Posted on 04/30/2007 9:14:44 AM PDT by Austin Willard Wright
We published an analysis on “Dollar Myths” in which we criticized spending habits in Washington:
"Interestingly, nobody seemed to focus on the fact that there is an unconventional solution to foreigners holding too much of our debt: live within your means and do not issue debt. Such an old fashioned concept would indeed strengthen the dollar. Unfortunately, none of the presidential candidates at either side of the aisle seem to have heard of this notion."
We missed that there is indeed a presidential candidate who believes in the old fashioned view to “live within your means.” Our apologies go to Congressman Ron Paul, who threw his hat in the ring on March 12, 2007, announcing his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination. Ron Paul is the one member of Congress who is a true fiscal conservative. As a member of the House Committee of Financial Services, he does not hesitate to speak out against inflationary policies. On his campaign website, Ron Paul 2008, he writes:
“Real conservatives have always supported low taxes and low spending.
But today, too many politicians and lobbyists are spending America into ruin. We are nine trillion dollars in debt as a nation… If we don’t cut spending now, higher taxes and economic disaster will be in their future – and yours.
(Excerpt) Read more at fxstreet.com ...
LOL!
Says the man who cites the New York Times spin machine as his authority.
FTTA is not unconstitutional.
End of story.
The story so far: you have produced zero evidence of the Executive obtaining unconstitutional powers.
Unsubstantiated claims of unconstitutional powers? Not really.
How about his Faith Based Programs? Looks harmless doesn’t it? Well it isn’t. Churches today are being censored by the fed usually using the USPS to achieve the purpose by saying what can and can not be placed in church flyer's {bulletins mailed out under NPO status}.
Let's pretend that this claim you've just made is true and verified - which it isn't.
If you want federal grant money, then you have to abide by the terms of the federal grant program.
If you don't like the terms, you don't have to ask for money.
Nothing unconstitutional about that - unless the Executive is somehow constitutionally obligated to give people free money. Which article would that be in?
Now you let the church start taking federal dollars and see how quick for example churches are ordered to hire gay preachers. Congress has no Constitutional authority nor does POTUS to stick it’s nose in church missions. The FED already has about destroyed church ran orphanages and hospitals. I say give them back to the churches to run as they see fit and I bet you Ron Paul agree’s.
Again, churches that decide to feed at the public trough do so voluntarily.
The impositions against hospitals and orphanages do not come from the Executive, of course, but from local jurisdictions.
But feel free to just make anything up.
Wrong! Any hospital who takes one cent in Medicaid {a State ran but federal funded program} or Medicare is indeed under FED impositions. Even private pay facilities are somewhat. So are orphanages who may happen to have kids under Medicaid due to death of parents. IOW they fall under Sec of Health and Human Services. Wanna play some more?
BTW I do think churches should not except one cent of Federal funding. It's a poor deal with the devil.
Or in other words: they take federal money.
BTW I do think churches should not except one cent of Federal funding.
Then why are you complaining?
Nothing you've mentioned can be construed as unconstitutional in any way.
The hospitals do so to get patients care yes. But Medicare funding is but a small part of the FEDS regulating even in private pay facilities. The ORPHANS take the Medicaid funding as it is provided for their medical care as a survivor. One of the few actual legitimate uses for it. It was meant solely as a safety net for workers and their families who either become disabled or die.
Now you tell me why over half the GOP is pushing Universal Health Care then? GW Bush and the GOP Big Government shills in congress have passed programs Hillary could only dream of getting through. The so called Medicare reform which Frist pushed was patterned after the nightmare called Tenn Care in Frist home state which Hillary and Gore helped start. Among it's biggest shills also is Senator Lamar Alexander-R-TN.
Well you see there's the problem. The Constitution only specifies what powers government has and it's boundries. What it does not mention or specify as being the duty of the three branches is left up to the states.
Not mentioned is the offering of taxpayer money for powers reserved to the states and to the people. Therein lies the major error in the socialism of liberal Democrats and liberal Republicans.
A Republican USAG supporting a direct violation of the Second Amendment. He needs to resign. This is but one of many of the Bush Administrations offenses against the Constitution. Too bad the GOP lacks the will to stop him.
True indeedand there is no difference between the two except for a D or R after the name.
The problem is that they are unconstitutionally given said trough to feed. The so-called "Faith-based initiatives" trough is unconstitutional per Amendments I and X.
The creation of the United States Department of United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare in 1953 {not a function of the federal government} and later the Department of Education has taken over control of what was one private sector and church ran functions such as hospitals and schools. The federal government put regulations and conditions upon these agencies and they failed under the pressure.
Our schools were primarily founded by churches and private business. The public schools were ran strictly by local rule. What Bush has tried to do using Faith Based Programs is a step in the wrong direction. They don't need Feds money but rather Feds off their backs and let them return to doing what they did far better than before government became the overseer of health care and education. That should solely be a task for state and local governments.
So why hasn't the GOP abolished many of the unconstitutional departments it now operates? Because neither the DEM's nor the GOP are interested in smaller and more accountable government except for persons like Ron Paul. The others are in it for power grabs. Government in the DEM's and GOP's eyes as a whole must be your overlord and you it's indebted servant.
Unfortunately the Rockefeller Republicans never met government expansion they didn't like. It was as true under the wide awakes pre-civil war party as it is now.
I agree. The federal income tax on individuals should end as a relegated leftover from the 20th Century. The liberals need to get over it.
Nonsense.
The initiatives do not establish any religion, and therefore do not violate I.
The initiatives do not restrain or usurp any rights retained by either the states or the people and therefore do not violate X.
They are laws respecting establishments of religion, and they effectively prohibit free exercise by taking from from practitioners of one religion and giving to other religious organizations.
They usurp the religious activities of the states and the people. The constitution did not authorize the federal government to fund religious organizations.
Nothing you have mentioned so far is unconstitutional in any way, shape or form.
Again Bush and company along with DEMs using the W.O.T. to attempt to expand Executive Powers.
You keep making this claim, but have yet to provide a concrete example.
A Republican USAG supporting a direct violation of the Second Amendment.
I grant you that the proposed bill may well violate the Second Amendment (I haven't read the text but it sounds extremely suspect), yet I'm not sure how you can pin on the President legislation proposed by one of the President's archenemies in the Senate: Frank Lautenberg.
Take it up with him.
Read the bill. It was filled with pork. Thats why he voted against it.
Except, of course, that they are not.
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.