[Hoot Gibson]

Oh, no, Hoot, not so fast. Big Insurance has board rooms. And those who sit at the table, in the soft leather chairs, and make decisions about who gets dropped and who gets care, these folks are not to be mistaken for those who work and receive insurance as a benefit. To understand that there is a monied elite, is that Marxist? Well, then call John the Revelator a Marxist. John the Baptist a Marxist. Paul the Apostle a Marxist. There is a monied elite. There was a monied elite. There will always be a monied elite.

Your use of Biblical figures as nothing more than rhetorical devices to support Obama's socialist agenda is tiresome. If Jesus had been a Marxist, then his words would have been focused toward the evil governments that controlled the world in His day. Neither Jesus nor any of his followers chronicled in the Bible sounded anything like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright or his pupil, Barack Hussein Obama.

[Mr.Kimball]

Your use of Biblical figures as nothing more than rhetorical devices to support Obama's socialist agenda is tiresome. If Jesus had been a Marxist, then his words would have been focused toward the evil governments that controlled the world in His day. Neither Jesus nor any of his followers chronicled in the Bible sounded anything like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright or his pupil, Barack Hussein Obama.

I suggest that it's use is for no other purpose than a continuing faint attempt of blasphemic mockery.

[thecavemaster]

Your use of Biblical figures as nothing more than rhetorical devices to support Obama's socialist agenda is tiresome. If Jesus had been a Marxist, then his words would have been focused toward the evil governments that controlled the world in His day. Neither Jesus nor any of his followers chronicled in the Bible sounded anything like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright or his pupil, Barack Hussein Obama.

Geez, Hoot, and I mean, Geez.... Biblical figures, especially jesus, in truth, cannot be used to support one side or the other. One of the things that so irritated everybody about jesus, ultimately leaving him to basically be executed with only a few women (one of them his mother) standing by him, was his refusal to be co-opted by one side or another. I have no idea what the Biblical figures would have done politically. What I am saying is that the Bible continually and repeatedly speaks of monied elites and economic injustice and expresses within "god" a preferential "heart" toward the oppressed and downtrodden. Frankly, it makes one weary to continually read your hackery. Tiresome.

[thecavemaster]

I suggest that it's use is for no other purpose than a continuing faint attempt of blasphemic mockery.

If you want to call this debate a renewed argument between federalists and states rights folks, a civil (to uncivil in varying tones) back and forth between people with differing views of the role of government in a constitutionally formatted democracy, so be it. But, oh no. It's the "socialists." The people out to bring "Armageddon" to this nation. The "sycophants" who can't recognize a socialist agenda, a would-be tyrant. "Take the high road." What a bunch of posers and phonies and Chicken Littles.

[Old School]

We all remember the Obama supporters saying after he was elected "that now they wouldn't have to worry about paying their mortgage or buy gas for their cars". I wonder how that worked out for them.

Here's another Obama supporter chiming in on the greatness of Obamacare.
"It's just going to be like Christmas," said DeCarlo Flythe, who lost health coverage for his family when he was laid off almost three years ago. "It's going to be great. You know, no worries (about) the bills. We are going to go ahead and pay our co-pay and be alright."

[Hoot Gibson]

Geez, Hoot, and I mean, Geez.... Biblical figures, especially jesus, in truth, cannot be used to support one side or the other. One of the things that so irritated everybody about jesus, ultimately leaving him to basically be executed with only a few women (one of them his mother) standing by him, was his refusal to be co-opted by one side or another. I have no idea what the Biblical figures would have done politically. What I am saying is that the Bible continually and repeatedly speaks of monied elites and economic injustice and expresses within "god" a preferential "heart" toward the oppressed and downtrodden. Frankly, it makes one weary to continually read your hackery. Tiresome.

You are the one who constantly tries distorts scripture to support your socialist positions. I merely pointed out one of the many weaknesses of your absurd arguments. Socialists are all for separation of church and state except when they are busy painting Jesus as a long haired hippie-socialist.

[thecavemaster]

You are the one who constantly tries distorts scripture to support your socialist positions. I merely pointed out one of the many weaknesses of your absurd arguments. Socialists are all for separation of church and state except when they are busy painting Jesus as a long haired hippie-socialist.

Yes, yes, Hoot, and conservatives are all for government staying out of people's lives until "jesus" tells them that abortion is different and homosexuality is different, etc. Read my post: "jesus" couldn't be co-opted to flag march with any crowd. He witnessed to truth, directed to the individual, not the crowd, and, therefore, he proved an irritant to all sides seeking sanction for "the cause."

[Hoot Gibson]

If you want to call this debate a renewed argument between federalists and states rights folks, a civil (to uncivil in varying tones) back and forth between people with differing views of the role of government in a constitutionally formatted democracy, so be it. But, oh no. It's the "socialists." The people out to bring "Armageddon" to this nation. The "sycophants" who can't recognize a socialist agenda, a would-be tyrant. "Take the high road." What a bunch of posers and phonies and Chicken Littles.

...says the hypocrite as he launches yet another ad hominem attack. What an amusing Quisling...you very rarely make a post that is devoid of insults and when one of the resident patriots respond in kind, you whine incessantly as you play the victim card. :lmao:

[Hoot Gibson]

Yes, yes, Hoot, and conservatives are all for government staying out of people's lives until "jesus" tells them that abortion is different and homosexuality is different, etc. Read my post: "jesus" couldn't be co-opted to flag march with any crowd. He witnessed to truth, directed to the individual, not the crowd, and, therefore, he proved an irritant to all sides seeking sanction for "the cause."

Then why do you employ Jesus and other biblical figures in your posts more often than any other poster?

[thecavemaster]

...says the hypocrite as he launches yet another ad hominem attack. What an amusing Quisling...you very rarely make a post that is devoid of insults and when one of the resident patriots respond in kind, you whine incessantly as you play the victim card. :lmao:

Of course, when the 51+ majority sees that Armageddon doesn't happen, that "the Act" actually helps things, what will Chicken Little do then? I am sure some other sky will fall somewhere. Look. over there. No, wait a minute, over there. When it comes to your gibberish, I'm Taxed Enough Already.

[Hoot Gibson]

Of course, when the 51+ majority sees that Armageddon doesn't happen, that "the Act" actually helps things, what will Chicken Little do then? I am sure some other sky will fall somewhere. Look. over there. No, wait a minute, over there. When it comes to your gibberish, I'm Taxed Enough Already.

Apparently this is another one of your random postings that has no connection to the post you quoted. Based on your blind allegiance to Obama, I am guessing that you will never need to worry about paying your "fair share" of federal income taxes and you are naive enough to think that Zero is handing out money to his sycophants. Like the frog tossed into a pot of water that is slowly brought to a boil, by the time that you realize that Obama is destroying your way of life, along with those "moneyed elites" that you so despise, it will be too late.

[thecavemaster]

Then why do you employ Jesus and other biblical figures in your posts more often than any other poster?

Let me be clear: my guess is that "jesus" would not be co-opted were he around these days. In that he supposedly said, "my kindgom ain't of this place," I doubt he'd much get involved. However, he would say what he says of power structures, economic injustices and the like. Most likely, he'd get strung up again...with multitudes on both sides cheering it all on. Why not? It's Western culture, Friend. No more influential images and figures in all the land.

[thecavemaster]

Apparently this is another one of your random postings that has no connection to the post you quoted. Based on your blind allegiance to Obama, I am guessing that you will never need to worry about paying your "fair share" of federal income taxes and you are naive enough to think that Zero is handing out money to his sycophants. Like the frog tossed into a pot of water that is slowly brought to a boil, by the time that you realize that Obama is destroying your way of life, along with those "moneyed elites" that you so despise, it will be too late.

And, yet again, Chicken Little says, "Hey, over there." I hardly think believing that folk ought not go broke because they get sick, die prematurely because they can't afford healthcare (a position I've held through many administrations) equates to "blind allegiance" to Obama... though, apparently, you desperately desire it to mean that, Sire Beckbaughoreilly.

[Hoot Gibson]

And, yet again, Chicken Little says, "Hey, over there." I hardly think believing that folk ought not go broke because they get sick, die prematurely because they can't afford healthcare (a position I've held through many administrations) equates to "blind allegiance" to Obama... though, apparently, you desperately desire it to mean that, Sire Beckbaughoreilly.

You are once again repeatedly repeating yourself all over again...so I think that I will call it a day.

[thecavemaster]

...says the hypocrite as he launches yet another ad hominem attack. What an amusing Quisling...you very rarely make a post that is devoid of insults and when one of the resident patriots respond in kind, you whine incessantly as you play the victim card. :lmao:

By the way, Hoot, as to abusive ad hominem: I say "Hootie Blowhard" and "Kemba" and "ToadHussie" as jokes, obvious light hearted stuff, often answered by "batman" "caveminion" "cavemoron" and the like, which is fine, all in fun. However, "socialist," "communist," "satan"... these are things that have been thrown toward me, which, too, is fine... but don't talk about whining to me... THAT'S funny... ha ha ha hee hee hee... Little Brown Jug did Hoot drink thee?

[thecavemaster]

You are once again repeatedly repeating yourself all over again...so I think that I will call it a day.

Good night then. Reinforce the ceiling there, CL... only that you might dream more pleasantly.

[vundy33]

Cavemaster, you agree with every single thing that is liberal in any way.

I think if there were another holocaust and it was ran by democrats, you would agree with it.

lol.

[Old School]

During a interview with WSJ, Obama supporter Dem. Rep. Dingell said "it will take a while for Obamacare to control the people". It may take some time but eventually the truth will be exposed.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/24/di...he-people/

[thecavemaster]

Cavemaster, you agree with every single thing that is liberal in any way.

I think if there were another holocaust and it was ran by democrats, you would agree with it.

lol.

I don't consider it "liberal" or "conservative" to think that people ought not go broke because they get sick, ought not die prematurely because they can't afford decent medical care. I'm also not comfortable with the Holocaust ever being used as part of a punch line.

[Hoot Gibson]

During a interview with WSJ, Obama supporter Dem. Rep. Dingell said "it will take a while for Obamacare to control the people". It may take some time but eventually the truth will be exposed.

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/24/di...he-people/

Dingell exposed the truth with his candid comment.

His fellow Michigan socialist, John Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wasted no time in displaying his disinterest in and ignorance of the US Constitution. It is tempting to describe Conyers as a moron, but that would insult morons everywhere. Conyers is as much a Constitutional scholar as Al Gore is a scientist.

[YOUTUBE="Believe it or not this is the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee"]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/f0VYOa2BRbg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/f0VYOa2BRbg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="385"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

[thecavemaster]

"We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union..... promote the general welfare...."

We all know where that comes from. While radical individualists may not like the idea of "general welfare," it exists as a principle in the Constitution, and is included as a concept to be used toward forming "a more perfect union."

[Hoot Gibson]

"We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union..... promote the general welfare...."

We all know where that comes from. While radical individualists may not like the idea of "general welfare," it exists as a principle in the Constitution, and is included as a concept to be used toward forming "a more perfect union."

But that is not what Conyers said now, is it? Conyers could not care less whether the HCR bill is constitutional or not, as his ignorant response shows.

[thecavemaster]

But that is not what Conyers said now, is it? Conyers could not care less whether the HCR bill is constitutional or not, as his ignorant response shows.

Conyers, it seems to me, probably has people on staff, or at least access to, much scholarship in constitutional principle. I thought I heard him mention that, as he suggested that if the bill were unconstitutional, in part or whole, he would, as chairman of Judiciary Committee, have fought it himself.

[vundy33]

I don't consider it "liberal" or "conservative" to think that people ought not go broke because they get sick, ought not die prematurely because they can't afford decent medical care. I'm also not comfortable with the Holocaust ever being used as part of a punch line.

Yeah, I shouldn't have said that, I'm a little more "de-sensitized" about that stuff than people around here.

But anyway, there is no such thing as dying prematurely.

[Old School]

"We, the people, in order to form a more perfect union..... promote the general welfare...."

We all know where that comes from. While radical individualists may not like the idea of "general welfare," it exists as a principle in the Constitution, and is included as a concept to be used toward forming "a more perfect union."

"We the people" reminded me of this video.

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxVT8AZt6cA"]YouTube- "WE THE PEOPLE" - DUE SOUTH - 9-12-09 March on D.C.[/nomedia]

[Hoot Gibson]

Conyers, it seems to me, probably has people on staff, or at least access to, much scholarship in constitutional principle. I thought I heard him mention that, as he suggested that if the bill were unconstitutional, in part or whole, he would, as chairman of Judiciary Committee, have fought it himself.

The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee should not need to consult with his staff to accurately cite the "promote the general welfare" language in the US Constitution. Nor does it take a constitutional scholar to understand that "general welfare" does not give Democrats carte blanche to pass any legislation that they deem good for their Americans.

None of the enumerated rights gives the federal government the right to dictate the purchase of goods and purchases by American citizens. The "Good and Welfare" [sic] clause is not an enumerated power, so it cannot be used as the basis to trample the rights of states or the citizens of those states.

Conyers is an undeclared communist. An admirer of Chavez, Castro, and other left wing dictators far and near. He has no love for the US Constitution and the fact that he is Nancy Pelosi's pick to chair the Judiciary Committee demonstrates her "love" for the document.

[thecavemaster]

The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee should not need to consult with his staff to accurately cite the "promote the general welfare" language in the US Constitution. Nor does it take a constitutional scholar to understand that "general welfare" does not give Democrats carte blanche to pass any legislation that they deem good for their Americans.

None of the enumerated rights gives the federal government the right to dictate the purchase of goods and purchases by American citizens. The "Good and Welfare" [sic] clause is not an enumerated power, so it cannot be used as the basis to trample the rights of states or the citizens of those states.

Conyers is an undeclared communist. An admirer of Chavez, Castro, and other left wing dictators far and near. He has no love for the US Constitution and the fact that he is Nancy Pelosi's pick to chair the Judiciary Committee demonstrates her "love" for the document.

Can I ask you this: the idea that resources ought not be exploited by foreign corporations while the native peoples struggle to have drinkable water... is that a communistic idea? In other words, while I may not "like" Chavez or Castro in terms of essential liberties infringement, the fact that I might find certain of their ideas interesting, if not just, that doesn't make me an "undeclared" communist, except in some sort of Bizarro either/or intellectual world that voids balance and true reason.

[Hoot Gibson]

Can I ask you this: the idea that resources ought not be exploited by foreign corporations while the native peoples struggle to have drinkable water... is that a communistic idea? In other words, while I may not "like" Chavez or Castro in terms of essential liberties infringement, the fact that I might find certain of their ideas interesting, if not just, that doesn't make me an "undeclared" communist, except in some sort of Bizarro either/or intellectual world that voids balance and true reason.

If you want to do some research, you will find the most polluted environments in the world are those governed by totalitarian regimes. You will also find that the most oppressed poor people of the world live under the jackboots of thugs like Castro and Chavez. Happy people do not try to ride a '59 Buick across shark infested waters to reach the freedom of the American shore.

[INDENT]

Exile activist says Cubans in floating Buick are sent back to Cuba, car sunk

The '59 Buick converted into a boat and headed to Florida Keys with 11 Cuban migrants onboard has been sunk by the U.S. Coast Guard and those onboard will be taken back to Cuba, according to an exile activist in Key West.

The U.S. Coast Guard Wednesday morning refused to comment on the fate of the car, citing a policy not to comment on an "ongoing mission.''

[/INDENT]

[Mr.Kimball]

I don't consider it "liberal" or "conservative" to think that people ought not go broke because they get sick, ought not die prematurely because they can't afford decent medical care. I'm also not comfortable with the Holocaust ever being used as part of a punch line.

Good Grief CM!!!!, could you PLEASE give that one a rest? It lost it's effectiveness a looong time ago. Sheeesh.:HitWall:

[Hoot Gibson]

The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee should not need to consult with his staff to accurately cite the "promote the general welfare" language in the US Constitution. Nor does it take a constitutional scholar to understand that "general welfare" does not give Democrats carte blanche to pass any legislation that they deem good for their Americans.

None of the enumerated rights gives the federal government the right to dictate the purchase of goods and services by American citizens. The "Good and Welfare" [sic] clause is not an enumerated power, so it cannot be used as the basis to trample the rights of states or the citizens of those states.

Conyers is an undeclared communist. An admirer of Chavez, Castro, and other left wing dictators far and near. He has no love for the US Constitution and the fact that he is Nancy Pelosi's pick to chair the Judiciary Committee demonstrates her "love" for the document.

Correction.