Constitutionalist Socialist?

[corsairtro]

I was talking to a guy I used to work with 5 years ago, asked him who he was supporting: Obama. Asked why and it was your standard list of socialist hogwash.

Well I went on my self responsibility kick, constitutionality, rights of individuals to the fruits of their labor, etc.

Long story short, he's now a constitutionalist Obama supporter: Amend the constitution to give congress the power to establish national healthcare and clearly legalize all other questionable federal programs.


How do you fight a constitutionalist socialist?

 

[Akus]

I was talking to a guy I used to work with 5 years ago, asked him who he was supporting: Obama. Asked why and it was your standard list of socialist hogwash.

Well I went on my self responsibility kick, constitutionality, rights of individuals to the fruits of their labor, etc.

Long story short, he's now a constitutionalist Obama supporter: Amend the constitution to give congress the power to establish national healthcare and clearly legalize all other questionable federal programs.


How do you fight a constitutionalist socialist?

Actually in a perfect Ron Paul's world, there would be nothing wrong with this guy. Ironic, isn't it.:o

 

[crazyfingers]

Actually in a perfect Ron Paul's world, there would be nothing wrong with this guy. Ironic, isn't it.:o

Yeah, exactly. CHANGE the Constitution, don't just IGNORE it.

Of course those proposals would never pass the rigorous amendment process, so that's why they would never subject them to it.

 

[berrybunches]

At least this guy appreciates the United States!!!!
So many Obama supports say that the constitution is a bunch of crap.

Anyway you can add to it but not take away from it so what he is suggesting is not possible...I think at least

What is possible is that each state has the right to socialize health care or whatever on its own. This is much better because if something were to go wrong at least it would only be in 1 state, not the whole country.
I won someone over who believed in social programs by saying that localizing things make them run better and it is constitutional this way too.

 

[Ex Post Facto]

I have heard this a lot from people I talk with. People are going to the polls to vote for Freedom. There is, however, a lack of understanding for what that truely means. Obama to a lot of people speaks about Freedom with added benefits driven by socialism. It's Freedom, civil rights, and we will take your money to do what is good for everyone (which, truely is not freedom). America is waking up in the smallest sense of the word. It may do us better to allow them to have an Obama, and continue the education, as he won't fix much.

 

[runderwo]

Unfortunately, socialism is not an "added benefit" unless you are both unable to take care of yourself and also have no friends, family, church, or private charity to turn to.

Socialism is not a "benefit" because it burdens and demotivates everyone, and creates a permanent culture of dependency.

It also cannot be a "benefit" because government fails as a provider; government redistribution can only destroy wealth.

 

[Libertytree]

"How do you fight a constitutionalist socialist?"

Ya can't fix stupid.

 

[FreeTraveler]

How do you fight a constitutionalist socialist?

I'd recommend a .30-06. Anything smaller, and you'd probably be close enough to smell the stench of the grave-robber.

 

[clintontj72]

Don't forget that the 30-06 needs a wooden bullet...because after all...socialists are vampires!!! Oh and you have to hit them in the heart with that wooden bullet...or they don't die and keep trying to suck your life/blood/dollars out of you...a mean foe to be sure

 

[Broadlighter]

Constitutionalist/Socialist? Sounds like a contradiction in terms.

Actually Congress's power to coin money is based on a socialistic notion that says control of the nation's currency belongs to the people, not private interests.

Seriously, if the American people wanted universal healthcare provided by the central government, then the appropriate course would be to amend the Constitution and assign that duty to the government. Establishing UHC by legilative statute will turn it into a political football and it will constantly have to justify itself in the face of legislative challenges. Healthcare is too intimately personal for it to be tossed around between the House, Senate, White House and Court System.

Better yet, it's too intimately personal for government bureaucrats to be trusted with it. But if we're going to do it, make it part of the Constitution. Make it stand up to the rigors of a constitutional convention and really press the people to think about and decide whether or not we really want this and once that decision is made, we stick by it.

 

[constitutional]

How do you fight a constitutionalist socialist?

Find out where he lives and...

 

[clintontj72]

Find out where he lives and...

Fire won't kill vampires my friend(said in a non-McWar way )