Posted on 01/02/2005 8:50:12 AM PST by worldclass
The real issue here is whether such so-called Federally-funded disaster “relief” is Constitutional. And the answer is very clear: No, it is not. There isn’t the slightest Constitutional authority for Federal tax dollars to be spent for disaster “relief.” Thus, any such expenditure of Federal tax dollars for disaster “relief” --- foreign or domestic --- is illegal, unlawful.
(Excerpt) Read more at peroutka2004.com ...
By the grace of G_d, I don't have children. But I like your thinking! You have potential!
A Somalian? My, my! What a suggestion.
That's what I thought. Did Congress pass this expense?
Yes, obviously it is a concern of my or I would not have made the request.
Nice. The point is, humanitarian aid does not "provide to the common defense" in this case. Furthermore, to expect a quid pro quo for such aid is disgusting.
I really, really need a new Maybach
Very nice automobile. I watched a video presentation from a European auto show. I'd need a driver because the back-seat amenities are so inviting.
Yes, Congress did pass this expense. It is in a fund earmarked for emergency aid. Anything above the amount in the fund will have to be approved by Congress. If you don't like it, write your Representative and Senator. <>Better yet, write your newspaper and be sure to sign your real name.
Well said! And our benefactor should be glad to provide it! After all, he'll get the cost back ten-fold!
Surely he'll provide a good rate of pay, along with medical benefits and a thrift plan? At ten-to-one, it's the deal of a lifetime!
No, my point is correct. Nothing the courts have done changes the original meaning.
God doesn't give back in kind, but He always gives back.
And that is the secret to happiness.
..and nowhere else in the world is there a Nation that is better equiped to help those people than ours.
And now our Nation is going to try and help those people.
It is the right thing to do.
I am curious...how do you view...poor illegal aliens who sneak over here that want a better life? Many have little or no shelter, food or reliable water to drink. Many are sick and poor.
Do we owe them something? Like menial jobs many richer folks here don't want? They contribute to OUR economy, many pay taxes, many provide services that are needed to keep our economy chugging along...like construction of roads and buildings. These similar humans who have little or nothing need help and charity are they "entitled" to receive similar type of help?
We are the "same" equipped country that is capable of helping disaster victims...what about the "other" victims that in many cases "contribute" back to the US?
I am just curious...especially with the upcoming turmoil surrounding GW's amnesty plan for illegals.
BTW wishing you and yours the best of New Years!
Sir Gaiwain to the President and Congress: Don't give foreign aid even if you think it would be best for the defense of our country.746
Please post the post# where Sir Gaiwain wrote that. Thanks in advance.755
I reference the comments that I refer to in my posts? Please see it.
Are you saying that Sir Gaiwain didn't write the words you attributed to him?
If he did write them please give the post# where he did so.
Among all these messages, has anyone attempted to trace the history of government funded foreign aid and disaster relief? I've tried to look through the messages, but they go every which way.
For example, the earliest foreign disaster assistance I've found so far happened in 1812. Following an earthquake in Venezuela, the U.S. Congress sent $50,000 for food and other supplies.
Excellent post.
In order for me to be your son, you would have to have been born in the 1920's.
I too am a descendant of French...only Catholics...I'm and Acadienne (Beaucoup de facteurs ont contribué à la création de ce que nous appelons l'identité acadienne.), now commonly called Cajuns.
By definition...we are not in a world war...I think that term derives from (virtually all countries that count) being involved in the world.
While the war on terror is nearly world wide...that does not make it a world war.
There is only one dominant world power now. The President could, for example, call Putin on the phone and say "there are a number of B-2 enroute to your capital bearing nuclear warheads...they should be there in...say three hours...do what you can." We can destroy any country now...with impunity...so what's your point?
My father recieved a Purple Heart and another decoration for valor in WWII. I recieved a Purple Heart in the Vietnam War...I have always backed the United States.
We will never need tents and or camels.
It may help our common defense in the long run or it may not. My point is more that foreign aid with that intension is Constitutional.
As far as a quid pro quo for foreign aid especially during a disaster, see my post to Neutrino about Christmas presents to ones kids. I wasn't being flippant.
No, I don't know. Frist was on Fox News today and talked about getting aid to this area as soon as possible, so I would imagine it would be as soon as the new Congress convenes.
And when all that money ends up in the hands of war lords, drug dealers, and dictators, what will we have stabilized?
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.