Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Clinton unveils mandatory health care insurance plan
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 249114" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>On principle I agree with you and AV8 but you have one major problem. First off, the 14th amendment opened up the states to federal jurisdiction as it totally changed the nature of the meaning of the term citizen and with that how far federal level jurisdiction can follow. President Eisenhower commissioned a report in 1956' to be drafted on this issue of fedral jurisdiction entiled, Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within the States. I've had this 2 volume work for about 20 years and have read it and it is dry and boring but it's also eye opening at the same time. I know this is stupid of me but if by chance you feel compelled to read this, it is now thank God on the net at: <a href="http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/fj0-0000.htm" target="_blank">http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/fj0-0000.htm</a></p><p> </p><p>Also we sat by without objection and allow the commerce clause to be abused for the sake of not only political interests but corp. interests as well. There is an old concept in law that We have failed to object in the past when the federal gov't federalized retirement (social security) worksite insurance (worker's comp) old age health insurance (medicare) medical drug benefits (Bush's recent medical drug plan) education (Bush and Kennedy's No Child Left Behind) energy (regulation and controlled free market by subsidizing oil even enacting a tax revenue model by funding roads via a tax on oil. Shift to a new means of energy will require a new ta model first. Ah! the secret for not moving away from oil.) We sit on our hands like good little comformists that we are and dare not utter a wimper of objection and then we proudly proclaimed we did our part by voting in the last election for the other guy, not the one who has us in whatever the current malaise is at the time. </p><p> </p><p>Jez guys, I could go on and on and on but the simple fact is that we have sat on our <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/censored2.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":censored2:" title="Censored2 :censored2:" data-shortname=":censored2:" /> and let both parties seemingly sing a different tune from one another but in fact it's the same old song. Wile one party sing it at one tempo the other party sings it at another. Depending on the verse, it comes down to just who is singing the faster tempo at the time. In the end it's all the same and so are the end result.</p><p> </p><p>Hillary's music that she's singing now was in fact written in 2005' with the help of the great defender of the conservative faith Newt Gingrich.</p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 18px">THAT'S A FACT JACK!!!!!!!!</span></p><p> </p><p>Bothsides want to nationalize health care but the question is are you willing to accept a lite or dark version. You fear Dracula (Hillary or the politics she represents) so you run into the arms of Frankenstein (Newt or the politics he represents) Either way, the monster gets you in the end!</p><p> </p><p>One of my favorite songs from back in my teenage years was Monster by Steppenwolf. The last line of Monster before it transitions over into the song Suicide goes as follows:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p> </p><p>What's also interesting is the opening verse to Suicide.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p><a href="http://www.steppenwolf.com/lyr/mnnster.html" target="_blank">http://www.steppenwolf.com/lyr/mnnster.html</a></p><p> </p><p>Man I love those days but we sure as hell forgot what we learned IMO!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 249114, member: 2189"] On principle I agree with you and AV8 but you have one major problem. First off, the 14th amendment opened up the states to federal jurisdiction as it totally changed the nature of the meaning of the term citizen and with that how far federal level jurisdiction can follow. President Eisenhower commissioned a report in 1956' to be drafted on this issue of fedral jurisdiction entiled, Jurisdiction Over Federal Areas Within the States. I've had this 2 volume work for about 20 years and have read it and it is dry and boring but it's also eye opening at the same time. I know this is stupid of me but if by chance you feel compelled to read this, it is now thank God on the net at: [URL]http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/fj0-0000.htm[/URL] Also we sat by without objection and allow the commerce clause to be abused for the sake of not only political interests but corp. interests as well. There is an old concept in law that We have failed to object in the past when the federal gov't federalized retirement (social security) worksite insurance (worker's comp) old age health insurance (medicare) medical drug benefits (Bush's recent medical drug plan) education (Bush and Kennedy's No Child Left Behind) energy (regulation and controlled free market by subsidizing oil even enacting a tax revenue model by funding roads via a tax on oil. Shift to a new means of energy will require a new ta model first. Ah! the secret for not moving away from oil.) We sit on our hands like good little comformists that we are and dare not utter a wimper of objection and then we proudly proclaimed we did our part by voting in the last election for the other guy, not the one who has us in whatever the current malaise is at the time. Jez guys, I could go on and on and on but the simple fact is that we have sat on our :censored: and let both parties seemingly sing a different tune from one another but in fact it's the same old song. Wile one party sing it at one tempo the other party sings it at another. Depending on the verse, it comes down to just who is singing the faster tempo at the time. In the end it's all the same and so are the end result. Hillary's music that she's singing now was in fact written in 2005' with the help of the great defender of the conservative faith Newt Gingrich. [SIZE=5]THAT'S A FACT JACK!!!!!!!![/SIZE] Bothsides want to nationalize health care but the question is are you willing to accept a lite or dark version. You fear Dracula (Hillary or the politics she represents) so you run into the arms of Frankenstein (Newt or the politics he represents) Either way, the monster gets you in the end! One of my favorite songs from back in my teenage years was Monster by Steppenwolf. The last line of Monster before it transitions over into the song Suicide goes as follows: What's also interesting is the opening verse to Suicide. [URL]http://www.steppenwolf.com/lyr/mnnster.html[/URL] Man I love those days but we sure as hell forgot what we learned IMO! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Clinton unveils mandatory health care insurance plan
Top