Politics and religion.

**Grace** · 10-27-2008, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by Puckstop31

1.) BO wants to take your money and give it to people who did not earn it.

2.) BO thinks the Constitution is the PROBLEM in this country.

1. The Bush administration is handing out buckets of $$$ (our money) to the banks - did they 'earn' it? What about sugar subsidies?

2. Hmmm, and wasn't it George Bush who said about the Constitution of the United States - “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

**Puckstop31** · 10-27-2008, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by Grace

1. The Bush administration is handing out buckets of $$$ (our money) to the banks - did they 'earn' it? What about sugar subsidies?

2. Hmmm, and wasn't it George Bush who said about the Constitution of the United States - “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

Come on Grace... I'd expect a deflection like this from the lefty drones here, but not you.

You are using Bush's actions as a excuse for BO doing the same thing? What? I thought BO was a man of "change". But it just seems like he IS more of the same...

Do you think wealth SHOULD be redistributed? Do you think the Constitution is the problem and not the answer?

**lizbud** · 10-27-2008, 11:39 AM

I've got a news flash for everyone, the government already taxes people
and "distributes the wealth" the way it sees fit. It's nothing new. Only thing
that should change is who gets the "perks". The wealthy & well connected,
or the average ,middle class folks who support (with taxes) their government.

**Grace** · 10-27-2008, 03:05 PM

I am saying that redistribution of money, in this country, is nothing new. Farm and sugar subsidies, graduated income tax, bailout of banks. I’m not saying I approve; I’m just stating a fact of life.

As for the Constitution, while it may be a problem for Obama, it was a bigger one for Bush. His administration has trashed it. I most certainly did not approve of that - but then he didn't request my approval

**Puckstop31** · 10-27-2008, 04:41 PM

I've got a news flash for everyone, the government already taxes people and "distributes the wealth" the way it sees fit. It's nothing new.

I am saying that redistribution of money, in this country, is nothing new. Farm and sugar subsidies, graduated income tax, bailout of banks. I’m not saying I approve; I’m just stating a fact of life.

As for the Constitution, while it may be a problem for Obama, it was a bigger one for Bush. His administration has trashed it. I most certainly did not approve of that - but then he didn't request my approval

OK, so we KNOW the government does it. Both "sides" do it. Yet we are willing to keep on letting them do it by putting them back in office?

Grace - You think BO will get your approval to further negate the Constitution? Look, we all know that Bush is the devil and most of what he did was bad. Lets move past that and NOT put another person, just like him OR WORSE in the White House. BO is on record, many, many times now, saying that the Constitution is the problem. Not that we don't adhere to it, but that it is THE problem. If that does not scare the crap out of you.... Well, then there really is no hope and it will come, eventually, to open armed conflict. Why? Because there are way to many people who took an oath to uphold and defend that document and what it stands for... Against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic. I took that oath, to defend the document and what it stands for, not the men and women in DC raping it. I keep my word. It is not time yet, but those storms clouds are getting nasty.

If there ever was a case for a 3rd party... This election is IT.

**momoffuzzyfaces** · 10-27-2008, 06:30 PM

Originally Posted by Puckstop31

OK, so we KNOW the government does it. Both "sides" do it. Yet we are willing to keep on letting them do it by putting them back in office?

Grace - You think BO will get your approval to further negate the Constitution? Look, we all know that Bush is the devil and most of what he did was bad. Lets move past that and NOT put another person, just like him OR WORSE in the White House. BO is on record, many, many times now, saying that the Constitution is the problem. Not that we don't adhere to it, but that it is THE problem. If that does not scare the crap out of you.... Well, then there really is no hope and it will come, eventually, to open armed conflict. Why? Because there are way to many people who took an oath to uphold and defend that document and what it stands for... Against ALL enemies, foreign or domestic. I took that oath, to defend the document and what it stands for, not the men and women in DC raping it. I keep my word. It is not time yet, but those storms clouds are getting nasty.

If there ever was a case for a 3rd party... This election is IT.

The Constitution is not THE problem!!! It's the idiots who don't follow it. Bush had the support of Congress before he invaded Iraq, no matter what they are trying to make everyone believe now. I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution saying go invade another country if you don't like their leader!!!

If the Constitution falls, so does our country. At least it can't be amended by just one person.

By the way, I've heard the European Union is wanting to take over the banking systems of the world. Now THAT scares the bejeebers out of me.

**Puckstop31** · 10-27-2008, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by momoffuzzyfaces

The Constitution is not THE problem!!! It's the idiots who don't follow it. Bush had the support of Congress before he invaded Iraq, no matter what they are trying to make everyone believe now. I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution saying go invade another country if you don't like their leader!!!

If the Constitution falls, so does our country. At least it can't be amended by just one person.

By the way, I've heard the European Union is wanting to take over the banking systems of the world. Now THAT scares the bejeebers out of me.

OK, so we AGREE.

A vote for Obama is a vote for doing away with the Consitution. A vote for McCain is a vote for more of the same "back room" redistirbution of wealth.

Pick your poison. OR Vote for a 3rd party.

Bush will be a saint compared to either one of these clowns. Think about THAT.

**lizbud** · 10-28-2008, 05:55 PM

Originally Posted by Puckstop31

BO is on record, many, many times now, saying that the Constitution is the problem. Not that we don't adhere to it, but that it is THE problem. If that does not scare the crap out of you.... Well, then there really is no hope and it will come, eventually, to open armed conflict. .

Shall I warn the FBI now that you are inviting armed conflict among
citizens after this election? Do you realize how you sound saying all
this stuff?

Please, pretty please, show me your proof of Obama saying this the US
Constitution is a problem in any way.

**lizbud** · 10-28-2008, 06:04 PM

Just wanted to share my very favorite cartoon of the day.

**Puckstop31** · 10-28-2008, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by lizbud

Shall I warn the FBI now that you are inviting armed conflict among
citizens after this election? Do you realize how you sound saying all
this stuff?

Good God Liz... You are such a drama queen. Please get over yourself.

I pray every day that it does NOT come to that. But I fear it might. And yes, I realize how I sound saying this. The scary truth is, well, scary.

Please, pretty please, show me your proof of Obama saying this the US
Constitution is a problem in any way.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=79225

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11OhmY1obS4

Now I know you are going to rip the source. But listen to the Youtube link. the read this article...

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1

If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be OK.

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it's been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you, but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.

And that hasn't shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that.

The man wants to modify the Constitution. He wants it to be a document of entitlement, rather than a document of FREEDOM. He thinks the Constitution CONSTRAINS people.

I have read just about every word of the Federalist Papers. I have done extensive reading and research into the founders, their ideals and their motives. The documents they created are the greatest documents of governance in history. Perfect? No. But they must have done something right. Weare, in a short span of time, the most free, prosperous and influential nation in history.

To put it in one sentence... The man wants to turn it into a document of entitlements, and change it from a document of FREEDOMS.

I challenge you to actually READ the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution. Tell me what you think. Then compare it to the "government" we have today.

**momoffuzzyfaces** · 10-27-2008, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by lizbud

I've got a news flash for everyone, the government already taxes people
and "distributes the wealth" the way it sees fit. It's nothing new.

Yep, instead of playing Robbin Hood and taking from the rich and giving to the poor, they are taking from the poor and giving it to the rich!!!

Do oil companies REALLY deserve billions of dollars in profits while lots of people can't afford to heat their homes?

It's becoming whoever is the biggest crook wins!

**Puckstop31** · 10-27-2008, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by momoffuzzyfaces

Do oil companies REALLY deserve billions of dollars in profits while lots of people can't afford to heat their homes?

If they EARNED it, yes. But you want to go after a REAL evil greedy company? Pick on Google. Pick on Microsoft. Pick on APPLE.

8% "windfall" profits, that kind of money is chicken feed compared to Google.

**lizbud** · 10-27-2008, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by Puckstop31

If they EARNED it, yes. But you want to go after a REAL evil greedy company? Pick on Google. Pick on Microsoft. Pick on APPLE.

8% "windfall" profits, that kind of money is chicken feed compared to Google.

Sorry, but they have to get in line behind all the wall street investment
firms and large banking firms that need some of our"wealth" to put them back
in business.

**Puckstop31** · 10-27-2008, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by lizbud

Sorry, but they have to get in line behind all the wall street investment
firms and large banking firms that need some of our"wealth" to put them back
in business.

So you agree the bailout bill is bad?

**momoffuzzyfaces** · 10-28-2008, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by Puckstop31

If they EARNED it, yes. But you want to go after a REAL evil greedy company? Pick on Google. Pick on Microsoft. Pick on APPLE.

8% "windfall" profits, that kind of money is chicken feed compared to Google.

If I were president, you can bet your underwear, I would go after them if they were a US comany and subject to taxes!!!