|
That cartoon is wrong, mainly because it’s not invoking "the children".... |
| |
Written By:
shark
URL:
http://
|
David Crockett is rolling over in his grave as we speak.
We need more Davys. |
| |
Written By:
Robb Allen
URL:
http://blog.robballen.com
|
|
Reminds me of two great Mencken quotes: one where he talks about politicians who court voters by "promising to turn A loose in B’s cornfield," and another where he talks about elections in the US becoming "an auction of stolen goods held before the fact." |
| |
Written By:
Bilwick
URL:
http://
|
I’m confused. Is the politician in the cartoon saying that he’ll take the money from taxpayers and give the money to defense contractors for some illegal war? If so, this is great...
|
| |
Written By:
k
URL:
http://
|
|
K, your "I’m confused" seems redundant when the following sentence is read. Your confusion seems obvious. |
| |
Written By:
tom scott
URL:
http://
|
Is the politician in the cartoon saying that he’ll take the money from taxpayers and give the money to defense contractors for some illegal war? I’ll make it easy for you - No. |
| |
Written By:
Robb Allen
URL:
http://blog.robballen.com
|
The funny thing is, when you think about it, people like ’k’ (who can’t even bother putting a little effort into the name field) are the type of people who don’t work good with logic, facts, and lengthy debate.
So you try to draw them simple pictures.
And they still don’t get it. |
| |
Written By:
Robb Allen
URL:
http://blog.robballen.com
|
"and another where he talks about elections in the US becoming "an auction of stolen goods held before the fact.""
LOL. Great quote. First we could hire personal shoppers, now we can hire personal thieves.
|
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
You got it wrong.
Its a two party system. One party wants to take his money and give it to you. The other party just wants to borrow money from the Chinese and the Saudis and give it to you. Didn’t you hear the one about "Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter?". We have two choices, dumb and dumber.
|
| |
Written By:
cindyb
URL:
http://
|
We have two choices, dumb and dumber. Thank you, Cindy B and K for joining us today. |
| |
Written By:
tom scott
URL:
http://
|
I’m confused. Is the politician in the cartoon saying that he’ll take the money from taxpayers and give the money to defense contractors for some illegal war? If so, this is great... The reason it is such a great cartoon is that it is a generic politician and two generic guys. We can all see the other guy as canoodling up to vote for the b*stard and stealing money from us. Works no matter who you are and how you feel ripped off. So just take the laugh. |
| |
Written By:
unaha-closp
URL:
http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
|
"Thank you, Cindy B and K for joining us today."
Ah, yes. Hobson’s choice. |
| |
Written By:
timactual
URL:
http://
|
This is old hat,
I am currently reading Imperium by Robert Harris about Cicero and the last days of the Roman Republic, and it’s politicians doing exactly this that helped bring down the Republic!!
The more things change, the more they stay the same! |
| |
Written By:
Kirsten
URL:
http://
|
This is old hat, I don’t believe that’s the argument. "Evolving" means that’s not what it was (or designed to be) in the beginning.
|
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/blog
|
|
It’s apparently "old hat" enough for Benjamin Franklin to have recognized the syndrome. He said, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will be the end of the republic." (Gosh, I am the Li’l Ol’ Quotemeister these days, aren’t I?) |
| |
Written By:
Bilwick
URL:
http://
|
It’s apparently "old hat" enough for Benjamin Franklin to have recognized the syndrome. The argument isn’t that the syndrome isn’t "old hat", the argument is the form of government established here was supposed to avoid the "old hat" syndrome. |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/blog
|
|
I agree with you, McQ; but apparently when the form of government that was established here was being established, Franklin (if I’m interpreting his statement correctly) saw the flaw that would sew the seeds of its regression into the Same Old Statism. I’m better at coming up with appropos quotes than I am at political theorizing, so I haven’t a clue how the Founders could have plugged up that hole. Maybe no-repeal clause like: "And anyone in this new republic who promotes the Cult of the State from which we just disenthralled ourselves will be shipped back to Europe where they obviously like that kind of thing." Imagine, a USA without "liberals" . . . . |
| |
Written By:
Bilwick
URL:
http://
|
Imagine, a USA without "liberals" . . . . And without Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Minnesota south of Mississippi River, much of North Dakota, nearly all of South Dakota, northeastern New Mexico, northern Texas, the portions of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado east of the Continental Divide, and Louisiana on both sides of the Mississippi River, including the city of New Orleans. As well as everything to the west of there.
Crowded.
|
| |
Written By:
unaha-closp
URL:
http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
|
when I go to this post via a permalink, the Google ad (in this case box.net/widget) overlays the top of the article. The ad has no close button or box and cannot be moved.
This is not the case when I go to the main page and scroll to the article. |
| |
Written By:
RM
URL:
http://
|
|
Yep. That’s because the cartoon is to large to fit. Happens sometimes. |
| |
Written By:
Dale Franks
URL:
http://www.qando.net
|
Old hat.
Actually, the Founders DID take care of the problem. They thought. One of the Federalist Papers addresses the question explicitly.
"When your federal Constitution was being considered for ratification by the State Senates, some people were suspicious of the "general welfare" Clause and tried to claim that these two words could authorize any kind of welfare. The general welfare Clause in Article 1, Section 8 of your U.S. Constitution reads: "The Congress shall have Power to ... provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; ..." It is an introductory phrase which is followed, after a semi-colon, by a specific list of the 17 things the new government would be authorized to do, such as; to establish Post Offices, coin money, make Treaties, establish standard weights and measures, provide for a Navy, punish pirates, punish counterfeiting, fund a temporary army, declare war, and exercise exclusive jurisdiction over all cases in the future Washington, D.C., etc.
To counter those rumors that the general welfare Clause in the proposed Constitution would authorize any kind of welfare, James Madison, in Federalist Paper #41, explained its clear intent. He stated that it "is an absurdity" to claim that the General Welfare Clause confounds or misleads, because this introductory Clause is followed by enumeration of specific particulars that explain and qualify the meaning of phrase "general welfare."
That’s right! YOUR CONSTITUTION WAS RATIFIED UNDER THE ASSURANCE THAT IT WOULD NEVER BE INTERPRETED TO PROVIDE WELFARE TO INDIVIDUALS."
Just one more example of how judicial activism has contributed to the ruination of this country.
|
| |
Written By:
jb
URL:
http://
|
