Has the term social conservative

[donttread]

Deteriorated into merely an excuse for greed and a lack of caring and empathy towards one's fellow man?

[Common]

I dont know if they are social conservatives or what their label is, but theres a faction of the republican party who spend every day of their political lives trying to cut social security, medicare and all other safety nets. Then they vote for every corporate or rich mans giveaway. Paul Ryan comes the forefront of that list, I dont know what you would call him but I cant wait till he gets his worthless ass out of politics.

Both Democrats and Republicans are so politically flawed and rotten that outside factions have overshadowed both of them. Each has agenda items that americans for the most part cant stand

Its 2018 with all its problems and we still have abortion in the paper each and every day for Gods sakes. Bring it to the supreme court get another ruling, stop federal funding of abortions and then STFU about it and fix something real for all americans.

The left does absolutely nothing for this country, they are a fractured piecemeal glob of special interest groups. Nothing they do is for the good of the entire country its always for the good of some small group. Then they fight anything meaningful being done because it always affects one of their special interest groups.

The left worries about transexuals, abortion, illegal immigrants, gay rights who have more rights and protections than anyone else in the world. They are on a campaign to denigrate white men in the hopes that will raise black men. They want a genderless society and keep trying to convince us women are identical to me and can do anything a man can do.

The lefts agenda and focus has created this great divide between americans and all of the above. Democrats havent done ANYTHING for america as a whole since the day obama was elected.

The right does what it always does try to start a war somewhere to make money and find ways for the rich not to have to pay taxs and make more money and keep loopholes that make them make more money. Then try to blame the deficit on everyone else but the rich and try to take from them to fix it.

Trump hate him love him whatever, is the only president that I remember thats actually trying to do things that would help the country. But instead of trying to work with him and help him you have the left and a faction of the right trying to take him down every minute of everyday.

This country has to crash before all this will end and start from scratch

[donttread]

I dont know if they are social conservatives or what their label is, but theres a faction of the republican party who spend every day of their political lives trying to cut social security, medicare and all other safety nets. Then they vote for every corporate or rich mans giveaway. Paul Ryan comes the forefront of that list, I dont know what you would call him but I cant wait till he gets his worthless ass out of politics.

Both Democrats and Republicans are so politically flawed and rotten that outside factions have overshadowed both of them. Each has agenda items that americans for the most part cant stand

Its 2018 with all its problems and we still have abortion in the paper each and every day for Gods sakes. Bring it to the supreme court get another ruling, stop federal funding of abortions and then STFU about it and fix something real for all americans.

The left does absolutely nothing for this country, they are a fractured piecemeal glob of special interest groups. Nothing they do is for the good of the entire country its always for the good of some small group. Then they fight anything meaningful being done because it always affects one of their special interest groups.

The left worries about transexuals, abortion, illegal immigrants, gay rights who have more rights and protections than anyone else in the world. They are on a campaign to denigrate white men in the hopes that will raise black men. They want a genderless society and keep trying to convince us women are identical to me and can do anything a man can do.

The lefts agenda and focus has created this great divide between americans and all of the above. Democrats havent done ANYTHING for america as a whole since the day obama was elected.

The right does what it always does try to start a war somewhere to make money and find ways for the rich not to have to pay taxs and make more money and keep loopholes that make them make more money. Then try to blame the deficit on everyone else but the rich and try to take from them to fix it.

Trump hate him love him whatever, is the only president that I remember thats actually trying to do things that would help the country. But instead of trying to work with him and help him you have the left and a faction of the right trying to take him down every minute of everyday.

This country has to crash before all this will end and start from scratch



And what magic vodoo do they use to prevent us from rejecting both camps?

[Common]

And what magic vodoo do they use to prevent us from rejecting both camps?

I do reject both as a whole but this country is run by them and I take my kids and grandkids and great more into the equasion than I do myself, I have to choose the lesser of the two evils. Taking all into consideration the right is better for america than the left at this point clearly. That of course is only my personal opinion

[spunkloaf]

I do reject both as a whole but this country is run by them and I take my kids and grandkids and great more into the equasion than I do myself, I have to choose the lesser of the two evils. Taking all into consideration the right is better for america than the left at this point clearly. That of course is only my personal opinion

That is so tragic, since the right is the one paid for by the energy companies. I personally don't think they give a damn about any of us, and they pander to their base just to get their votes. The Koch Brothers are the worst. That shit should be outlawed. What is the point of having a democracy when all the big kids are just going to make the decisions, anyways?

[MisterVeritis]

That is so tragic, since the right is the one paid for by the energy companies. I personally don't think they give a damn about any of us, and they pander to their base just to get their votes. The Koch Brothers are the worst. That shit should be outlawed. What is the point of having a democracy when all the big kids are just going to make the decisions, anyways?
We have a Republic. It is a representative republic. We elect men and women to make and enforce our laws. If you want someone to care about you I recommend you try one of the many online dating sites.

[MisterVeritis]

I dont know if they are social conservatives or what their label is, but theres a faction of the republican party who spend every day of their political lives trying to cut social security, medicare and all other safety nets.
Wouldn't that be cool? If only it were true. The federal government has no constitutional authority to transfer wealth from people like me to people like you. It would be a wonderful thing to begin a return to Constitutional government.

[Captdon]

That is so tragic, since the right is the one paid for by the energy companies. I personally don't think they give a damn about any of us, and they pander to their base just to get their votes. The Koch Brothers are the worst. That $#@! should be outlawed. What is the point of having a democracy when all the big kids are just going to make the decisions, anyways?

This is tragic: the Left wants to take your money and give it to those who don't earn it. Everything else is minor compared to that. George Soros and his ilk are the worst.

[Common]

That is so tragic, since the right is the one paid for by the energy companies. I personally don't think they give a damn about any of us, and they pander to their base just to get their votes. The Koch Brothers are the worst. That shit should be outlawed. What is the point of having a democracy when all the big kids are just going to make the decisions, anyways?
I stated clearly that the right is for the rich and I stated theres a faction that wants to dismantle the safety nets.

The democrats have accomplished absolutely nothing since obama became president. They did nothing for the economy, every aspect of the economy was in the toilet. Unemployment, food stamp use was the highest ever. They did nothing to try and bring jobs to america. They focused on gays in the military, trannys in womens bathrooms and illegal immigrants.


There is no way you or anyone else can convince me that the democrat party is nothing but a conglomerate of special interest groups none of which include my family.

I also clearly stated I chose the lesser of the two evils based on what I believe is best for my Kids and grandkids and greatgrandkids.

Spunkloaf with all due respect and no personal insult intended in any way. Democrats are always in denial at what the democrat party does and never admit that it does one thing wrong ever or that it ever fails at anything.

Obama failed america, he did great for a few small special interest groups

[Common]

Wouldn't that be cool? If only it were true. The federal government has no constitutional authority to transfer wealth from people like me to people like you. It would be a wonderful thing to begin a return to Constitutional government.
Then they shouldnt have the right to take money from me and give it to you

[MisterVeritis]

Then they shouldnt have the right to take money from me and give it to you
Exactly! Do you see how easy it can be to come to the right side?

[Chris]

Deteriorated into merely an excuse for greed and a lack of caring and empathy towards one's fellow man?

My impression is social conservativism took a back seat to social democracy popularized by Bernie Sanders.

Social conservatism was about preserving tradition and social institutions against liberal government erosion of those values.

[spunkloaf]

I stated clearly that the right is for the rich and I stated theres a faction that wants to dismantle the safety nets.

The democrats have accomplished absolutely nothing since obama became president. They did nothing for the economy, every aspect of the economy was in the toilet. Unemployment, food stamp use was the highest ever. They did nothing to try and bring jobs to america. They focused on gays in the military, trannys in womens bathrooms and illegal immigrants.


There is no way you or anyone else can convince me that the democrat party is nothing but a conglomerate of special interest groups none of which include my family.

I also clearly stated I chose the lesser of the two evils based on what I believe is best for my Kids and grandkids and greatgrandkids.

Spunkloaf with all due respect and no personal insult intended in any way. Democrats are always in denial at what the democrat party does and never admit that it does one thing wrong ever or that it ever fails at anything.

Obama failed america, he did great for a few small special interest groups

Really? I thought we were doing pretty good for those 8 years. Unemployment dropped. The economy grew. We averted a financial disaster, which was brought on by unfettered financial practices administered by greedy profiteers.

I also think it's sad that you don't see the benefit to the whole that LGBT rights brings. It was a statement that every citizen has a right to participate in the military and get married, given they can demonstrate the competency to do so, without being subject to the court of public opinion about their lifestyle. You may not see how that benefits you, but it does. Just because it doesn't put millions of dollars in your pockets doesn't mean you are not a beneficiary of it.

How many people in your family are gay?

[spunkloaf]

Oh, and Obamacare. I was a direct beneficiary of that.

[jimmyz]

Really? I thought we were doing pretty good for those 8 years. Unemployment dropped. The economy grew. We averted a financial disaster, which was brought on by unfettered financial practices administered by greedy profiteers.

I also think it's sad that you don't see the benefit to the whole that LGBT rights brings. It was a statement that every citizen has a right to participate in the military and get married, given they can demonstrate the competency to do so, without being subject to the court of public opinion about their lifestyle. You may not see how that benefits you, but it does. Just because it doesn't put millions of dollars in your pockets doesn't mean you are not a beneficiary of it.

How many people in your family are gay?
You've had the right to stick whatever you want into whomever's hole for millennia. It's only recently that legislation has called it something it is not (marriage). That change is what social conservatives are against... even gay social conservatives.

[jimmyz]

Oh, and Obamacare. I was a direct beneficiary of that.

And my tax dollars subsidized your lower Obamacare premiums. Where's my thank you note?

[spunkloaf]

And my tax dollars subsidized your lower Obamacare premiums. Where's my thank you note?

I pay my taxes. I'm thanking myself. :wink:

[spunkloaf]

You've had the right to stick whatever you want into whomever's hole for millennia. It's only recently that legislation has called it something it is not (marriage). That change is what social conservatives are against... even gay social conservatives.

Thanks to liberals, nobody can dictate to you what your definition of a marriage, or anything else for that matter, is. You get to do your thing, no matter how many people hate you for it. You're welcome.

[jimmyz]

Thanks to liberals, nobody can dictate to you what your definition of a marriage, or anything else for that matter, is. You get to do your thing, no matter how many people hate you for it. You're welcome.

**Post deleted for my misunderstanding what Spunkloaf posted**

[spunkloaf]

I'm to be "hated" by social progressives huh. How tolerant of you. :wink:

That's not what I said.

[jimmyz]

That's not what I said.

After re-reading your post I agree. Post edited.

[Common]

Really? I thought we were doing pretty good for those 8 years. Unemployment dropped. The economy grew. We averted a financial disaster, which was brought on by unfettered financial practices administered by greedy profiteers.

I also think it's sad that you don't see the benefit to the whole that LGBT rights brings. It was a statement that every citizen has a right to participate in the military and get married, given they can demonstrate the competency to do so, without being subject to the court of public opinion about their lifestyle. You may not see how that benefits you, but it does. Just because it doesn't put millions of dollars in your pockets doesn't mean you are not a beneficiary of it.

How many people in your family are gay?
You thought wrong, there were more middleclass on foodstamps than ever before, unemployment was not lower. Thats why hillary didnt win by a landslide

I will state this clearly from my view of the obama years he did nothing for the country as a whole, it was not his focus. His focus was attacking police, and coddling small special interest groups another reason hillary did not win by an electoral landslide.

Obama ignored the largest chunk of the country and they knew they were being ignored.

[NapRover]

If people want to start calling dogs cats, it’s fine with me.

[spunkloaf]

You thought wrong, there were more middleclass on foodstamps than ever before, unemployment was not lower. Thats why hillary didnt win by a landslide

I will state this clearly from my view of the obama years he did nothing for the country as a whole, it was not his focus. His focus was attacking police, and coddling small special interest groups another reason hillary did not win by an electoral landslide.

Obama ignored the largest chunk of the country and they knew they were being ignored.

I can't tell you that your perspective is not your perspective. That's a 0 = 0 situation. What I can tell you is that your perspective is warped. And unemployment was, indeed lower.

By the way. Has it escaped your attention that the current president made outrageous remarks that the unemployment rate was 40 goddamned percent under Obama? Is that the honest truth? Was it really 40%?

[spunkloaf]

Common, I can't FORCE you to appreciate the things Obama did for you. It's your prerogative and your decision to dismiss it. With that being said, I don't really want to sit here and debate it with you, because I'm not going to change your mind. Likewise, you are not going to change mine. However, you are living in a fantasy if you believe that the GOP is really any better than the Democrats. I think the last election has demonstrated just how desperate the right is, and how low they have sunk. I am referring to the character of the POTUS.

[Captdon]

Really? I thought we were doing pretty good for those 8 years. Unemployment dropped. The economy grew. We averted a financial disaster, which was brought on by unfettered financial practices administered by greedy profiteers.

I also think it's sad that you don't see the benefit to the whole that LGBT rights brings. It was a statement that every citizen has a right to participate in the military and get married, given they can demonstrate the competency to do so, without being subject to the court of public opinion about their lifestyle. You may not see how that benefits you, but it does. Just because it doesn't put millions of dollars in your pockets doesn't mean you are not a beneficiary of it.

How many people in your family are gay?

You do know that gay rights had nothing to do with the Democratic Party? It was all SCOTUS. Why would the number of gays in my family concern you?

It didn't say every citizen had the right to participate in the military. Even if I was young I couldn't participate.

[Captdon]

I pay my taxes. I'm thanking myself. :wink:

I pay taxes and get nothing for your Obamacare. Pay your own way and stop sucking off my money.

[Captdon]

Thanks to liberals, nobody can dictate to you what your definition of a marriage, or anything else for that matter, is. You get to do your thing, no matter how many people hate you for it. You're welcome.

I don't get to define right and wrong. If I rob a bank I'm certain I will go to jail.

[Captdon]

I can't tell you that your perspective is not your perspective. That's a 0 = 0 situation. What I can tell you is that your perspective is warped. And unemployment was, indeed lower.

By the way. Has it escaped your attention that the current president made outrageous remarks that the unemployment rate was 40 goddamned percent under Obama? Is that the honest truth? Was it really 40%?

He said no such thing. You have the right to lie, though.

[Captdon]

Common, I can't FORCE you to appreciate the things Obama did for you. It's your prerogative and your decision to dismiss it. With that being said, I don't really want to sit here and debate it with you, because I'm not going to change your mind. Likewise, you are not going to change mine. However, you are living in a fantasy if you believe that the GOP is really any better than the Democrats. I think the last election has demonstrated just how desperate the right is, and how low they have sunk. I am referring to the character of the POTUS.
]


The character of Trump compared to Clinton? I know you're not a serious person now.

[MisterVeritis]

Thanks to liberals, nobody can dictate to you what your definition of a marriage, or anything else for that matter, is. You get to do your thing, no matter how many people hate you for it. You're welcome.
We have the right to govern ourselves. Five men and women in black robes took that right away. We have legislatures to make our laws. The courts have no business changing our laws.

[jimmyz]

I pay my taxes. I'm thanking myself. :wink:

Here's the difference, the taxes you pay DO NOT subsidize my private (non-Obamacare) health insurance. I pay for it ALL myself. YOU do not. The upside for me is I can choose many providers that welcome me as opposed to being sent to Dr. Jagdesh Badbreath who is fresh off the boat and substandard in every way to my Doc with a Johns Hopkins diploma on his wall.

[Tahuyaman]

Deteriorated into merely an excuse for greed and a lack of caring and empathy towards one's fellow man?

Short answer.... No.

[Dr. Who]

Wouldn't that be cool? If only it were true. The federal government has no constitutional authority to transfer wealth from people like me to people like you. It would be a wonderful thing to begin a return to Constitutional government.
It also has no right to be co-opted by transnational companies who influence foreign policy nor does it have any right to spent taxpayer dollars to manipulate regions of the world by subsidizing foreign militaries in their aid or support the bottom line of Big Pharma and other transnationals at the expense of American citizens, but it does. In that respect it is transferring wealth to corporate and political non-citizens, which in the scheme of things is far worse than supporting its own.

[MisterVeritis]

It also has no right to be co-opted by transnational companies who influence foreign policy nor does it have any right to spent taxpayer dollars to manipulate regions of the world by subsidizing foreign militaries in their aid or support the bottom line of Big Pharma and other transnationals at the expense of American citizens, but it does. In that respect it is transferring wealth to corporate and political non-citizens, which in the scheme of things is far worse than supporting its own.
It is the other way around. A federal government that behaved in accordance with the US Constitution would not be positioned to shake down corporations.

[Dr. Who]

Here's the difference, the taxes you pay DO NOT subsidize my private (non-Obamacare) health insurance. I pay for it ALL myself. YOU do not. The upside for me is I can choose many providers that welcome me as opposed to being sent to Dr. Jagdesh Badbreath who is fresh off the boat and substandard in every way to my Doc with a Johns Hopkins diploma on his wall.

Sure, but you don't complain about subsidizing Big Pharma that is driving up your health care costs. Who would you rather give money to - someone who is suffering or a transnational corporation that has billions of dollars?

[donttread]

I do reject both as a whole but this country is run by them and I take my kids and grandkids and great more into the equasion than I do myself, I have to choose the lesser of the two evils. Taking all into consideration the right is better for america than the left at this point clearly. That of course is only my personal opinion


The "lesser of two evils" is still evil asa our deteriorating situation shows.

[Dr. Who]

It is the other way around. A federal government that behaved in accordance with the US Constitution would not be positioned to shake down corporations.

It's not "the government" per se, it's all of the individual elected members that have been given license to sell out to private interests because their loyalty is purchased before they are elected. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents it and the fact that the absolute right to petition guarantees an unrestrained right to lobby, provides the opportunity. I'm pretty sure that the right to petition was never intended to be a pathway to corruption, but it's lack of definition has made it so.

[MisterVeritis]

Sure, but you don't complain about subsidizing Big Pharma that is driving up your health care costs. Who would you rather give money to - someone who is suffering or a transnational corporation that has billions of dollars?
A federal government constrained by its Constitution would do neither.

[MisterVeritis]

It's not "the government" per se, it's all of the individual elected members that have been given license to sell out to private interests because their loyalty is purchased before they are elected. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents it and the fact that the absolute right to petition guarantees an unrestrained right to lobby, provides the opportunity. I'm pretty sure that the right to petition was never intended to be a pathway to corruption, but it's lack of definition has made it so.
Of course, it is the government.

See Article 1 Section 8 for what is allowed.

[spunkloaf]

You do know that gay rights had nothing to do with the Democratic Party? It was all SCOTUS. Why would the number of gays in my family concern you?

It didn't say every citizen had the right to participate in the military. Even if I was young I couldn't participate.

There are clear reasons for why certain people can't be in the military. They are legitimate reasons, not "I'm afraid of homosexuals" reasons.

[spunkloaf]

Here's the difference, the taxes you pay DO NOT subsidize my private (non-Obamacare) health insurance. I pay for it ALL myself. YOU do not. The upside for me is I can choose many providers that welcome me as opposed to being sent to Dr. Jagdesh Badbreath who is fresh off the boat and substandard in every way to my Doc with a Johns Hopkins diploma on his wall.

I don't really care about your health problems, dude.

[Dr. Who]

Of course, it is the government.

See Article 1 Section 8 for what is allowed.
Name one part of Article 1 Section 8 that prevents candidates from taking campaign financing from transnational corporations or big business.

[Peter1469]

Name one part of Article 1 Section 8 that prevents candidates from taking campaign financing from transnational corporations or big business.

Art. 1, sec. 8 lists what the legislature can spend tax dollars on.

[spunkloaf]

He said no such thing. You have the right to lie, though.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/10/19-times-trump-called-the-jobs-numbers-fake-before-they-made-him-look-good/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.189cddde2f17


Sep. 7, 2012 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/244102395838230528)
“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”
Oct. 19, 2012 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/259391524201193472)
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”
Aug. 11, 2013 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20130812_015500_Road_to_the_White_House/start/540/end/600?q=false+number)
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”
May 31, 2014 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20140601_013100_Donald_Trump_on_Politics_and _Business/start/1904/end/1964?q=phony+number)
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”
June 16, 2015 (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/16/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-real-unemployment-rate-18-20-per/)
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”
Aug. 11, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20150812_050100_Hannity/start/1495/end/1555?q=phony+number)
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”
Aug. 30, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20150830_174700_Washington_This_Week/start/724/end/784?q=phony+number)
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”
Sept. 28, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20150928_150400_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1322/end/1382?q=phony+number)
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”
Sept. 29, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20150929_103100_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1327/end/1387?q=phony+number)
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”
Oct. 9, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20151009_222700_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1706/end/1766?q=phony+number)
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”
Oct. 11, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20151011_171100_Donald_Trump_Campaign_Rally_ in_Las_Vegas/start/1843/end/1903?q=phony+number)
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”
Jan. 17, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160117_203600_Washington_This_Week/start/773/end/833?q=phony+number)
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”
Feb. 9, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160210_025700_2016_New_Hampshire_Primary_R esults/start/597.9/end/612.2?q=phony+number)
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”
March 12, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20160312_100100_Hannity/start/1588/end/1648?q=phony+number)
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”
May 24, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20160525_020100_Hannity/start/263/end/323?q=phony+number)
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”
July 7, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160707_060400_Newt_Gingrich_Campaigns_with _Donald_Trump/start/1740/end/1800)
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”
Aug. 8, 2016 (http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/campaign/290777-transcript-of-donald-trumps-economic-policy-speech-to-detroit)
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”
Nov. 4, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20161104_170100_Happening_Now/start/128/end/188?q=phony+number)
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”
Dec. 8, 2016 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/12/12/donald-trump-still-does-not-understand-the-unemployment-rate/?utm_term=.04bdc91ffd34)
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”


Please don't accuse me of lying again. Ever.

[Common Sense]

To me, what has discredited social conservatives was the election of Trump. His words and deeds don't exactly conform to social conservatism.

[spunkloaf]

To me, what has discredited social conservatives was the election of Trump. His words and deeds don't exactly conform to social conservatism.

He lies, and his supporters cheer. And then when others fact-check, his supporters say "HE NEVER SAID THAT!"

[Tahuyaman]

To me, what has discredited social conservatives was the election of Trump. His words and deeds don't exactly conform to social conservatism.


Lol...... That's a lie. You've been an opponent of social conservative ideas for years.

[Dr. Who]

Art. 1, sec. 8 lists what the legislature can spend tax dollars on.

Exactly.

[Common Sense]

Lol...... That's a lie. You've been an opponent of social conservative ideas for years.

Their politics, sure, but their political ideals isn't what discredits them in my eyes. I understand why some would hold their positions and I wouldn't discredit someone for holding social conservative positions. I would disagree with them...but that's far different than what I said.

I said their support of Trump has discredited them. It illustrates hypocrisy.

If you're going to claim I'm lying, please try to understand what I actually wrote.

[spunkloaf]

Captdon. Oh, Captdon. I'm waiting for your response and apology.

[Dr. Who]

Their politics, sure, but their political ideals isn't what discredits them in my eyes. I understand why some would hold their positions and I wouldn't discredit someone for holding social conservative positions. I would disagree with them...but that's far different than what I said.

I said their support of Trump has discredited them. It illustrates hypocrisy.

If you're going to claim I'm lying, please try to understand what I actually wrote.
I agree. A true social conservative could not ignore Trump's hedonism and frankly predatory attitude toward women nor could they excuse his less than honest business practices.

[MisterVeritis]

Name one part of Article 1 Section 8 that prevents candidates from taking campaign financing from transnational corporations or big business.
Don't be a fool. Look at how little the federal government does under the Constitution. People and corporations would not have to pay off politicians.

Open your closed mind.

[MisterVeritis]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/03/10/19-times-trump-called-the-jobs-numbers-fake-before-they-made-him-look-good/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.189cddde2f17
Sep. 7, 2012 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/244102395838230528)
“Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers”
Oct. 19, 2012 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/259391524201193472)
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%”
Aug. 11, 2013 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20130812_015500_Road_to_the_White_House/start/540/end/600?q=false+number)
“We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers.”
May 31, 2014 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20140601_013100_Donald_Trump_on_Politics_and _Business/start/1904/end/1964?q=phony+number)
“Unemployment is a totally phony number.”
June 16, 2015 (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/16/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-real-unemployment-rate-18-20-per/)
“Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it.”
Aug. 11, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20150812_050100_Hannity/start/1495/end/1555?q=phony+number)
“Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it.”
Aug. 30, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20150830_174700_Washington_This_Week/start/724/end/784?q=phony+number)
“They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not.”
Sept. 28, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN2_20150928_150400_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1322/end/1382?q=phony+number)
“I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false.”
Sept. 29, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20150929_103100_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1327/end/1387?q=phony+number)
“The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false.”
Oct. 9, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20151009_222700_Key_Capitol_Hill_Hearings/start/1706/end/1766?q=phony+number)
“They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent.”
Oct. 11, 2015 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20151011_171100_Donald_Trump_Campaign_Rally_ in_Las_Vegas/start/1843/end/1903?q=phony+number)
“Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books.”
Jan. 17, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160117_203600_Washington_This_Week/start/773/end/833?q=phony+number)
“Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed.”
Feb. 9, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160210_025700_2016_New_Hampshire_Primary_R esults/start/597.9/end/612.2?q=phony+number)
“Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent.”
March 12, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20160312_100100_Hannity/start/1588/end/1648?q=phony+number)
“The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers.”
May 24, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20160525_020100_Hannity/start/263/end/323?q=phony+number)
“You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.”
July 7, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/CSPAN_20160707_060400_Newt_Gingrich_Campaigns_with _Donald_Trump/start/1740/end/1800)
“The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment.”
Aug. 8, 2016 (http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/campaign/290777-transcript-of-donald-trumps-economic-policy-speech-to-detroit)
“The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics.”
Nov. 4, 2016 (http://archive.org/details/FOXNEWSW_20161104_170100_Happening_Now/start/128/end/188?q=phony+number)
“The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent.”
Dec. 8, 2016 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/12/12/donald-trump-still-does-not-understand-the-unemployment-rate/?utm_term=.04bdc91ffd34)
“The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”

Please don't accuse me of lying again. Ever.
You do know he is smarter than you, don't you?

[Tahuyaman]

Their politics, sure, but their political ideals isn't what discredits them in my eyes. I understand why some would hold their positions and I wouldn't discredit someone for holding social conservative positions. I would disagree with them...but that's far different than what I said.

I said their support of Trump has discredited them. It illustrates hypocrisy.

If you're going to claim I'm lying, please try to understand what I actually wrote.

Conservatives support the things he does which are in line with conservative principles and they don’t support the things he does which are not.

You are the hypocrite here.

[Common Sense]

Conservatives support the things he does which are in line with conservative principles and they don’t support the things he does which are not.

You are the hypocrite here.
Lol...ok.

[spunkloaf]

You do know he is smarter than you, don't you?

Oh? Well, he called me a liar, and claimed Trump never said those things. I just proved him wrong. So far he is 0 and 1.

[jimmyz]

I don't really care about your health problems, dude.

Thank God no problems to date. But it is nice knowing The Mayo Clinic is 20 minutes from my home and takes my top-shelf insurance. You could not park in the lot at Mayo with your Obamacare.

[spunkloaf]

Thank God no problems to date. But it is nice knowing The Mayo Clinic is 20 minutes from my home and takes my top-shelf insurance. You could not park in the lot at Mayo with your Obamacare.

God, you must be a miserable human. All you have is attack, attack, attack.

[Dr. Who]

Don't be a fool. Look at how little the federal government does under the Constitution. People and corporations would not have to pay off politicians.

Open your closed mind.
The point is that the Constitution is silent on this issue and it is the singularly biggest contribution to corruption in government from which all other ills stem and has done so almost from the date the Constitution was signed. Virtually every elected candidate is beholding and if they want to continue in office, they have to accede to their benefactors. The only other alternative is to limit any candidate to one term of office.

[jimmyz]

God, you must be a miserable human. All you have is attack, attack, attack.

Nah I am good.

I know where a penis is supposed to go hence no worry of anal gonorrhea like you have.
I dont beg other taxpayers to support my substandard Obamacare for treatment of said anal gonorrhea.

Yep, everything is good cock-breath. Want a mint?

[spunkloaf]

Nah I am good.

I know where a penis is supposed to go hence no worry of anal gonorrhea like you have.
I dont beg other taxpayers to support my substandard Obamacare for treatment of said anal gonorrhea.

Yep, everything is good cock-breath. Want a mint?

Moderator, please?

[jimmyz]

Moderator, please?

Your insults to my religion today brought out a flame that even your tears cannot put out. Sob into your pillow more.

[Common Sense]

Nah I am good.

I know where a penis is supposed to go hence no worry of anal gonorrhea like you have.
I dont beg other taxpayers to support my substandard Obamacare for treatment of said anal gonorrhea.

Yep, everything is good cock-breath. Want a mint?

Wait...are you a social conservative?

[Common Sense]

Your insults to my religion today brought out a flame that even your tears cannot put out. Sob into your pillow more.

How virtuous.

I'm not saying I condone SL's comment...I don't, but geeze.

[spunkloaf]

Your insults to my religion today brought out a flame that even your tears cannot put out. Sob into your pillow more.

I hope you learn how to handle differing opinions in the future without resorting to attacking people.

[spunkloaf]

How virtuous.

I'm not saying I condone SL's comment...I don't, but geeze.

I didn't attack anybody like this.

[jimmyz]

I hope you learn how to handle differing opinions in the future without resorting to attacking people.

I handled your opinions quite well and responded accordingly. In my way.

[jimmyz]

How virtuous.

I'm not saying I condone SL's comment...I don't, but geeze.
White Night somewhere else. Spunk is a punk and he knows it.

[spunkloaf]

I handled your opinions quite well and responded accordingly. In my way.

You said lots of disgusting things to me, and about me. I never did that to you.

[Common Sense]

White Night somewhere else. Spunk is a punk and he knows it.

I'll post where I like, thanks.

I'm not defending anyone...but there is a difference between an attack on a religion and an attack on an individual poster.

[spunkloaf]

You can't just throw a tantrum whenever somebody says something about Jesus Christ, or his mother, that you don't agree with.

Same thing for Donald Trump.

[spunkloaf]

I'll post where I like, thanks.

I'm not defending anyone...but there is a difference between an attack on a religion and an attack on an individual poster.

I think you are definitely defending me. Thanks.

[Common Sense]

I think you are definitely defending me. Thanks.

I'm not defending your comment. I'm simply stating that there is a huge difference between disparaging an idea, political position or a religion versus an individual.

[spunkloaf]

I'm not defending your comment. I'm simply stating that there is a huge difference between disparaging an idea, political position or a religion versus an individual.

And that's what I'm saying as well.

[Cletus]

I'll post where I like, thanks.

I'm not defending anyone...but there is a difference between an attack on a religion and an attack on an individual poster.

Not really.

A person's religion helps define him. For many, it is an integral part of his life and he could no more be separated from it than he could live without oxygen. You attack his belief system and you attack him.

Personally, I am about as nonreligious as it is possible to be. However, I understand the role religion plays in the lives of people and in society. If it helps guide people, if it brings them solace in times of hardship, it isn't a bad thing and you will never see me here or anywhere else criticize someone for his religious beliefs unless he uses them as a weapon. Even then, I am far more likely to show him how he is perverting the tenets of his religion than I am to attack the religion itself.

Spunkloaf is just a nasty person. I don't know anything about his life, nor do I want to. I have however, seen his interaction on this board and I find him more than a little disgusting.

Apparently, I am not the only one.

[Dr. Who]

Not really.

A person's religion helps define him. For many, it is an integral part of his life and he could no more be separated from it than he could live without oxygen. You attack his belief system and you attack him.

Personally, I am about as nonreligious as it is possible to be. However, I understand the role religion plays in the lives of people and in society. If it helps guide people, if it brings them solace in times of hardship, it isn't a bad thing and you will never see me here or anywhere else criticize someone for his religious beliefs unless he uses them as a weapon. Even then, I am far more likely to show him how he is perverting the tenets of his religion than I am to attack the religion itself.

Spunkloaf is just a nasty person. I don't know anything about his life, nor do I want to. I have however, seen his interaction on this board and I find him more than a little disgusting.

Apparently, I am not the only one.

No one has a duty to not question any religion and no one who is a member of that religion has a right to insult anyone who questions. If a person is secure in their faith, they welcome questioning. While insulting a faith is bad form, so is insulting someone's country and I don't see many who have a problem insulting all manner of nationalities and cultures, nor do many who get inflamed at having their own religion besmirched seem to have a problem with besmirching other faiths.

Respect has to be offered in order to be earned.

[spunkloaf]

Not really.

A person's religion helps define him. For many, it is an integral part of his life and he could no more be separated from it than he could live without oxygen. You attack his belief system and you attack him.

Personally, I am about as nonreligious as it is possible to be. However, I understand the role religion plays in the lives of people and in society. If it helps guide people, if it brings them solace in times of hardship, it isn't a bad thing and you will never see me here or anywhere else criticize someone for his religious beliefs unless he uses them as a weapon. Even then, I am far more likely to show him how he is perverting the tenets of his religion than I am to attack the religion itself.

Spunkloaf is just a nasty person. I don't know anything about his life, nor do I want to. I have however, seen his interaction on this board and I find him more than a little disgusting.

Apparently, I am not the only one.

I'm sorry I made you feel that way.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm sorry I made you feel that way.

You don’t make me feel anything but empathy for your parents.

[spunkloaf]

I wasn't calling people cock-breath, or putting them down because they have poor health insurance, or saying they have gonorrhea because they stick things in their rear ends.

As a matter of fact, as nasty as any of my posts have been in the past, none of them got quite that nasty. So, you can take your partisan sides here all you want. I already reported him. If something isn't done, then I guess we'll see what happens from there...but I can't stick around in a place where people let that kind of behavior go unchecked. I never attacked him like that, it was completely uncalled for.

[Tahuyaman]

Oh brother.

[spunkloaf]

Let's just stop attacking spunkloaf, and talk about the topic of the thread, please...

[Cletus]

I wasn't calling people cock-breath, or putting them down because they have poor health insurance, or saying they have gonorrhea because they stick things in their rear ends.

As a matter of fact, as nasty as any of my posts have been in the past, none of them got quite that nasty. So, you can take your partisan sides here all you want. I already reported him. If something isn't done, then I guess we'll see what happens from there...but I can't stick around in a place where people let that kind of behavior go unchecked. I never attacked him like that, it was completely uncalled for.

You elicited an emotional reaction. That doesn't make it right, but if someone attacks someone or something important to another, he shouldn't expect a proportional response.

Just let it go and hopefully he will be able to do the same. There is no reason to leave the forum over something that can be easily rectified. At some point, someone needs to take the high road.

One of the problems I have seen with this forum in the time I have been here is that people get bent out of shape over things that don't really matter. It happens to all of us. We all have our triggers. We all say things we shouldn't because it is just a fact of human nature that when we get worked up, rational thought goes out the window. It generally doesn't last long. It is really only a problem if it persists. Someone says something stupid, someone else responds in kind and we end up with the whole forum with their panties in a wad and we spend page after page talking about how the forum has "gone downhill" or is destroying itself. We are all supposed to be adults here. That means that sometimes, we just have to shrug off the bullshit and try to get the discussion back on topic.

I have been on forums like this almost since they came into existence and I have never seen one that didn't have its share of petty squabbles. More often than not, heavy handed attempts to control them causes more damage to the forum than the squabbles themselves. Really, as long as there is no viable threat of physical violence or the bickering goes on for an extended period, there is no actual harm done. If someone on a forum says he wants to kick my ass, I know the odds of him showing up at my door are so small there is no reason to give it a second thought. The same is true of insults. I think there are a few areas that should be off limits and warrant corrective action, but for the most part, they just don't matter. Suck it up and drive on and hope that if someone is going to insult you, he at least puts enough effort into it to make it original and interesting.

[Common]

Nah I am good.

I know where a penis is supposed to go hence no worry of anal gonorrhea like you have.
I dont beg other taxpayers to support my substandard Obamacare for treatment of said anal gonorrhea.

Yep, everything is good cock-breath. Want a mint?

Discuss the Topic Not other posters

[Peter1469]

Exactly.

That is spending for national programs. Other part of the constitution allows for administrative spending- like building the capital and maintaining it. To include legislative staff.

[donttread]

We have a Republic. It is a representative republic. We elect men and women to make and enforce our laws. If you want someone to care about you I recommend you try one of the many online dating sites.


They are supposed to care about our wishes not simply those of their party

[donttread]

Wouldn't that be cool? If only it were true. The federal government has no constitutional authority to transfer wealth from people like me to people like you. It would be a wonderful thing to begin a return to Constitutional government.

Including tax deferments that tend to help transfer wealth from the working person to people at the economic top. ?

[donttread]

You can't just throw a tantrum whenever somebody says something about Jesus Christ, or his mother, that you don't agree with.


Same thing for Donald Trump.

True but you also have control over what you say about some people's Gods

[donttread]

I agree. A true social conservative could not ignore Trump's hedonism and frankly predatory attitude toward women nor could they excuse his less than honest business practices.

I'm pretty sure most of the women Trump "preyed upon" lined up to be preyed upon in the VIP lounge.

[DGUtley]

Common, I can't FORCE you to appreciate the things Obama did for you.

What did Obama do for me?



It's your prerogative and your decision to dismiss it. With that being said, I don't really want to sit here and debate it with you, because I'm not going to change your mind. Likewise, you are not going to change mine. However, you are living in a fantasy if you believe that the GOP is really any better than the Democrats. I think the last election has demonstrated just how desperate the right is, and how low they have sunk. I am referring to the character of the POTUS.

They are both the same.

[donttread]

I can't tell you that your perspective is not your perspective. That's a 0 = 0 situation. What I can tell you is that your perspective is warped. And unemployment was, indeed lower.

By the way. Has it escaped your attention that the current president made outrageous remarks that the unemployment rate was 40 goddamned percent under Obama? Is that the honest truth? Was it really 40%?


We need a new measurement tool to take into account rampant under employment

[MisterVeritis]

The point is that the Constitution is silent on this issue and it is the singularly biggest contribution to corruption in government from which all other ills stem and has done so almost from the date the Constitution was signed. Virtually every elected candidate is beholding and if they want to continue in office, they have to accede to their benefactors. The only other alternative is to limit any candidate to one term of office.
Without the ability to shake down corporations no corporation would care what government is doing. A Federal government limited by the Constitution would have few opportunities to shake down corporations. You don't understand that.

[MisterVeritis]

We have a Republic. It is a representative republic. We elect men and women to make and enforce our laws. If you want someone to care about you I recommend you try one of the many online dating sites.

They are supposed to care about our wishes not simply those of their party
If you don't like the representation you receive then vote for someone more closely aligned with your views.

[MisterVeritis]

Including tax deferments that tend to help transfer wealth from the working person to people at the economic top. ?
You know my views about taxes.

Do you think you will EVER learn how to punctuate a sentence?

[spunkloaf]

True but you also have control over what you say about some people's Gods

That's true. And other people have control over what they say about liberals, too. The street goes both ways, right? The difference is, I was not attacking anybody directly.

I'm sorry if people get hurt when I speak about their God. But hey, everybody else has to put up with that kind of bullshit...so you might as well get used to it because you are not getting special treatment just because your are a Christian.

Anyways....what was this thread about again?

[Captdon]

We have the right to govern ourselves. Five men and women in black robes took that right away. We have legislatures to make our laws. The courts have no business changing our laws.


The Congress of 1803 destroyed this Republic. they allowed SCOTUS to decide on Constitutionality, They should have impeached the whole court for it. Guess those early founders were screw-ups.

[Captdon]

It also has no right to be co-opted by transnational companies who influence foreign policy nor does it have any right to spent taxpayer dollars to manipulate regions of the world by subsidizing foreign militaries in their aid or support the bottom line of Big Pharma and other transnationals at the expense of American citizens, but it does. In that respect it is transferring wealth to corporate and political non-citizens, which in the scheme of things is far worse than supporting its own.

This just blather. You are so far to the left you believe every lie you hear from them.

[Captdon]

It's not "the government" per se, it's all of the individual elected members that have been given license to sell out to private interests because their loyalty is purchased before they are elected. There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents it and the fact that the absolute right to petition guarantees an unrestrained right to lobby, provides the opportunity. I'm pretty sure that the right to petition was never intended to be a pathway to corruption, but it's lack of definition has made it so.

Start your own lobby.

[Captdon]

There are clear reasons for why certain people can't be in the military. They are legitimate reasons, not "I'm afraid of homosexuals" reasons.

What if the military decides they are a problem to the service. You support that? Who are you to decide what clear reasons are?

[Captdon]

Captdon. Oh, Captdon. I'm waiting for your response and apology.

For what?

[MisterVeritis]

The Congress of 1803 destroyed this Republic. they allowed SCOTUS to decide on Constitutionality, They should have impeached the whole court for it. Guess those early founders were screw-ups.
Some of them. Same as today. This is why Republics fail. We can do a reset. The Article V process to propose amendments is the last legitimate path.

[spunkloaf]

What if the military decides they are a problem to the service. You support that? Who are you to decide what clear reasons are?

And who are you?

The military has already decided that gays and transgender people are not a problem to the service.

[spunkloaf]

For what?

I provided like 10+ examples to counterclaim your assertion that I was making things up about what Trump said about unemployment. You made a claim, and then ran away without confronting my rebuttal. Is that your strategy?

Trump lied multiplle times, saying that unemployment under the Obama administration reached 40, and even 42 percent. (The numbers changed many times.) Why doesn't that bother you?

[Cletus]

And who are you?

The military has already decided that gays and transgender people are not a problem to the service.

No, they haven't decided that. The politicians at the top of the chain of command have decided that.

It is a problem.

[jimmyz]

I provided like 10+ examples to counterclaim your assertion that I was making things up about what Trump said about unemployment. You made a claim, and then ran away without confronting my rebuttal. Is that your strategy?




Trump lied multiplle times, saying that unemployment under the Obama administration reached 40, and even 42 percent. (The numbers changed many times.) Why doesn't that bother you?

Maybe he forgot the decimal point... 4.0 & 4.2 is what he probably was going for.

[Peter1469]

Including tax deferments that tend to help transfer wealth from the working person to people at the economic top. ?

How does a tax break for business and the wealthy take money from the working class?

[Peter1469]

We need a new measurement tool to take into account rampant under employment

We have one. It is part of the U-6 calculation.

[Peter1469]

The Congress of 1803 destroyed this Republic. they allowed SCOTUS to decide on Constitutionality, They should have impeached the whole court for it. Guess those early founders were screw-ups.

The purpose of Art. 3 was to create the judiciary as the 3rd part of checks and balances. If SCOTUS can't say a law is unconstitutional, there is no need for it. I have a problem when SCOTUS or the lower courts make or change legislation.

[nathanbforrest45]

I provided like 10+ examples to counterclaim your assertion that I was making things up about what Trump said about unemployment. You made a claim, and then ran away without confronting my rebuttal. Is that your strategy?

Trump lied multiplle times, saying that unemployment under the Obama administration reached 40, and even 42 percent. (The numbers changed many times.) Why doesn't that bother you?


Can you provide a link where President Donald Trump ever claimed unemployment hit 40% or more under Obama?

I am thanking you in advance because I know you will provide this link in very short order.

[donttread]

Without the ability to shake down corporations no corporation would care what government is doing. A Federal government limited by the Constitution would have few opportunities to shake down corporations. You don't understand that.

And vice versa. Corps buying influence would lessen if the government had less power to sell.

[donttread]

We have one. It is part of the U-6 calculation.

Does it compare the 24 hours at 10.00 an hour flipping burgers to the $20.00 an hour full time the college grad should be earning? If so why don't we hear more about it?

[donttread]

Meanwhile back at the ranch ma and pa are beating off the Indians but they keep cumming. LOL

Meanwhile back at the OP lets talk about whether or not social cons have a value based outlook on policy or are just selfish

[MisterVeritis]

The purpose of Art. 3 was to create the judiciary as the 3rd part of checks and balances. If SCOTUS can't say a law is unconstitutional, there is no need for it. I have a problem when SCOTUS or the lower courts make or change legislation.
At best the courts should have returned faulty legislation to the legislatures.

[donttread]

At best the courts should have returned faulty legislation to the legislatures.


With the exception of one textualist the SC is pretty much an extension of the "two major parties"

[spunkloaf]

No, they haven't decided that. The politicians at the top of the chain of command have decided that.

It is a problem.

Why is it a problem? Nobody can give a good answer to that.

[spunkloaf]

Maybe he forgot the decimal point... 4.0 & 4.2 is what he probably was going for.

No, he meant 40%. And he used vague terms, as usual.

He can get away with it because it isn't a crime to lie to the American public.

[Cletus]

Why is it a problem? Nobody can give a good answer to that.


Lots of people have given lots of answers... all good.

You just haven't paid attention.

[spunkloaf]

Lots of people have given lots of answers... all good.

You just haven't paid attention.

I'm waiting.

[Tahuyaman]

I'm waiting.

You’ve received several answers. You just need to be smart enough to recognize that.

[Dr. Who]

This just blather. You are so far to the left you believe every lie you hear from them.
So you support corruption. Good to know. And FYI, everything that I said is verifiable. Big Pharma is using America as a cash cow because the government allows it. No one else does - they care about their people. Corporations like Monsanto have legislation protecting them at the expense of farmers. Do you hate farmers? They are usually solid conservatives. These things are increasing the debt in America.

Have you got a soft spot for transnational oil corporations who don't even really sell their product in America? You must also feel that protecting Israel is worth incurring additional debt. Between the oil companies and Israel, America has amassed huge debt messing around in the middle east. Was the ME ever of any interest to America before the discovery of oil. No, it wasn't. Now it isn't even relevant in that respect, other than their ability to change the currency used to purchase oil which artificially props up the US dollar and makes energy costs cheaper in America than anywhere else.

So, America borrows trillions of dollars in order to continue to destabilize the ME, to ensure that oil is traded in US dollars while telling everyone that it's to help the people of the ME. All the while America is paying to protect Israel as their main source of intelligence in middle east and protect horrific states like Saudi Arabia because they permit America to maintain military bases in their country while said country is funding terrorism around the world. Meanwhile, the fed continues to print money that hasn't the value that it is purported to have and one day, this whole disingenuous house of cards is going to crash, making the Great Depression look like a tiny economic setback.

You need to pull your head out of the sand and get some oxygen. When the house of cards comes down, it's going to be a bumpy ride.

[spunkloaf]

You’ve received several answers. You just need to be smart enough to recognize that.

I have not received a single answer.

If you are going to criticize me for missing these "answers," have the integrity to point them out to me. Otherwise, kindly fuck off. :wink:

[Peter1469]

Does it compare the 24 hours at 10.00 an hour flipping burgers to the $20.00 an hour full time the college grad should be earning? If so why don't we hear more about it?

Because politicians and the media focus on the U-3 figures.


Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization[Percent]
Measure
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted


Apr.
2017
Mar.
2018
Apr.
2018
Apr.
2017
Dec.
2017
Jan.
2018
Feb.
2018
Mar.
2018
Apr.
2018


U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

1.8
1.5
1.5
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.4


U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

2.1
2.1
1.7
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.8


U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

4.1
4.1
3.7
4.4
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
3.9


U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

4.4
4.4
3.9
4.7
4.4
4.4
4.4
4.3
4.2


U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

5.0
5.0
4.5
5.3
5.1
5.1
5.1
4.9
4.7


U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

8.1
8.1
7.4
8.6
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.0
7.8


NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.




Link (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm)

[Peter1469]

At best the courts should have returned faulty legislation to the legislatures.

I agree that is what they should do. If SCOTUS finds a statute to be unconstitutional, they should rule as such and perhaps even suggest to the legislature a way to rewrite the law to make it constitutional if possible.

What Roberts did the the Obamacare case went well beyond that. He said the individual mandate (which Congress said was not a tax) was a tax in order to make the law constitutional on the record before SCOUTS (at the time I explain that it still wasn't Constitutional as a tax, because you cannot divorce the taxing power from Article 1, sec. 8).

[Tahuyaman]

I have not received a single answer.

If you are going to criticize me for missing these "answers," have the integrity to point them out to me. Otherwise, kindly $#@! off. :wink:


I'm just going to disregard you.

[Tahuyaman]

I agree that is what they should do. If SCOTUS finds a statute to be unconstitutional, they should rule as such and perhaps even suggest to the legislature a way to rewrite the law to make it constitutional if possible.

What Roberts did the the Obamacare case went well beyond that. He said the individual mandate (which Congress said was not a tax) was a tax in order to make the law constitutional on the record before SCOUTS (at the time I explain that it still wasn't Constitutional as a tax, because you cannot divorce the taxing power from Article 1, sec. 8).

Correct. Roberts abused the authority of the Supreme Court. At the time it was inexplicable.

[donttread]

I have not received a single answer.

If you are going to criticize me for missing these "answers," have the integrity to point them out to me. Otherwise, kindly fuck off. :wink:


Here's an answer . Politics is gradually entering the realm of entertainment . It's a show for the most part.

[Tahuyaman]

Here's an answer . Politics is gradually entering the realm of entertainment . It's a show for the most part.

It’s turning into a reality TV show. Politics Wars..,..

[MisterVeritis]

I agree that is what they should do. If SCOTUS finds a statute to be unconstitutional, they should rule as such and perhaps even suggest to the legislature a way to rewrite the law to make it constitutional if possible.

What Roberts did the the Obamacare case went well beyond that. He said the individual mandate (which Congress said was not a tax) was a tax in order to make the law constitutional on the record before SCOUTS (at the time I explain that it still wasn't Constitutional as a tax, because you cannot divorce the taxing power from Article 1, sec. 8).
I believe Roberts was surveilled and blackmailed.

[Peter1469]

I believe Roberts was surveilled and blackmailed.

Over what?

[Tahuyaman]

I believe Roberts was surveilled and blackmailed.


No.

[Common Sense]

It’s turning into a reality TV show. Politics Wars..,..
The election of a reality TV star certainly helped.

[Cletus]

I believe Roberts was surveilled and blackmailed.

I think he just didn't want to be known as the Chief Justice of the Court that shut down Obama's unconstitutional, but popular with the ignorant unwashed, health care plan.

He was thinking about his legacy.

[Common]

The election of a reality TV star certainly helped.
Trump was far more successful in his life than Obama a community organizer whatever that is.

You folks on the left twist every aspect of anything trump to denigrate and belittle him and that causes the rift we now have

[Tahuyaman]

The election of a reality TV star certainly helped.

Actually a real estate developer was elected POTUS.

[Common Sense]

Trump was far more successful in his life than Obama a community organizer whatever that is.

You folks on the left twist every aspect of anything trump to denigrate and belittle him and that causes the rift we now have

He wasn't a reality tv star?

[Common Sense]

Actually a real estate developer was elected POTUS.

Yes. He was also a reality tv star.

[Tahuyaman]

Yes. He was also a reality tv star.


He had a short stint with a TV show. He got the show based on his previous success as a businessman and real estate developer.

[MisterVeritis]

Over what?
Over something Roberts did not want to be made public. If I knew Roberts would not be vulnerable to blackmail.

[MisterVeritis]

I think he just didn't want to be known as the Chief Justice of the Court that shut down Obama's unconstitutional, but popular with the ignorant unwashed, health care plan.

He was thinking about his legacy.
He damaged his legacy. Your reason is unreasonable. However, if true Roberts must be impeached and removed.

[Tahuyaman]

He damaged his legacy. Your reason is unreasonable. However, if true Roberts must be impeached and removed.
He did damage his supposed constitutional conservative reputation, but there’s no reason to believe he did it because he is vulnerable to blackmail. If he was, we’d know it by now.

[MisterVeritis]

He did damage his supposed constitutional conservative reputation, but there’s no reason to believe he did it because he is vulnerable to blackmail. If he was, we’d know it by now.
Based on what? If his secret is "safe" who would tell us?

[Tahuyaman]

Based on what? If his secret is "safe" who would tell us?

There are no secrets like that any more.

[donttread]

Trump was far more successful in his life than Obama a community organizer whatever that is.

You folks on the left twist every aspect of anything trump to denigrate and belittle him and that causes the rift we now have


True but to be fair the right does the same thing to the left. The only way the donkephant can fuck up literally everything and still get 95% of the votes cast

[Tahuyaman]

True but to be fair the right does the same thing to the left. The only way the donkephant can $#@! up literally everything and still get 95% of the votes cast

Then alternative parties should recruit better candidates.



This donkephant thing is childish and worn out.

[MisterVeritis]

There are no secrets like that any more.
Well, that explains it.

[donttread]

Then alternative parties should recruit better candidates.



This donkephant thing is childish and worn out.


Really. Talk to me about their "accomplishments" then. LOL. It's the money and influence, clearly not the candidates . Look at some of the elected officals we have now!

[Tahuyaman]

Really. Talk to me about their "accomplishments" then. LOL. It's the money and influence, clearly not the candidates . Look at some of the elected officals we have now!

Again, the alternative parties need to recruit better candidates.

[donttread]

Again, the alternative parties need to recruit better candidates.

It has nothing to do with the candidates and everything to do with the stranglehold on the money and the process. How's that "accomplishments list" coming?

[Tahuyaman]

It has nothing to do with the candidates and everything to do with the stranglehold on the money and the process. How's that "accomplishments list" coming?
Nope. It’s the candidates.

[donttread]

Nope. It’s the candidates.


Of course, it couldn't be the money and the ability to close other candidates out of debates. For God's sake Hilary almost wion and Bush the 2nd and obama were both elected TWICE. Trust me it ain't the candidates. Good grief.

[Tahuyaman]

Of course, it couldn't be the money and the ability to close other candidates out of debates. For God's sake Hilary almost wion and Bush the 2nd and obama were both elected TWICE. Trust me it ain't the candidates. Good grief.


The teason alternative parties don't receive the support they need is because they mostly run kooks or zealous one issue candidates.

I voted for a third party candidate in 2016. No one in the media or political establishment stopped me.