quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
No, that is not the crux, it is simpletonian asswipe.
The house was given the power to tax and spend.   That has been perverted.  Nowhere was it contemplated that  corporations were people, nowhere was it contemplated that lifer government politicos would build machines of their robbery, nor would it contemplate that the 'redress of grievances' would be an industry that would be called lobbyists, and that when people left the government they wouldnt be helping to pervert those goals.

quote:

quote:

Yeah, utopian and agrarian I know, but times change and locks are made to keep the honest people honest, but criminals are always gonna pick them locks.  And capitalism and its trappings were never concieved to be a criminal enterprise.

Ok. cool.
First. And capitalism and its trappings were never concieved to be a criminal enterprise.
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and righteous people. It is wholly inadequate for the governance of any other." - John Adam
So what the fuck happened? How did the criminal class find its way into government?
Yes, the House was given the power to tax and spend. But just what is the house but people elected to that office? And whom elects them?
Obliquely stating - My problem is that when the tenants are given the vote as to their tenancy along with the landlord, chaos ensues. The power of the tenant is in his tenancy itself, not his ability to control the landlord directly.
Thus I agree, That has been perverted.
Nowhere was it contemplated that corporations were people (legislative;judiciary), nowhere was it contemplated that lifer government politicos would build machines of their robbery, nor would it contemplate that the 'redress of grievances' would be an industry that would be called lobbyists(legislative), and that when people left the government they wouldnt be helping to pervert those goals.
All of that can be traced to government elected, appointed, etc.
Ultimately it falls on the voter.
So, just whom is voting? Obviously not a moral and righteous people. Such would not allow the likes of what has occupied government to have entered in the first place.
It's happened. Split milk. But for yucks, how did it happen? Does it not lend itself to Franklin's statement that every so often, say every twenty years or so, some blood need be shed?

quote:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. -- Thomas Jefferson

quote:

But if one understands what it takes for the scoundrel to enter political office, it's hardly asswipe. It's the voters. Everything else is secondary; education, media, bribery, etc.
It all falls on the voter.
How can the farmer blame the fox for the chicken coop when he let the fox in himself?
So ultimately what first must be determined is whom should vote and why. The criminal class in government shall not correct itself. One way or another, they must be removed. Either by the vote or by other means.

quote:

When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:


Not only did the Constitution give the House the power to tax and spend, it also gave them limits on what they could spend on. And, yes, that has been perverted by liberal interpretations of the US Constitution. Changing usages of words does not change the meaning of the words that were written.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Don't know what your point is, but its a senseless one, the first change to the constitution was the fucking bill of rights, sport,  and you can quote me.

Your constitutional law is a little weak.   Amendments aren't just for dirt anymore........

Keep digging yourself deeper. It's quite funny. Pedantic even. Keep carving out your wiggle room. So progressive of you.

edit: Ya know, since you wish to dig so mighty, just which of the Bill of Rights would you be referring to that changed voting, being the topic of our discussion?

Here, let me help you -



Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:


Not only did the Constitution give the House the power to tax and spend, it also gave them limits on what they could spend on. And, yes, that has been perverted by liberal interpretations of the US Constitution. Changing usages of words does not change the meaning of the words that were written.

Point me to that part of the constitution.

quote:

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

...

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
...
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

 
That enumeration is near infinite.  I don't see any sort of restriction there.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
What words are being changed in usage and meaning?  None.   Unless there is some conservative dictionary that is not available to other than to rabid idealogues.
and?
general?
welfare?
of?
United?
States?
where is it, what is it, and why is it liberal or conservative?  I think those words are also used by communists and nazis and have the same common, shared meaning for them as well as us.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
What is the convervative view of that whole  'We the people' thing then?
If it is not designed for the general welfare of the people as individuals, then it must be that the conservative interpretation is that promote the general profits of the corporations as individual.

quote:


I bet you think you are good at any sort of vermiform dance.

quote:

which exact individual and only individual taxation has been perverted?

quote:

One has the right to a hearing of the redress of grievances, as an individual, a lobby, a corporation....

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
OK, so you are twisting words, and meanings,  and got caught.  Got it.  

quote:


I guess you made a mockery of me with your limbo crapola, right?
LOL. small boats should stay close to shore.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

DScuri
How about the changing meaning of "general welfare of the United States?" It doesn't mean general welfare of the individual citizens of the United States. It is to apply as a blanket to the whole of the nation, not here and there, wherever government may so choose.

quote:

DScuri
Interesting that you bring in "communists" and "nazis" in your attempt of rebuttal.

quote:

DScuri
I'm going to make a guess that you are amazing at limbo.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

What words are being changed in usage and meaning?  None.   Unless there is some conservative dictionary that is not available to other than to rabid idealogues.


and?
general?
welfare?
of?
United?
States?

where is it, what is it, and why is it liberal or conservative?  I think those words are also used by communists and nazis and have the same common, shared meaning for them as well as us.

quote:

This section specifically defines to which body or entity the general welfare clause is to apply. Since the United States is specifically made up of the States themselves, this clause applies to the States as a whole and not the People. The US Constitution addresses specific entities throughout the document. The People as an entity are only addressed twice in the main body of the US Constitution and in no case does the General Welfare clause apply to the People specifically. However, the Constitution does specifically define the rights which are to be retained by the People, as you can see in the following constitutional amendments. Notice the 10th Amendment.


Amendment I
“…or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”

Amendment II
“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Amendment IV
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,…”

Amendment IX
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

Amendment X
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Amendment XVII
“…elected by the people thereof…”

“…That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election…”

Is it a Power?
Looking at the two occurrences of “General Welfare” within the US Constitution, it is important to observe that in neither case does the phrase itself delegate any power. The first occurrence is in the Preamble to the US Constitution where the purpose of the Union and US Constitution is stated. The second occurrence is in article 1, Section 8 relating to the taxation authority of congress as stated before. Article 1, Section 8 is where all congressional authority is enumerated. It was understood that congress had no power that was not specifically enumerated in the US Constitution. A broad reading of the General Welfare clause would render the enumeration of powers pointless. There would be no specific limitation to Federal power. Instead, it would only require an argument that any action was for the general good. This was not the intention by those who created the document. To answer the original question, is the general welfare clause an enumerated power? No,not in either occurrence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas
Greetings,

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
What words are being changed in usage and meaning?  None.   Unless there is some conservative dictionary that is not available to other than to rabid idealogues.
and?
general?
welfare?
of?
United?
States?
where is it, what is it, and why is it liberal or conservative?  I think those words are also used by communists and nazis and have the same common, shared meaning for them as well as us.

The founders did not specifically include "the people" but instead the states themselfs as a combined entity rather than a group of people who through voting determines their "welfare" is best served by not paying taxes and living off others. Instead, this is the correct interpretation taken from http://universityofcommonsense.org/articles/general-welfare-us-constitution/

quote:

This section specifically defines to which body or entity the general welfare clause is to apply. Since the United States is specifically made up of the States themselves, this clause applies to the States as a whole and not the People. The US Constitution addresses specific entities throughout the document. The People as an entity are only addressed twice in the main body of the US Constitution and in no case does the General Welfare clause apply to the People specifically. However, the Constitution does specifically define the rights which are to be retained by the People, as you can see in the following constitutional amendments. Notice the 10th Amendment.
Amendment I
“…or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”
Amendment II
“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Amendment IV
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,…”
Amendment IX
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”
Amendment X
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Amendment XVII
“…elected by the people thereof…”
“…That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election…”
Is it a Power?
Looking at the two occurrences of “General Welfare” within the US Constitution, it is important to observe that in neither case does the phrase itself delegate any power. The first occurrence is in the Preamble to the US Constitution where the purpose of the Union and US Constitution is stated. The second occurrence is in article 1, Section 8 relating to the taxation authority of congress as stated before. Article 1, Section 8 is where all congressional authority is enumerated. It was understood that congress had no power that was not specifically enumerated in the US Constitution. A broad reading of the General Welfare clause would render the enumeration of powers pointless. There would be no specific limitation to Federal power. Instead, it would only require an argument that any action was for the general good. This was not the intention by those who created the document. To answer the original question, is the general welfare clause an enumerated power? No,not in either occurrence.

So, what's the point? The point is "the general welfare" clause does not give anyone the power to change anything for the welfare of specific people. It does not give anyone the power to redistribute wealth for the "general welfare" of a specific group of people.
Be well,
Arturas.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

If it is not designed for the general welfare of the people as individuals, then it must be that the conservative interpretation is that promote the general profits of the corporations as individual.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

the rightwing interpretation is what then?  So, you are against all the bills passed as jobs bills by the teabagger house, any foreign interventions including Iraq, and the and just about anything  else, federal highways, streetlighting, sidewalks, police, fire.....and you must support the dismantling of stock holding corporations and any and all tax breaks for anyone at anytime no matter what.

I get it, because none of those things promote the general welfare as you interpret it.
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie
The general welfare does not go the individual. Your posit as to corporations is absurd and I shall ignore it as you have set up a false either/or.

Your idea of general is highly skewed. Here's an example. Food stamps. Accessible to those who Qualify. It's that qualification which separates it from any form of general welfare. To be generally applied it must be accessible to all at all times regardless whether one wishes to access or not. The act of qualification removes it from any general into specific. The postal service can be seen as general as it is accessible to all at all times.