On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:07:16 -0700 (PDT), Nickname unavailable wrote:

On Oct 22, 2:53*pm, Planet Visitor II wrote:
On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 17:56:00 -0700 (PDT), Nickname unavailable wrote:
On Oct 19, 11:37 pm, Planet Visitor II wrote:

yea, there is no proof at all, except their own writings and how the
constitution was crafted. blubber on, i beat your ass.

Logical fallacy -- Argumentum ad verecundiam. See --

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...html#authority

deathly silence

and -- Argumentum ad hominem. See --

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...c.html#hominem

deathly silence

Your apology for having no proof of your argument is accepted.

Planet Visitor II

face it light weight, you got nothing, i got this,

I don't see the word "rich," or "socialism," nor does "promoting the
general welfare" argue the rich have to do it. *Since doing so certainly
doesn't _promote the general welfare_ of those giving voluntarily.
While, keep in mind, those words were framed while slavery was still
a powerful force in the U.S. *I don't believe the Founding Fathers
intended those words to apply to Black slaves in the U.S.

deathly silence

No matter how you slice and dice it, the rich giving handouts to those
not as rich only ****es off both the giver and the taker. *Blacks hark
back to the days they were slaves, and needed to kiss the White Man's
ass to get a proper meal. *Which is why racists are so supportive of
welfare." * Believing it best to keep those Blacks in the ghetto with
handouts, rather than giving them a hand up to achieve equality
in social, economic and educational opportunities.

deathly silence

It's rather obvious that the reaction of those receiving such handouts
only increases their rage; and their belief that anti-Social behavior is
justified because the world is filled with racists giving handouts, to
keep them subdued as if having been given a lobotomy. *The socially
disadvantaged are not as stupid as you would make them out to be,
in you arguing to give them money to keep them quiet.

deathly silence

Those who support handouts rather than giving a hand up to the
socially disadvantaged are either oblivious to the psychological reactions
of those being placed into second-class citizenship; or they are
racists knowing this and wanting to perpetuate keeping them
as second-class citizens and nothing else.

deathly silence

Would you rather be given a handout, viewed as a second-class
citizen, or given a hand up to gain equality in social, economic,
and educational opportunities? *I've never argued we should
reduce taxes; but I have argued against how we allocate those
taxes, in giving handouts rather than establishing a social
framework that goes toward creating equality with that tax
revenue. *That should be the REAL focus of the words "provide
for the general welfare."

deathly silence

Planet Visitor II

The Constitution of the United States
Preamble Note
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings
of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish
this Constitution for the United States of America.

See --
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Welfare_clause
QUOTE -- "Taxing and Spending Clause
The United States Constitution contains two references to "the General Welfare",
one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause.
The U.S. Supreme Court has held the mention of the clause in the Preamble
to the U.S. Constitution "has never been regarded as the source of any substantive
power conferred on the Government of the United States or on any of its Departments."
Moreover, the Supreme Court held the understanding of the General Welfare
Clause contained in the Taxing and Spending Clause adheres to the construction
given it by Associate Justice Joseph Story in his 1833 Commentaries on the
Constitution of the United States. Justice Story concluded that the General Welfare
Clause is not a grant of general legislative power, but a qualification on the taxing
power which includes within it a federal power to spend federal revenues on matters
of general interest to the federal government. The Court described Justice Story's
view as the "Hamiltonian position", as Alexander Hamilton had elaborated his view
of the taxing and spending powers in his 1791 Report on Manufactures. Story,
however, attributes the position's initial appearance to Thomas Jefferson, in his
Opinion on the Bank of the United States. As such, these clauses in the U.S.
Constitution are an atypical use of a general welfare clause, and are not considered
grants of a general legislative power to the federal government."

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 borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several
States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on
the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and
fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and
current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas,
and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules
concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use
shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval
Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the
Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and
for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of
the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the
Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia
according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such
District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of
particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of
the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority
over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the
State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts,
Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
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.

THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE
Article. VI.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be
made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be
made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme
Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby,
any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary
notwithstanding.

The preemption doctrine derives from the Supremacy Clause of the
Constitution which states that the "Constitution and the laws of the
United States...shall be the supreme law of the land...anything in the
constitutions or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
This means of course, that any federal law--even a regulation of a
federal agency--trumps any conflicting state law.

Article V - Amendment Note1 - Note2 - Note3
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it
necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the
Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States,
shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either
Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this
Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of
the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the
one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress;
Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One
thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first
and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that
no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage
in the Senate.

so any law, treaty or regulation that is deemed constitutional, shall
be the law of the land. its really quite simple. the constitution was
crafted by liberals, who gave the constitution broad powers to
legislate, tax, regulate, negate state law, mandate, tariff, to
promote and provide for the general welfare, to ensure domestic
tranquility, and 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.))

and of course the extensive writings of the founders original intent
for a interventionist government, socialism.


oh i forgot, what do you think a interventionist government is, its
socialism. and as i have proven to you, the founders were against
concentrated and inherited wealth, its why the federal government has
the right to tax enshrined into the constitution, along with other
liberal interventionist policies. i have proven this to you many times
before. you are such a light weight. your logic and critical thinking
skills, are at best, appalling.

So you're a socialist... so what??? Capitalism doesn't support interventionist
government. See --
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism


Planet Visitor II