Posted on 09/28/2011 9:34:48 AM PDT by free me
"Q: So in your view those things fall outside of general welfare. But what falls inside of it? What did the Founders mean by 'general welfare'?
"A: I don't know if I'm going to sit here and parse down to what the Founding Fathers thought general welfare meant.
"Q: But you just said what you thought they didn't mean by general welfare. So isn't it fair to ask what they did mean? It's in the Constitution.
"A: [Silence.]
"Q: OK. Moving on.... "
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
You’re flat-out wrong.
President Bush was openly, tirelessly, relentlessly pushing to grant American citizenship to millions of invaders. (”See you at the signing!”)
His failure to act as Commander-in-Chief as millions of foreign nationals marched on American cities equals endorsement. There is no other possible interpretation.
When you’re in charge, endorsement means responsibility. He practically ordered them to march in Dallas (and Los Angeles), as if such demonstrations (or as the rest of us saw it, an implicit threat of violence) would either scare us or shame us into ceding American sovereignty. Perry similarly sat on his hands as the chief executive of Texas.
Bush and Perry are not the only ones responsible, but they are some of the ones.
"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Constitutional architect James Madison
500,000 marched in Los Angeles on 3/25/2006
"Police said more than 500,000 people marched Saturday to protest a proposed federal crackdown on illegal immigration. Wearing white as a sign of peace, and waving flags from the U.S., Mexico, Guatemala and other countries, they came to show that illegal immigrants already are part of the American fabric, and want the chance to be legal, law-abiding citizens."
don’t forget heartless!
ROFL
Last week some folks were posting attacks on Perry from Texans for Public Justice, a leftist Democrat operative organization. This week we've had attack threads from fringe nativist groups like CIS: Center for Immigration Studies. Now NPR is being employed to attack Rick Perry. More pot shots.
What's next? Hit pieces from the CBC or the NAACP? Can't post from fringe groups like Stormfront or VDARE. That will get you guys banned. LOL
"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."
~~~ James Madison, 1792
"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
~~~ Thomas Jefferson
"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."
James Madison, 1792
For most of our history, the Courts foiled congressional attempts to use the "commerce clause" to sabotage the clear meaning of the Constitution, particularly the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. The Courts began caving in to congressional tyranny during the 1930s. That tyranny was sealed in 1942 by a little known U.S. Supreme ruling in Wickard v. Filburn. Mr. Filburn was a small farmer in Ohio. The Department of Agriculture had set production quotas. Mr. Filburn harvested nearly 12 acres of wheat above his government allotment. He argued that the excess wheat was unrelated to commerce since he grew it for his own use. He was fined anyway. The Court reasoned that had he not grown the extra wheat he would have had to purchase wheat; therefore, he was indirectly affecting interstate commerce.
All under another president coming out of Texas.
Try and get a hold of your emotions and stop whining.
You look stupid repeating the lies from the SPLC about CIS.
Just because Perry’s own words reveal him to be a moron is no reason for you to get so angry.
Perry supporters, I kind of get there was a perfectly good answer to what the guy from the Beast was asking. My problem is not with that. My problem is that your candidate apparently has problems with coming up with it himself.
Amen.
Even Reagan threw up his hands at this problem.
Prior to the 1940s no one even worried about this. People went to and fro across the border without anyone being much concerned.
The biggest cause of this is economics. We are not going to put thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of soldiers on the border with Mexico. Note that Canada, not being a failed economy, is not a problem.
The only real way to solve it is to take over Mexico and run it right. We might slow it down a little by strict enforcement against hiring illegals.
What is the point in dredging up an old photo under W and trying to imply that Perry is same. He is not, never was.
I am not a Perry for Pres. cheer leader, but you are always a Texas hater.
Looks like your CA POLs are a lot lot worse. Jerry Medfly Brown, talk about a retread.
One of the things I disagreed with Bush about was immigration. That being said your conclusion: “His failure to act as Commander-in-Chief as millions of foreign nationals marched on American cities equals endorsement” is ludicrous.
Almost as ludicrous as “He practically ordered them to march in Dallas (and Los Angeles), as if such demonstrations (or as the rest of us saw it, an implicit threat of violence) would either scare us or shame us into ceding American sovereignty.”
These demonstrations were organized by Democrat operatives, financed by Democrat money and supported by Democrat politicians ending in rallies where Democrats were the principal speakers.
Fact is, CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA and several other groups have direct ties to the nativist and eugenicist, John Tanton. Tanton admits to receiving money from the Pioneer Fund, a white supremacist group.
From the Wall Street Journal:
"During a immigration subcommittee hearing in March, Mr. Cannon had the gumption to question the executive director of CIS, Mark Krikorian, as well as to challenge Roy Beck, who heads NumbersUSA and serves as "spokesman" for CFAW. After first denying it, Mr. Krikorian was forced to admit that CIS is a spin-off of FAIR. In fact, CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA, Project-USA -- and more than a half-dozen similar groups that Republicans have become disturbingly comfy with -- were founded or funded (or both) by John Tanton, a retired doctor in Michigan. In addition to trying to stop immigration to the U.S., appropriate population-control measures for Dr. Tanton and his network include promoting China's one-child policy, sterilizing Third World women and wider use of RU-486. FAIR, where Mr. Krikorian once worked, is run by Dan Stein and shares advisers and personnel with CIS and other members of the Tanton nexus. As our Jason Riley noted in a March 15 op-ed, "By Dr. Tanton's own reckoning, FAIR has received more than $1.5 million from the Pioneer Fund, a white-supremacist outfit devoted to racial purity through eugenics." Representative Cannon says, "Tanton set up groups like CIS and FAIR to take an analytical approach to immigration from a Republican point of view so that they can give cover to Republicans who oppose immigration for other reasons."
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.