founding Fathers were to specifically state in detail what their expectations of 'powers' would be? The kind of power the Federal Govt. had when the Constitution was created is NOTHING compared to what the Federal Govt. is today. The Creators could have never perceived in their wildest dreams how this country would evolve over the last couple of centuries since its inception. I'm sure the Founding Fathers would have never imagined there would be a Dept. of Transportation, Dept. of Education, Dept. of Rural Affairs, FEMA, and the hundred other government agencies we have today. Whose to say that group didn't fully expected future generations to modify the Constitution to 'fit the current times and situations' facing the American people at any specific point in time? Do we have documented proof that has Thomas Jefferson saying, "The Constitution should NEVER be changed, specificall y the Bill Of Rights."?
They removed the word "specifically" from the original draft of the tenth to give the government the ability to take authority "assumed" in the constitution. But there needs to be a rationale based in the constitution for the government to assume the power. The government was granted the right to create post roads and the network of Court Houses and useful military installations would need a network of roads to access them, thus the department of transportation.
 
What constitutional provision does the government base the need for the department of education on???
 
The feds base their ban on marijuana on the interstate commerce clause. Could you explain to me how someone who plants a seed, grows a plant, harvests a bud and smokes it, all being done in Oceanside California effected interstate commerce?
 
If the constitution was just a list of suggestions which didn't need to be strictly adhered to why did they include a method of amending it???
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303680
How ridiculous is that. I've been a native Texan all my life. I have no desire whatsoever to move anywhere else simply because I don't like a law. So I'm supposed to just shut down a very profitable business, tell my wife to leave her job of 15 years, move out of a house that I had custom built to my specifications, tell my two daughters they have to uproot their lives, simply because of some local law? How about I GET THE LAW CHANGED. If the Feds enact a law and you don't like it, GET A MAJORITY TO HAVE IT CHANGED. See how democracy works? You try making it sound like the Feds are this Demi-God association of individuals that can create laws that can never be changed or repealed once they're enacted. If a representative of yours doesn't follow your bidding, VOTE HIM/HER OUT.
 
What if the majority of the people in your local area support the law you don't like? Wouldn't you rather have the option to move to another city, country or even state rather than have to live under a rule you find so distasteful?
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303735
What if the majority of the people in your local area support the law you don't like? Wouldn't you rather have the option to move to another city, country or even state rather than have to live under a rule you find so distasteful?
If I felt so strongly against a law that the Federal Govt. enacted that it would force me to leave this country, then I'd have bigger issues to contend with. I can't imagine any law that the Feds could pass that the majority of Americans would approve, and would affect my life so drastically that it would cause me to want to move out of this country because of it.
 
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303749
 
If I felt so strongly against a law that the Federal Govt. enacted that it would force me to leave this country, then I'd have bigger issues to contend with. I can't imagine any law that the Feds could pass that the majority of Americans would approve, and would affect my life so drastically that it would cause me to want to move out of this country because of it.
 
Then explain health care?
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303756
Then explain health care?
LOLOL. I KNEW you were going to bring that one up. What about health care? As I told you before, since that bill was passed, my current health insurance hasn't been affected one iota. Now will it eventually affect my small business? Only if I want to declare my employees who are Contractors as physical employees of my company (which they aren't today). Even so, if I had to pony up a certain percentage of my business income to insure my employees remain healthy so I don't incur any loss of productivity, that's fine with me. Believe me, it wouldn't put that big a dent in my overall bottom line that would make me so irate that I'd pack up and move to the Caymans (which I may do anyways when I decide to retire).
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303759
As I told you before, since that bill was passed, my current health insurance hasn't been affected one iota. Now will it eventually affect my small business? Only if I want to declare my employees who are Contractors as physical employees of my company (which they aren't today).
lol parrotting obama again I see...
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303759
LOLOL. I KNEW you were going to bring that one up. What about health care? As I told you before, since that bill was passed, my current health insurance hasn't been affected one iota. Now will it eventually affect my small business? Only if I want to declare my employees who are Contractors as physical employees of my company (which they aren't today). Even so, if I had to pony up a certain percentage of my business income to insure my employees remain healthy so I don't incur any loss of productivity, that's fine with me. Believe me, it wouldn't put that big a dent in my overall bottom line that would make me so irate that I'd pack up and move to the Caymans (which I may do anyways when I decide to retire).

You said the federal government wouldn't pass a law most the country opposed. I give you health care
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303783
You said the federal government wouldn't pass a law most the country opposed. I give you health care
I guess that depends on whose poll you beilieve, which as far as polls go, they are useless. I never said they wouldn't pass a law that most of the country would oppose. I said it would have to be something so dramatic that I disagreed with that would cause me to want to leave the country. If the majoriy of Americans actually don't like the health care bill, then get it overturned. Come mid-term elections, vote in people that feel the same way you do, and see if they'll repeal the bill. Again, the only laws that are technically 'etched in stone' are the one's defined in the Constitution. Although we have the capability to modify those laws, the Framers made it very difficult to do. I have no problem with modifying the 14th to make it so illegals can no longer obtain automatic citizenship just because they were born on the US side of the border. Could enough votes needed for Repealing of an Amendment ever occur this day and time? Doubtful.
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303816
At least I actually UNDERSTAND my current health care plan. You only know what some right-wing media outlet tells you. THESKY IS FALLING!
So eliminating medicare advantage plans is letting folks keep their current health care?
 
Forcing insurance companies to cover more people for more things will force rates for everyone through the roof, I know a few people who are already seeing that. That isn't a change to your health care?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303822
I guess that depends on whose poll you beilieve, which as far as polls go, they are useless. I never said they wouldn't pass a law that most of the country would oppose. I said it would have to be something so dramatic that I disagreed with that would cause me to want to leave the country. If the majoriy of Americans actually don't like the health care bill, then get it overturned. Come mid-term elections, vote in people that feel the same way you do, and see if they'll repeal the bill. Again, the only laws that are technically 'etched in stone' are the one's defined in the Constitution. Although we have the capability to modify those laws, the Framers made it very difficult to do. I have no problem with modifying the 14th to make it so illegals can no longer obtain automatic citizenship just because they were born on the US side of the border. Could enough votes needed for Repealing of an Amendment ever occur this day and time? Doubtful.
I've yet to see a poll showing more people favoring Obama care than opposed to it.
 
As far as the 14th again we have a case of black robe legislators. The last supreme court decision used a late 1800's case to justify the opinion that children of illegals had previously been ruled covered under the 14th amendment. It was incorrect. The late 1800's ruling said the children of Chinese immigrants who were brought here to work the railroads where citizens unded the 14th, not those who came in illegally.
 
If you put it to a vote of the people I think an amendment stating only children of citizens and legal immigrants would be citizens I believe it would easily pass, it would be finding 3/4 of the congress with backbone enough to put it on the state ballots that is a pipe dream.
 
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303823
So eliminating medicare advantage plans is letting folks keep their current health care?
 
Forcing insurance companies to cover more people for more things will force rates for everyone through the roof, I know a few people who are already seeing that. That isn't a change to your health care?
Where are you reading this? Is this just another one of your exerpts from some right-wing blog site, or have you actually read the health care bill in its entirety? I'd think you'd be overjoyed to get rid of a bloated, mismanaged Federal Govt.-run program like Medicare/Medicaid? If the people on that program can get the same services they get today, and pay around the same amount for it, why not get rid of that program? I can guarantee you I could get an insurance plan just as good or better than Medicare with the 7.5% in FICA taxes I pay every year, and have been paying for the last 38 years. You know how many BILLIONS of dollars we as tax payers have lost with false and inflated claims hospitals and doctors have filed with Medicare/Medicaid?
 
It's about time insurance companies cover procedures that you would think should've been covered in the first place. I love how these insurance companies can use this 'preexisting condition' excuse to keep from paying a person's claim. You know how many thousands of dollars I've given to insurance companies over the years, and never filed enough claims to even come close to what I paid for those policies? But when I do finally need to use them, they give me these 'conditions' or excuses as to why I'm not covered.
 
To this day, I've yet to see what these 'costs' or 'rates' will be for obtaining insurance under this plan. Whatever they are, they won't even pertain to me anyway, because I get my health insurance through my wife's group plan. Will that plan go up? Probably. Her plan has gone up at least 5% every year for the last 10 years. We either pay higher premiums, or they've raised the Out-Of-Pocket Max, or the Family and Individual deductibles. They've been doing this WAY before Obama's little plan was enacted. If there's alternative options for obtaining insurance outside her group plan, at least I'll have an alternative. Right now it's "My Way or The Highway" with her current provider. She can't even opt out of her plan unless she can show proof she's covered on some other form of insurance plan.
 
marydem

marydem

New Member
the stimulus created/saved 1.6 million jobs and GDP was 3.2% higher than without the stimulus.
(http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69923-cbo-stimulus-saved-or-created-as-many-as-16m-jobs)
 
my point is that we would have been in the depths of a full-scale depression if the stimulus hadn't passed. thanks to President Obama and a Democratic congress for saving the economy from ruin.
 
mantisman51

mantisman51

Active Member
Well, I think my purchase of a 1976 Chevy van in February saved the economy. Just take my word for it. Things would have been much worse for the country if I hadn't.
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by marydem http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303944
the stimulus created/saved 1.6 million jobs and GDP was 3.2% higher than without the stimulus.
(http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/69923-cbo-stimulus-saved-or-created-as-many-as-16m-jobs)
 
my point is that we would have been in the depths of a full-scale depression if the stimulus hadn't passed. thanks to President Obama and a Democratic congress for saving the economy from ruin.
How do they know what the "without the stimulus" numbers are? That math seems a bit fuzzy to me. What happens when the bill for all that spending comes due? The debt is increasing exponentially. Soon we won't be able to cover the interest. I thought if you found yourself in a hole, the first thing to do was stop digging.
 
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/140#post_3303922
Where are you reading this? Is this just another one of your exerpts from some right-wing blog site, or have you actually read the health care bill in its entirety? I'd think you'd be overjoyed to get rid of a bloated, mismanaged Federal Govt.-run program like Medicare/Medicaid? If the people on that program can get the same services they get today, and pay around the same amount for it, why not get rid of that program? I can guarantee you I could get an insurance plan just as good or better than Medicare with the 7.5% in FICA taxes I pay every year, and have been paying for the last 38 years. You know how many BILLIONS of dollars we as tax payers have lost with false and inflated claims hospitals and doctors have filed with Medicare/Medicaid?
 
It's about time insurance companies cover procedures that you would think should've been covered in the first place. I love how these insurance companies can use this 'preexisting condition' excuse to keep from paying a person's claim. You know how many thousands of dollars I've given to insurance companies over the years, and never filed enough claims to even come close to what I paid for those policies? But when I do finally need to use them, they give me these 'conditions' or excuses as to why I'm not covered.
 
To this day, I've yet to see what these 'costs' or 'rates' will be for obtaining insurance under this plan. Whatever they are, they won't even pertain to me anyway, because I get my health insurance through my wife's group plan. Will that plan go up? Probably. Her plan has gone up at least 5% every year for the last 10 years. We either pay higher premiums, or they've raised the Out-Of-Pocket Max, or the Family and Individual deductibles. They've been doing this WAY before Obama's little plan was enacted. If there's alternative options for obtaining insurance outside her group plan, at least I'll have an alternative. Right now it's "My Way or The Highway" with her current provider. She can't even opt out of her plan unless she can show proof she's covered on some other form of insurance plan.
Have you read the Bill?
 
I made it through most, and have had the rest thrust on me by the compliance department where I work.
 
Let's see to make the price tag come in under 1,000 billion dollars, let's cut medicare advantage, and stiff the physicins for 21%,
 
Let's require the insurance companies to provide "dependant care" to the age of 26 ( if memory serves me).
 
Let's increase taxes now and put off implementation until 2014 ( convenient to front load the taxes and back load the benefit to after the 2012 election). If it is that good of an idea implement it NOW.
 
I see you fall for blaming the hospitals and doctors. Yes, there are bad apples, and those people should be in jail. Maybe you should walk in my shoes and see how hard it is becoming to acutally get paid for what you do. If only pro atheletes had half the paperwork I have. Documentation, coding and billing charts take over 50% of my clinical hours. That's less time with the patient/family.
 
The bill also requires a private citizen to buy a product offered by a gov't approved carrier. If they do not they are levied a fine. Where in the Constitution is that?
 
 
oscardeuce

oscardeuce

Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///forum/thread/379731/for-fox-news-fans/120#post_3303654
 
The interpretation of the 2nd has been debated ad nauseum. Based on the punctuation in that statement, people have interpreted that Amendment 5 different ways. Just depends on which side of the fence you sit on.
 
My Obama? Where do you get that? I agree with a lot of his policies, but by no means all of them. That's one of your problems. You rely on articles you 'Google' to defend your stance on the subject. They are now saying that 1 out of every 5 Americans actually believe Obama is a Muslim. Where exactly do they get this ridiculous diatribe? FROM GOOGLING STUPID NEWS ARTICLES THAT ARE SUPPOSEDLY ACCURATE.
 
Radical Constitutionalist like yourself are very scary people. You don't want 'Big Government' telling you want to do in your lives, but if the Federal Govt. dropped every bit of support and assistance away from you, chaos would occur in a matter of weeks. You're all for States Rights, yet I can show you HUNDREDS of examples where laws passed by States are more restrictive, and take 10 times as many of your legal rights away as any Federal law does. Look at that Bell County in California. The mayor and City Council had salaries of over $1 MILLION each in one of the most poverty-stricken areas in that state. I can document at least 10 current laws passed by my local City Council that infringe on my rights. They just passed a law that mandates that a small business can no longer allow smoking in their establishment, even if they put up signs telling people smoling is allowed. So how are States and Local rights and laws better than Federal laws?
 
I thought based on Muslim teaching that the son of a Muslim is Muslim. On the otherhand his religion matters not to me. I judge a perosn on the content of his/her character.
 
I am not dependant on the gov't. I can fend for myself. I depend only on myself and my family. If the gov't suddenly took away all its support, I would not notice as I've never had gov't assistance. I've been willing to work hard, learn and better myself. The Katrina aftermath would not have been so devastating if the people were more independant.
 
Your argument about California is great. That's why I don't live there. If you want a leftist utopia move there. I'm stuck in California light here in Ohio. I'm thinking of moving my family to Texas, Arizona, or Montana as they seem more in line with my views.
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top