Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mr. President, "Disaster Relief" Is Not Yours to Give
Peroutka 2004 ^ | 12/30/2004 | Peroutka

Posted on 01/02/2005 8:50:12 AM PST by worldclass

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 1,181-1,195 next last
To: Howlin

You are quibbling about "ask" and "tell." I noticed it never occurred to you that the rest of us didn't need to be ask or told, we just did it.

You're wrong. It's obvious that people don't have to be asked. Yet asking does make "sales", -- when the President speaks he motivates people. You have more straw man than... well, anybody else on this thread. By your standards I should assert that you don't think the President should encourage people to donate to the tsunami victims. 

361 posted on 01/02/2005 11:40:32 AM PST by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: HitmanNY
HitmanNY said: "... my point is that those who argue against all sorts of elective actions by the feds - that is, stuff not mandated nor expressly forbidden by the USC - on Constitutional grounds are all wet."

It is your position, then, that anything that is not expressly forbidden, is allowed? Why, then, was there any attempt to enumerate the powers of the government? Without the Second Amendment, would it be permissible for the government to disarm the people?

362 posted on 01/02/2005 11:40:54 AM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

I see that it was posted after I posted it, and that there was a link to it that I was replying to with the text. I haven't seen any other threads about this particular topic so I don't know where else it might have been posted.

I believe it (the Crockett thing) sums up what the original poster of this thread might have been trying to say. I don't have dog in this fight one way or the other. We allocate certain monies for 'disaster relief' every year, and have been doing so for quite a while now. No one that I am aware of has made an eloquent plea against this practice.


363 posted on 01/02/2005 11:40:59 AM PST by spodefly (This message packaged with desiccant. Do not open until ready for use or inspection.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: jude24

I realize this puts me in the "heartless" category according to the majority in this "conservative" forum, but there is nothing Christian or moral about government-sponsored disaster relief. Willingly giving of what you have is not the same as taking from someone to give to someone else. Forced charity is not charity.

364 posted on 01/02/2005 11:41:05 AM PST by sheltonmac ("Duty is ours; consequences are God's." -Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

You must've been sleeping in your constitutional law class that day, too.


365 posted on 01/02/2005 11:42:02 AM PST by Nephi (Liberals refer to the constitution as a "living document" because they only want to abort it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Zon
GEORGE BUSH HAS BEEN SPEAKING ON THIS SUBJECT ALL WEEK LONG
366 posted on 01/02/2005 11:42:34 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: Sofa King

I read or heard somewhere that charitable contributions for disaster relief from Americans had already exceeded $100 million.


367 posted on 01/02/2005 11:43:18 AM PST by Doohickey ("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: sheltonmac

I feel quite confident that the Bush Administration will keep this money for the appropriate people. There is a reason that the President set up the "core group" to work together on these donations, and I am certain they are well aware of the UN's avarice.


368 posted on 01/02/2005 11:44:23 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 347 | View Replies]

To: Goodgirlinred

I agree but look at what UN did with the oil for food program that was to help the people/children of Iraq. How much of this generous donation from the US is going toward lining the pockets of UN aids instead of the victims.


369 posted on 01/02/2005 11:45:12 AM PST by newfrpr04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll; Miss Marple; Howlin; Peach; HitmanNY; worldclass; neutrino; xzins
CAUTION! The following may seem to be heartless...

As well as sophomoric.

If the real reason for helping our fellow man is not enough for you:

"And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins. Use hospitality one to another without grudging. As every man hath received the gift, [even so] minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God." -- 1 Peter 4:8-10.

Then the pragmatic reason should suffice. World economies are interconnected. We help to help ourselves:

"Society is joint action and cooperation in which each participant sees the other partner's success as a means for the attainment of his own." -- Ludwig von Mises.

370 posted on 01/02/2005 11:45:26 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: worldclass

Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda neat huh?


371 posted on 01/02/2005 11:45:33 AM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William Tell

The USC outlines the roles and responsibilities of the branches of the Federal Government.

The Bill of Rights expressly limits what the Feds can do. Amd. 10 reserves other rights to the states and to the people.

That's not to say that if the USC doesn't expressly give permission (or even broaches) a matter, the Feds have n legal authority .

My consistent point is that the fact that the USC does not specifically mandate a role, nor specifically forbid a role, does not necessarily make it unconstitutional. There is 200 years of Constitutional law behind that position.

There isn't much history or law in support of a serious argument to the contrary.

So to be clear and explicit, and to answer your question directly, no, I am not saying that if something is not expressly forbidden, it is allowed.

I am saying that if it is neither expressly mandated nor expressly forbidden, that doesn't necessarily mean that a particular course of action is forbidden. It may be, or it may not be.

Catch the wave!


372 posted on 01/02/2005 11:46:32 AM PST by HitmanLV (HitmanNY has a brand new Blog!! Please Visit! - http://www.goldust.com/weblog -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: cyborg

Do you think everyone pays taxes? I'll bet less than half the population of the US pays any taxes.


373 posted on 01/02/2005 11:47:51 AM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Works for me, Bones (may I call you 'Bones?' I have been wanting to call a doctor 'Bones' since I was a young kid watching Star Trek).


374 posted on 01/02/2005 11:48:25 AM PST by HitmanLV (HitmanNY has a brand new Blog!! Please Visit! - http://www.goldust.com/weblog -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
LOL......I tried to point out that INTERNET is not mentioned in the Constitution, too, but nobody would acknowledge it.

If it is not mentioned, it is ok, if the States or the people do it.

375 posted on 01/02/2005 11:48:30 AM PST by carenot (Proud member of The Flying Skillet Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez

No, Congress may only appropriate funds for those things it is allowed to do within the confines of the Constitution.

Then I should expect a detailed statement of how every single one of those 350 million dollars were spent, right?

376 posted on 01/02/2005 11:48:49 AM PST by sheltonmac ("Duty is ours; consequences are God's." -Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 339 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
I do not consider foreign aid unconstitutional, especially in the case of disaster relief. I realize some on this forum disagree with me, including you, but that is what I think.

The Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe and stopped the threat that the Soviets would take over. It probably was "unconstitutional" according to your thinking, but there is no doubt that it was needed and was effective. I am glad we did it.

377 posted on 01/02/2005 11:48:51 AM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: newfrpr04

Our money is not going through the UN..and the UN doesn't like it much either. Tee Hee


378 posted on 01/02/2005 11:48:57 AM PST by Earthdweller (US descendant of French Protestants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: unbalanced but fair
Zon to Miss Maple...

Zon: When you made a donation to the tsunami victims did you feel good or bad about your act of donating? 'Nuf said.338

unbalanced but fair responded...

unbalanced but fair: Well. since you have previously said that "Fascism best describes the U.S. government;" nothing that you say here astounds me.

What you responded to was so astounding to you. I wrote: "When you made a donation to the tsunami victims did you feel good or bad about your act of donating? 'Nuf said." You astound incredibly easily. 

BTW, the government does control the means of production via withholding taxes on wager earners and regulations on business. It's fascist.

BTW, welcome to FreeRepublic.

379 posted on 01/02/2005 11:49:00 AM PST by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: alnick

"Do you honestly think that our giving aid to the victims of the tsunamis is being given to make someone look good?"

Do you actually think that the Washington elites would send anything to these people if they weren't getting a little PR for our tax money? We pay, they look good, everyone feels all warm and fuzzy. Except for the Thais the whole region will be right back to hating us next month.


380 posted on 01/02/2005 11:51:36 AM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 1,181-1,195 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson