Frog boiling, yet?
Stormin Mormon
In the USA, we've had some serious disregard of the
Constitution. We've had corporations taken over by the Fed.
We've had massive spending which is likely not authorized by
the Constitution. And we've had some serious ignoring of the
people by the elected reps.
Is the frog boiling, yet?
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
flattrack38
The frog got dropped into the pot in November, 2006.
The frog died November, 2008.
CPR will be preformed on the frog November, 2010.
But the frog is dead.
Karsten Kruse
> In the USA, we've had some serious disregard of the
> Constitution. We've had corporations taken over by the Fed.
Wich probably gave the US a few more years.
> We've had massive spending which is likely not authorized by
> the Constitution.
The Constitution forbids saving the country? Must be a shitty one. Or,
and that's more likely, you don't know anything about it and just repeat
what FoxNews tells you to think.
> And we've had some serious ignoring of the
> people by the elected reps.
You don't want a direct democracy.
Karsten
--
() My homepage is http://www.tecneeq.de/ and your homepage sucksￜ!
<\/>
_/\_ ￜ) Unless it has animated gifs from 1996, then it rocks!
Stormin Mormon
New! (R) Improved! (R) frog which is far superior to the old
frog. Since it doesn't slow down the process with checks and
balances, it will be much more responsive to the needs of
Our Nation's Leaders. Who "REALLY CARE" about us, and want
to keep us safe.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"flattrack38" <flatt...@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:3cec2e79-a52f-4b05-ac48-
robert bowman
> The Constitution forbids saving the country? Must be a shitty one.
The Constitution had an uphill fight to be ratified and was immediately
amended in an attempt to fix it. Draw your own conclusion about quality.
Dan
And it was mandated to have provisions that led directly to a civil war...
Dan
Dan
> On Dec 30, 12:44 pm, "Stormin Mormon"
> <cayoung61**spambloc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> There is the old parable of how to boil a frog.
>>
>> In the USA, we've had some serious disregard of the
>> Constitution. We've had corporations taken over by the Fed.
>> We've had massive spending which is likely not authorized by
>> the Constitution. And we've had some serious ignoring of the
>> people by the elected reps.
>>
>> Is the frog boiling, yet?
>>
>> --
>> Christopher A. Young
>> Learn more about Jesus
>> www.lds.org
>> .
>
> The frog got dropped into the pot in November, 2006.
More like November 1980.
>
> The frog died November, 2008.
The frog is still alive, but barely.
> CPR will be preformed on the frog November, 2010.
CPR is performed on the frog every two years.
> But the frog is dead.
You are such a pessimist.
Dan
hal
wrote:
The US Constitution was the most brilliantly forged document in the
history of mankind. The only problem with The Constitution is the
people who misuse it to try to achieve their personal ends.
hal
such as?
>
>Dan
Dan
State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in
Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such
Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to
whom such Service or Labour may be due."
Tacit acceptance of slavery.
Proposals for restrictions/abolishment of slavery were removed by the
southern states to get their approval.
Dan
robert bowman
> The US Constitution was the most brilliantly forged document in the
> history of mankind. The only problem with The Constitution is the
> people who misuse it to try to achieve their personal ends.
A brilliantly forged document would not allow for misuse. QED.
Stormin Mormon
free, as long as we are a righteouos and God-loving people.
But which allows us to reveal our inner natures. GOD.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"robert bowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:7q5ili...@mid.individual.net...
robert bowman
> A divinely inspired document, one which allows us to be
> free, as long as we are a righteouos and God-loving people.
Which divinity? Kali? I'll believe than right after I accept there is
anything vaguely resembling the Garden of Eden anywhere near Missouri.
Strabo
> Stormin Mormon schrieb:
>
>> In the USA, we've had some serious disregard of the Constitution.
>> We've had corporations taken over by the Fed.
>
> Wich probably gave the US a few more years.
>
>> We've had massive spending which is likely not authorized by the
>> Constitution.
>
> The Constitution forbids saving the country? Must be a shitty one. Or,
> and that's more likely, you don't know anything about it and just repeat
> what FoxNews tells you to think.
>
It's true, many do not know about it, and some don't care.
The Constitution forbids inflationary spending and redistribution of
wealth. If the Constitution were followed we wouldn't have many
problems.
Strabo
The Constitution was an agreement among the states. Once that agreement
was broken, a state could leave the Union. Some did.
> Dan
hal
wrote:
>hal wrote:
I never said it was perfect. And even if it was some would still
misuse it for their own purposes.
Karsten Kruse
> The Constitution forbids inflationary spending and redistribution of
> wealth.
Point me to the relevant part of the wealth distribution thing.
AFAIK, that would forbid every kind of humanitarian help, social
services and so on.
Our constitution gives specifics about the economic order. We have a
social market economy, wich means monopolys aren't allowed because they
don't serve the people. If something in the market doesn't serve the
people, it's wrong. Nothing is said about distribution of wealth tho.
Other parts say the government has to protect the dignity ans life of
every human, wich is used as reason for social services. Surely a human
that dies because of a simple infection, hunder or cold is stripped off
his dignity when all he needed was health care, food or clothes.
Strabo
> Strabo schrieb:
>
>> The Constitution forbids inflationary spending and redistribution of
>> wealth.
>
> Point me to the relevant part of the wealth distribution thing.
>
That's the simplest to describe. We have a negatively written
document. The distribution of wealth is not addressed. Therefore,
it's not authorized. If it ain't in there it's prohibited.
>
> AFAIK, that would forbid every kind of humanitarian help, social
> services and so on.
>
That's right.
Keep in mind that the US constitution was never construed to
be a governing document. Its job is only to accomplish what
individual states cannot.
Individual state constitutions do address social problems and
remedies.
>
> Our constitution gives specifics about the economic order. We have a
> social market economy, wich means monopolys aren't allowed because they
> don't serve the people. If something in the market doesn't serve the
> people, it's wrong. Nothing is said about distribution of wealth tho.
> Other parts say the government has to protect the dignity ans life of
> every human, wich is used as reason for social services. Surely a human
> that dies because of a simple infection, hunder or cold is stripped off
> his dignity when all he needed was health care, food or clothes.
>
The collection of wealth and its distribution carries the potential for
massive corruption and social decay. This potential increases in
probability with time, that is, it increases with each succeeding
generation. In short, the welfare state is a self-destructing structure.
Your constitution was designed according to post-WWII treaty conditions,
NATO and the later UN model. The US documents are unique and are not
comparable to any other.
>
> Karsten
>
robert bowman
> Our constitution gives specifics about the economic order. We have a
> social market economy, wich means monopolys aren't allowed because they
> don't serve the people. If something in the market doesn't serve the
> people, it's wrong. Nothing is said about distribution of wealth tho.
The US culture is quite a bit different than Europe's. While Anglo-Saxon
Protestants of the Calvinist persuasion have actually been a small minority
for almost two centuries, the US cannot be separated from its roots.
Retief
wrote:
>Karsten Kruse wrote:
>> Strabo schrieb:
>>> The Constitution forbids inflationary spending and redistribution of
>>> wealth.
>>
>> Point me to the relevant part of the wealth distribution thing.
>
>That's the simplest to describe. We have a negatively written
>document. The distribution of wealth is not addressed. Therefore,
>it's not authorized. If it ain't in there it's prohibited.
Errr... Actually, a positively written document -- all authorized
powers are enumerated (and in case they didn't understand that the
first time, the 10th was added to reiterate that fact).
Retief