Sweep!

[chalice_thunder]

Yes, because extortion is just so Christ-like isn't it.

How difficult it will be for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of heaven.

 

[arensb]

I do not hold it against my CEO that he makes much more, I see it as a goal that I can attain if I work hard enough.

Your ambition and work ethic are commendable. However, studies show that, not to put too fine a point on it, the American Dream ain't what is used to be. If you want to get rich, you may want to consider moving to Canada or Scandinavia.

For instance, this study (which I kind of picked at random after googling "international economic mobility statistics", but I'm sure you can find similar ones) has, as its first key finding,

International comparisons indicate that intergenerational mobility in Britain is of the same order of magnitude as in the US, but that these countries are substantially less mobile than Canada and the Nordic countries. Germany also looks to be more mobile than the UK and US, but a small sample size prevents us drawing a firm conclusion.

The reason many progressives push for things like "social equality" is not that they're communists who hate rich people, but rather to improve people's chances of getting rich through hard work and perseverance.

 

[arensb]

The first entitlement program was the Bill of Rights.

Slight quibble: the right to habeas corpus was considered important enough to be guaranteed in the body of the constitution. The bill of rights, being the first ten amendments, was added after that.

And arguably, without habeas corpus, the other rights don't mean a whole lot.

 

[KCDAD]

Slight quibble: the right to habeas corpus was considered important enough to be guaranteed in the body of the constitution. The bill of rights, being the first ten amendments, was added after that.

And arguably, without habeas corpus, the other rights don't mean a whole lot.

That fascist dictator Lincoln suspended habeas corpus! (in time of war)

 

[Guttermouth]

You guys keep claiming that charity will take care of folks. When? Capitalism and communism have one big thing in common. The powerful at the top work tirelessly to screw over everyone else and will do most anything to anyone if they can get another diamond to add to their thrones. Once the mega-rich spend the $100,000+ they need to “get by” for the month, what are they doing with the rest and why? How can a Christian nation be defined by unlimited gluttony?

 

[Charlie V]

That fascist dictator Lincoln suspended habeas corpus! (in time of war)

Just because Lincoln (or FDR, or anyone else) did a particular thing doesn't make it right.

What makes you believe that Lincoln was a fascist dictator?

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

Slight quibble: the right to habeas corpus was considered important enough to be guaranteed in the body of the constitution. The bill of rights, being the first ten amendments, was added after that.

And arguably, without habeas corpus, the other rights don't mean a whole lot.

You haven't heard? The new George Orwell-predicted Constitutional Amendment has reduced the consitution to this:

All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.

Charlie

 

[KCDAD]

Just because Lincoln (or FDR, or anyone else) did a particular thing doesn't make it right.

What makes you believe that Lincoln was a fascist dictator?

Charlie

Just because some judge or legislator says something is wrong doesn't make it so either.
Isn't that what Bush (and Rumsfeld) is being called?

 

[Charlie V]

Just because some judge or legislator says something is wrong doesn't make it so either.

You're right. The wrongness of something makes it wrong.

To not have habius corpus is wrong.

Although.. judges and legislators can make things illegal. Illegal and wrong, are of course, two different words, and we weren't discussing "illegal."

Isn't that what Bush (and Rumsfeld) is being called?

Rumsfeld is being called a fascist dictator? By whom?

Was someone who likes Lincoln who said that, causing you to retaliate by attacking Lincoln? Or do you have a particular disdain for Abraham Lincoln? A little research does show that Lincoln only got 39.8% of the popular vote. Did you prefer John Breckinridge of Kentucky, John Bell of Tennessee, or Stephen Douglass of Illinios in the 1860 election?

I really don't see the relevence of other people allegedly calling one person something, causing you to call a completely different person (a historic one no less) something. Umm.. Grover Cleveland is a comedian. Isn't that what Jerry Seinfeld is being called?

Charlie

 

[EIChief]

Your ambition and work ethic are commendable. However, studies show that, not to put too fine a point on it, the American Dream ain't what is used to be. If you want to get rich, you may want to consider moving to Canada or Scandinavia.

I can't believe I just read this...

 

[KCDAD]

You're right. The wrongness of something makes it wrong.

To not have habius corpus is wrong.

Although.. judges and legislators can make things illegal. Illegal and wrong, are of course, two different words, and we weren't discussing "illegal."



Rumsfeld is being called a fascist dictator? By whom?

Was someone who likes Lincoln who said that, causing you to retaliate by attacking Lincoln? Or do you have a particular disdain for Abraham Lincoln? A little research does show that Lincoln only got 39.8% of the popular vote. Did you prefer John Breckinridge of Kentucky, John Bell of Tennessee, or Stephen Douglass of Illinios in the 1860 election?

I really don't see the relevence of other people allegedly calling one person something, causing you to call a completely different person (a historic one no less) something. Umm.. Grover Cleveland is a comedian. Isn't that what Jerry Seinfeld is being called?

Charlie

I will write slow. Lincoln was called a dictator... tyrant... monster... evrything from ape to zealot for suspending constitutional rights during wartime. He was proven right by popular sentiment, history and the courts. The constitution, as a whole, is not enforcible during wartime.

 

[trunks2k]

The constitution, as a whole, is not enforcible during wartime.

I'm not so sure about that. But even if that is true, when was the last time we declared war?

 

[KCDAD]

I'm not so sure about that. But even if that is true, when was the last time we declared war?

Are you asking when the last time Congress exercised it authority to declare war, or the last time the United States declared war? There is debate as to whether or not Congress is the only authority to be able to declare war. In this latest case, The Chief Executive was very clear about declaring our intervention in the Middle East as A WAR. Is there any philosophical or political doubt that we were at war with North Korea in the 50's, North Vietnam in the 60's or Saddam Hussein in 1992?

 

[Alarum]

Are you asking when the last time Congress exercised it authority to declare war, or the last time the United States declared war? There is debate as to whether or not Congress is the only authority to be able to declare war. In this latest case, The Chief Executive was very clear about declaring our intervention in the Middle East as A WAR. Is there any philosophical or political doubt that we were at war with North Korea in the 50's, North Vietnam in the 60's or Saddam Hussein in 1992?

No, the constitution is pretty clear on the issue. Congress is the only body allowed to declare war.

Article I
Section 1. All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.


Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
...
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

 

[Charlie V]

I will write slow.

LOL! Write whatever speed you want. I'll still read the same speed.

Lincoln was called a dictator... tyrant... monster... evrything from ape to zealot for suspending constitutional rights during wartime.

Was that before or after you called him a facist dictator?

The constitution, as a whole, is not enforcible during wartime.

What a silly thing to say. The Constitution wasn't written to only apply during peace-time. It applies all the time. It doesn't get set to the side or reduced to nothing like the Constitution of George Orwell's Animal Farm. There are no provisions in the Constitution that say, "This document only applies during peacetime."

Charlie

 

[KCDAD]

No, the constitution is pretty clear on the issue. Congress is the only body allowed to declare war.

That is not what it says. It says the President in the Commander in Chief AND Congress has the power to declare war. It does not say that ONLY Congress has the power to declare war. It is a function of the Commander in Chief. But the Constitution also allows Congress to declare war as well. (Besides, they fund it). This is a highly debated part of our Constitutional law.