Litmus
Verified User
Maybe he is...you definitely aren't. Have someone smarter than you (heh heh heh STY heh heh heh) diagram the second sentence in your previous post and tell you all the ways it is wrong...
You do it.
Maybe he is...you definitely aren't. Have someone smarter than you (heh heh heh STY heh heh heh) diagram the second sentence in your previous post and tell you all the ways it is wrong...
SUDDENLY the party of Vitter, Sanford and Ensign are worried about ETHICS?!?!
Oh that is too rich!!
SUDDENLY the party of Vitter, Sanford and Ensign are worried about ETHICS?!?!
Oh that is too rich!!
Can you tell me what those Senators now do for a living?Where'd everybody go??
I thought we wanted to talk ethics?
I guess Senators Vitter, Sanford and Ensign had bigger things to worry about.
who's party would that be?
Can you tell me what those Senators now do for a living?
Why, that would be the very same party screaming about the "ethics violations" of Senator Nelson.
So, you are saying that an extramarital affair is something Ensign and Vitter should have been removed from office over? That their personal tribulations are the same as backroom deals in the supposedly open negotiations that Obama insisted would be on CSPAN is the same thing as sleeping around on your wife?Unless one of them quit in the past day or two...
They are all CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN SENATORS
The field apples are found in those who are pretending that because it happened before it must be "good".It has been done since the day they first convened the congress.
Its how these deals have always been made and to pretend its something NEW is horseshit.
translation - "we're trying to change the constitution through legislation and judicial tyranny, screw the amendment process"
Do you know the difference between the word promote and that of provide?The very first words dealing with the Constitution are as follows.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, 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."
Take note of "promote the general welfare". When you think of a person's welfare, when you ask how a person is, when you say, "How are you?" are you not asking about a person's health?
Put another way have you ever asked someone how they are and they replied, "I'm doing great! Just found out last week I'm a diabetic." Or "Life is good. I finally broke my leg last month." Or "Things are fantastic! My oncologist said my cancer has spread so I won't have to worry about finances six months from now."
How can anyone separate health from "general welfare"? Isn't health number one on the "general welfare" list?
The very first words dealing with the Constitution are as follows.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, 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."
Take note of "promote the general welfare". When you think of a person's welfare, when you ask how a person is, when you say, "How are you?" are you not asking about a person's health?
Put another way have you ever asked someone how they are and they replied, "I'm doing great! Just found out last week I'm a diabetic." Or "Life is good. I finally broke my leg last month." Or "Things are fantastic! My oncologist said my cancer has spread so I won't have to worry about finances six months from now."
How can anyone separate health from "general welfare"? Isn't health number one on the "general welfare" list?
Do you know the difference between the word promote and that of provide?
Absolutely ridiculous. When rejoicing in the "first step towards single payer (read government provided) health care" you sit here and tell me that nobody is working towards that?No one is giving something for nothing if that's what you mean by provide. Under universal plans people pay according to their ability, through taxes.
As for promote when one sees the per capita expenditures on medical compared with countries with a universal plan it is always less expensive to cover everyone. To allow the current ways to continue while ignoring people without coverage is more akin to discouraging the general welfare of the citizens.
PROMOTE, not PROVIDE FOR OR MANDATE.
HUGE difference. and you're also stretching the general welfare clause like the new deal dems stretched the commerce clause. apparently you didn't learn the lesson of unintended consequences regarding that total fuck up.
Again, providing or mandating is not promoting. Not even close.Stretching? If you care about the general welfare of family members or friends isn't their health your number one concern? Maybe it's not. Just asking.
That the democratic party would go to the lengths they have to pass a piece of shit like this is amazing. We're not talking about the usual pork and earmarks found in the normal legislation process here. It's way above and beyond, and anyone with a genuine brain can see that plainly.
But what is even more disgusting is the blind lemming brain dead partisan hacks that are supporting it. Do you fucking assholes truly believe a piece of legislation that is going to make the rest of the states pick up Nebraska's tab for healthcare in order to secure the vote of a Nebraska senator is a GOOD bill? Get your heads out of the fucking donkey's ass for once in your pathetic little lemming like lives. It is a piece of shit bill in the first place that does nothing more for health care than give a few hundred billion dollars in profits to the very insurance companies you have been denigrating the last couple decades as a source of our health care problems. How the FUCK can you brain dead pustules not see that? And then to resort to outright bribery to get it passed - and it's perfectly fine with you jack asses because it is the jackass party doing it.
I'd say "may you assholes get what you deserve", but the problem is you fuck ups and your entire fucking party are taking the rest of us down the gutter with you. Not even Bush's administration was this outright in-your-face corrupt. And that is saying a lot.