I Agree With The Founders About Healthcare

Fentoine Lum said:
And now you're down to the homoeroticism you run to post embarrassing yourself. Still triggered about your statues?
Click to expand...

I'm not the one sucking another male's dick, faggot. It's OK. Your wife still has me to fuck.

I'm not the one tearing something down that hurts my feelings. They can all come down and it won't change that black folks were slaves to white people.
 
CFM said:
Someone should explain to Nordberg that 1.4 million out of 325 million is .0043%. It's obvious you don't understand how low that is.
Click to expand...

For some odd reason you need this steered away from an examination of your shitty healthcare system. It's going the way of your statues, merely a matter of time.
 
Fentoine Lum said:
For some odd reason you need this steered away from an examination of your shitty healthcare system. It's going the way of your statues, merely a matter of time.
Click to expand...

I didn't think a stupid nigger like you could count that high. I case you didn't know, it's less than 1.

As far as the system working, it's done fine by me. Since I don't give a shit whether you get cancer or not, I don't care if it works for you.
 
CFM said:
I didn't think a stupid nigger like you could count that high. I case you didn't know, it's less than 1.

As far as the system working, it's done fine by me. Since I don't give a shit whether you get cancer or not, I don't care if it works for you.
Click to expand...

Now I'm black because you assigned such? Hey, sorry about your statues hon.
 
Kacper said:
Not relying on the scientific prowess of people who leeched and bled each other.
Click to expand...

Another "Troll" who'd thought? Everyone knows the founders were idiots and snowflakes are far more intellectual today in invoking a historically documented failed system of social collectivism..i.e., communism. Truth: The health of the individual is a personal responsibility and seeking the HELP of a professional in the field of human healthcare is a free market decision......demanding the free services of any free individual who has studied half his/her life to achieve certain wisdom and knowledge is nothing short of "indentured servitude".

Demanding "free" health care is comparable to demanding wealth redistribution...…. on one hand we are addressing Slavery "demanding the free or regulated services of a professional"....on the other, income redistribution...unlimited taxation based upon class warfare....THEFT. I prefer to remain MORAL. ;)

No one has the RIGHT to make another person serve them (if you want their service, then PAY FOR THEIR SERVICES or educate yourself and serve yourself, do not spend the first part of your life engaging in activities that damage your health (no one forced you to pig out on pork, drugs, and sugar) and then demand free services of those who have dedicated the first portion of their life attempting to protect life...… theft of income......No one has the RIGHT to take the earned wealth of one citizen and give it to another "undeserving" citizen in order to purchase a political power base under the threat of fine and or imprisonment.....Fascists engage in such activity.


The COLLECTIVE enjoys spending money....OP money (other peoples money). Look at the elite that direct the lives of you SHEEPLE...… do they sent their children to public schools, do they elect to use this inferior health service called Obama Care.....do they erect low income housing in their own neighborhoods......do they build walls and hire security guards on the borders of their private property while they demand open borders and no security (take your right of self protection..i.e., the right to arms) for the public at large.


WAKE UP....stop being idiots. They PROMISE you everything and deliver nothing to you expect more poverty with less freedoms.
 
Last edited:
Old Trapper said:
Then follow the example of the Founders. National healthcare for all. But the right wing will not allow that, so that is why one should give s fuck about left wing, or right wing. That is also why you have the problem with big pharma, insurance companies, hospitals, etc.
Click to expand...

“Edmund Pendleton (September 9, 1721 – October 23, 1803) was a 1. Virginia planter, politician, lawyer and judge. He served in the Virginia legislature before and during the American Revolutionary War, rising to the position of Speaker. “ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Pendleton

Pendleton was a “State” representative. His welfare for the poor qwas a “state” proposal. I found nowhere where he suggested an American Federal government introduce such legislation or claim it would be constitutional as a federal law.
 
CFM said:
That is the mindset of the left. If what they claimed was actually true, the Constitution would need to be only a few words long and say "general welfare". If general welfare was that blank check, Article I, Section 8 , the 10th amendment, and Article I, Section 10 would not have been written. The left wing mindset that general welfare means the government can do whatever a majority chooses for it to do is the very reason we have the Constitution written as it is. It prevents 2/3 of a group being able to vote to steal from the other 1/3.
Click to expand...

The Constitution is clear. The "general welfare" as portrayed in the Constitution simply describes those things enumerated in the Constitution as actual powers of the federal government.
 
Robo said:
The Constitution is clear. The "general welfare" as portrayed in the Constitution simply describes those things enumerated in the Constitution as actual powers of the federal government.
Click to expand...

To the left, general welfare means "if I don't want to earn it, someone I think has more than they need should be forced to pay for it". What they propose is nothing more than claiming that the poorer you are, the more rights you have to someone else's money.
 
LV426 said:
General welfare.
Click to expand...

Jefferson and Madison disagrees with you.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.” (James Madison)

To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless.
1. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. (Thomas Jefferson)
 
CFM said:
To the left, general welfare means "if I don't want to earn it, someone I think has more than they need should be forced to pay for it". What they propose is nothing more than claiming that the poorer you are, the more rights you have to someone else's money.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the poor with all their power and influence fucked everything up fer ya, poor thing.
 
Robo said:
Jefferson and Madison disagrees with you.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.” (James Madison)

To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless.
1. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. (Thomas Jefferson)
Click to expand...

Oh come on, you can do better than that, tell us all who the founders really were:

“[A social division exists] between the rich and the poor, the laborious and the idle, the learned and the ignorant. … Nothing, but force, and power and strength can restrain [the latter].” —John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson (1787)

Fweedumb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top