Debates
30 Jul 21
01 Aug 21
@mghrn55 saidMGM in a nutshell. You say that it is undemocratic to plea with the government to follow the Constitution literally, as written, the Enumerative Powers, the whole works, everything about it, which fly right in the face of your radical movement.
Ok. So you don't support democracy.
You support the overthrow of a legitimate government.
Got it.
Tell me, is that about it? For the record, I mean follow EVERY word of it, not to pick and choose like your rabid buddies. Do you know, for example, that Bernie has often said that citizens have a RIGHT, a Right for god sakes, to all that free stuff (college, med, the works) that he thinks that the govt should provide. Do you think the Constitution gives that right? Do you think, as does Marauder, that the govt needs to do the General Welfare thing, but no one seems to be able to define it. Even Hamilton and Madison were at odds about it. They should have checked with Marauder.
Maybe Marauder can explain the above to you, I am told he is a lawyer, hell everyone is a lawyer.
01 Aug 21
@no1marauder saidI think it is a fact. Do I smell a segue here? And you don't even write about the Capitol Police. A sticky mess, for sure, so why don't we all cool it till there is a result. Sonhouse, could you report on the daily meetings, since your TrumpTrek seems to be going nowhere?
You don't need a commitee to determine if the sky is blue or if water is wet.
That Nancy Pelosi does not command the DC National Guard is a fact.
02 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidTrump lost the election.
MGM in a nutshell. You say that it is undemocratic to plea with the government to follow the Constitution literally, as written, the Enumerative Powers, the whole works, everything about it, which fly right in the face of your radical movement.
Tell me, is that about it? For the record, I mean follow EVERY word of it, not to pick and choose like your rabid buddi ...[text shortened]... Maybe Marauder can explain the above to you, I am told he is a lawyer, hell everyone is a lawyer.
Why are you going down this constitutional rabbit hole ?
02 Aug 21
@mghrn55 saidYou equate the two?? I know Trump lost, fair and square. I don't, and see no need, to write about that. Boring,,,all of y'all's posts about it are boring.
Trump lost the election.
Why are you going down this constitutional rabbit hole ?
You said above that if we can't win it back, we have to take it back. I said, yes, as far as reassessing the Constitution and living under it, like we are supposed to. That is the only way for me to answer your implication that I am going into a Constituional rabbit hole.
I am ANSWERING you. About what the USA must do. You mention Trump 24/7, I don't. I did this post as a joke, and you fellers jumped all over it. Talk about jumping into a hole!!!!! Jesus. Y'all should elect Sonhouse as your President.
So, all that aside, tell me what you think about abiding by the Constitution. You can't do that and abide by Marx at the same time. This is Marauder's biggest problem which he wrestles with.
02 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidBeing from Canada, I won't know about as much about the constitution as others in here.
You equate the two?? I know Trump lost, fair and square. I don't, and see no need, to write about that. Boring,,,all of y'all's posts about it are boring.
You said above that if we can't win it back, we have to take it back. I said, yes, as far as reassessing the Constitution and living under it, like we are supposed to. That is the only way for me to answer your ...[text shortened]... that and abide by Marx at the same time. This is Marauder's biggest problem which he wrestles with.
I'll leave the experts to the nuts and bolts.
But from a 10,000 foot level, Someone needs to explain what is constitutional about tossing out a fair and accurate election.
This is not a repeat of 2000 where it took a couple of months to sort out a very close race in Florida.
This election wasn't close.
And it certainly wasn't as close as some races in 2016 where the Democrats conceded the results.
This is about a Conservative base that is all too aware that their base has been gradually shrinking over decades.
And that they have hitched their wagon to an immature buffoon who was in over his head from day one in 2017.
And one who needed 2 terms to shield himself from the legal consequences that are now coming his way.
btw, I am not a Marxist !!
And I doubt there are very few others in this forum.
@no1marauder saidYou may be giving some posters here too much credit. Some of them would need a committee to determine that the Earth is not flat. And even then, they'd dispute the result as partisan.
You don't need a commitee to determine if the sky is blue or if water is wet.
That Nancy Pelosi does not command the DC National Guard is a fact.
02 Aug 21
@moonbus saidIf Trump were to come out and say that the earth was flat, 3/4 of the GOP would follow him.
You may be giving some posters here too much credit. Some of them would need a committee to determine that the Earth is not flat. And even then, they'd dispute the result as partisan.
Hilarious !! 😆
02 Aug 21
@mghrn55 saidYour take in first 3 paras is correct. Trump lost. I cannot imagine arguing that point.
Being from Canada, I won't know about as much about the constitution as others in here.
I'll leave the experts to the nuts and bolts.
But from a 10,000 foot level, Someone needs to explain what is constitutional about tossing out a fair and accurate election.
This is not a repeat of 2000 where it took a couple of months to sort out a very close race in Florida.
This ele ...[text shortened]... coming his way.
btw, I am not a Marxist !!
And I doubt there are very few others in this forum.
As to the Republicans losing a base, you might be correct in numbers given all of the immigrants that are pouring into the country, which is obviously to get votes for our senile president. But with all the actions of the present administration, you might find that the Republicans will not be able to take it anymore. We are worried that he will tax the hell out of the middle class and ruin our country, because he needs that money to fund his trillions. That is common sense. He cannot do it with just the money taxed from the rich folks. Impossible, so where do you think he will get it. Will you help me with this argument to explain this to the turkeys in this thread
02 Aug 21
@moonbus saidSomeone here, you guys, sureydo NOT need a Committee to ascertain where the money will come from for Biden to fund his trillions. It will come from the middle class, it has to, therefore he has lied to our sweet middle class. No committee needed.
You may be giving some posters here too much credit. Some of them would need a committee to determine that the Earth is not flat. And even then, they'd dispute the result as partisan.
02 Aug 21
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidA stab at humour. (Pardon the "u", I'm Canadian) 😛
Is there a link on that. I just do not believe it. Is that just a stab at humor.? Oooo,man..
And you responded.
Enough said.
02 Aug 21
@mghrn55 saidNo, not enough. Sad stuff.
A stab at humour. (Pardon the "u", I'm Canadian) 😛
And you responded.
Enough said.
02 Aug 21
@averagejoe1 saidThe math rather easily refutes such a claim.
Someone here, you guys, sureydo NOT need a Committee to ascertain where the money will come from for Biden to fund his trillions. It will come from the middle class, it has to, therefore he has lied to our sweet middle class. No committee needed.
US personal income is about $20 trillion a year. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PI
Of that, the top 20% have over 51.9% or approximately $10.5 trillion. https://www.statista.com/statistics/203247/shares-of-household-income-of-quintiles-in-the-us/
Biden's budget proposal from Bernie and the infrastructure bill total $4.5 trillion over 10 years or $450 billion a year.
So a fairly minimal increase of taxes paid by the top 20% (about 4% of their income) would easily cover the programs.
