President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

#14,876
#14,876
luthervol said:
The preamble..
Click to expand...

I assume you talking about “promote the general welfare” …..it does not mean taking from the rich.

No, "promote the general welfare" in the Preamble of the Constitution does not explicitly mean "taking from the rich and giving to the poor"; it refers to the broader goal of creating conditions that benefit the well-being of the entire nation, including measures to address social and economic issues that could impact all citizens, not just a specific class, and does not necessarily imply direct redistribution of wealth.

You are wrong again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT, YankeeVol, Orange_Crush and 5 others
#14,878
#14,878
jwells said:
It's real easy to whine about socialism while benefitting from it. Things like education, fire, police, roads, recreation areas...they're important. And access to them is funded by the whole to benefit those who need them. It's not Marxism.

These farmers that are about to get boned by Trump's tariffs sure will take ALLLLLLL the socialism here soon to bail them out.

Why should I, a tax-payer, be paying to help poor farmers? Why should they get broadband access even though their bills will never cover that installation? Why are they getting paved roads? Let them pay for it!

See how stupid that sounds? You can't live in a black and white world solely because you deny the existence of the things you rail against.
Click to expand...
I see you’re still talking about farm subsidies, probably because you erroneously believe you have me pigeonholed into an ideological position that is easier to attack.

I’ll say for the [checks notes] 4th time now: I do not support farm subsidies. You’re barking up the wrong tree.

Again, continue to misconstrue and attack strawman positions about roads and police, but it doesn’t address what I said.

And are you really implying that roads, fire, police are funded to the benefit of only the “needy”?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#14,880
#14,880
luthervol said:
That's your game, not mine.
It's not like we are going to reach any type of agreement.
Many scholars believe it is perfectly constitutional......I agree with them.
Click to expand...
Since you refuse to answer the question, I will treat you like my 14-year-old students when I teach them the Constitution so maybe you can understand it.

Provide means to give. This one is simple. If I provide lunch for you, that means I give you lunch. In context of the Constitution, it is the federal governments job to provide or give us our defense.

Promote is not as straightforward as provide. If you ask me to promote your rap concert, does that mean I give you a free place to put it on at and buy all the tickets for the concert? Of course not. Promote means I tell or show people why your concert is a good idea, I tell them it would be fun, it would be good for them to support someone local, they will get to hang out with their friends, etc. So, promote means that I think something is a good idea and it will help you in one way or another, so I want you and others to know about it. In context of the Constitution, promote means things the government thinks will be good for its citizens such as education, safety, proper nutrition, daily exercise, etc. It does not mean the government is to provide these things.

As far as your "scholars" comment, scholars used to think the moon was made of cheese, the Earth was flat and many other idiotic things, that didn't make them correct any more than it makes you correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buddy’s Bandit and W.TN.Orange Blood
#14,881
#14,881
85SugarVol said:
I see you’re still talking about farm subsidies, probably because you erroneously believe you have me pigeonholed into an ideological position that is easier to attack.

I’ll say for the [checks notes] 4th time now: I do not support farm subsidies. You’re barking up the wrong tree.

Again, continue to misconstrue and attack strawman positions about roads and police, but it doesn’t address what I said.

And are you really implying that roads, fire, police are funded to the benefit of only the “needy”?
Click to expand...

What way too few people understand is that farm subsidies (for the most part) are in reality subsidies for the poor.

I've said for a long time we need to end all farm subsides and price controls on agriculture products.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85, LouderVol and 85SugarVol
#14,885
#14,885
#14,886
#14,886
n_huffhines said:
IDK, man. I remember people being pissed about the Bush Steel tariffs, and stuff like that. But may have just been in my bubble.
Click to expand...

So far, most of this administration’s economic/trade and foreign policy is analogous to saying they’re going to save money by skipping mortgage payments and use the extra cash to buy scratch off lottery tickets.

I was kind of snarking at you about “why bother attacking his policies on here,” the other day. But I do think it’s interesting to see the response, or lack thereof, particularly among the cohort of posters who are invested as being seen as principled conservatives.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, MercyPercy, swampfoxfan and 3 others
#14,888
#14,888
825VOL said:
Since you refuse to answer the question, I will treat you like my 14-year-old students when I teach them the Constitution so maybe you can understand it.

Provide means to give. This one is simple. If I provide lunch for you, that means I give you lunch. In context of the Constitution, it is the federal governments job to provide or give us our defense.

Promote is not as straightforward as provide. If you ask me to promote your rap concert, does that mean I give you a free place to put it on at and buy all the tickets for the concert? Of course not. Promote means I tell or show people why your concert is a good idea, I tell them it would be fun, it would be good for them to support someone local, they will get to hang out with their friends, etc. So, promote means that I think something is a good idea and it will help you in one way or another, so I want you and others to know about it. In context of the Constitution, promote means things the government thinks will be good for its citizens such as education, safety, proper nutrition, daily exercise, etc. It does not mean the government is to provide these things.

As far as your "scholars" comment, scholars used to think the moon was made of cheese, the Earth was flat and many other idiotic things, that didn't make them correct any more than it makes you correct.
Click to expand...
Yep, "scholars" are often proven to be wrong with the passage of time.
The flat earther's certainly were. I guess we probably disagree on who the flat earther is in this debate.

Had the states responded to the fed's promotion by adequately providing, then there would have been no need for the feds to step into the provider role.

Hell, had local communities adequately provided, there would have been no need for the state to get involved.

But that's the way it always goes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#14,891
#14,891
RockyTop85 said:
So far, most of this administration’s economic/trade and foreign policy is analogous to saying they’re going to save money by skipping mortgage payments and use the extra cash to buy scratch off lottery tickets.
Click to expand...
I shared my family's financial system with you in confidence. Whatever happened to attorney - client privilege???
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol, YankeeVol and RockyTop85
#14,895
#14,895
Sea Ray said:
A lot of the Democratic narrative falls apart when you look at all their criticisms, for example Trump is a dictator and he’s Hitler and then they say that he cedes power to Elon Musk. These narratives just fall apart every time they throw another gripe up against the wall.
Click to expand...
He’s Hilter but he’s also an appeaser like Chamberlain. He needs to either appease or defeat himself.
 
#14,896
#14,896
luthervol said:
Yep, "scholars" are often proven to be wrong with the passage of time.
The flat earther's certainly were. I guess we probably disagree on who the flat earther is in this debate.

Had the states responded to the fed's promotion by adequately providing, then there would have been no need for the feds to step into the provider role.

Hell, had local communities adequately provided, there would have been no need for the state to get involved.

But that's the way it always goes.
Click to expand...
Can you ever just admit when you are wrong?
 
#14,898
#14,898
#14,899
#14,899
LouderVol said:
Canada wasn't involved.

2015 CONACAF here in Atlanta. It was Jamaica & US, boos by both. and Panama Mexico, boos by both. the boos were the easiest things to hear from the crowd live and in person. no idea how it sounded on TV.

and it was also US & Panama in 2017 in Chattanooga. Boos by both, again no idea how it sounded on TV.
Click to expand...

Boos are always much louder or "carry" more than higher pitched sounds that crowds yell or sing etc. Its a scientific thing due to frequency. Saw it on Mythbusters or somewhere ... but anyway, at the same decibel level and all things being equal, lower pitched sounds like "boo" carry much further and louder than higher pitched sounds. A small number of buttheads in the crowd can overpower the sound of a much larger group that is cheering. Q
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top