Who's out to get Glenn Beck? (McCain, claims, bailout, pay)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you think the founding generation would approve of Glenn Beck?
Virginia Constitution, 1776
SEC. 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses, without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assembled, for the public good.
All men ... cannot be taxed without their own consent.
All men ... cannot be deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent.
All men ... cannot be bound by any law that is not for the public good.
Disgusting!
How dare people refuse to bow the heads and submit to the collective State.
So convenient that you left out such an important part of your own quote from the Virginia Constitution. Let me help you with that:
All men ... cannot be taxed without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.
All men ... cannot be deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.
All men ... cannot be bound by any law that is not for the public good. Should I find it at all humorous that you're complaining about the "collective State" while stating that laws should be "for the public good"? Probably not....but I find it interesting on its face.
Leaving out the 2nd half of the conditional makes a huge difference in the argument you are trying to make, IMO. Personally it sounds like you [should] have more of a problem with "representatives", and their actions (or lack thereof), than you do with the "State" as an entity.
Additionally, are you suggesting that "all men" do not have representation when the actions of the "collective State" are being decided?
So convenient that you left out such an important part of your own quote from the Virginia Constitution. Let me help you with that:
All men ... cannot be taxed without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.
All men ... cannot be deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected.
All men ... cannot be bound by any law that is not for the public good. Should I find it at all humorous that you're complaining about the "collective State" while stating that laws should be "for the public good"? Probably not....but I find it interesting on its face.
Leaving out the 2nd half of the conditional makes a huge difference in the argument you are trying to make, IMO. Personally it sounds like you [should] have more of a problem with "representatives", and their actions (or lack thereof), than you do with the "State" as an entity.
Additionally, are you suggesting that "all men" do not have representation when the actions of the "collective State" are being decided?
You fail to realize that not "all men" could vote. Ergo, those non-voters did not give power of attorney to a "Representative" so elected. (In the 13 colonies, voting was limited to property owners and who had paid taxes.)
Remember, pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, job #1 = secure rights, job #2 = govern those who CONSENT.
Any law that requires consent cannot apply to those who are incapable of giving consent.
If you're into reading the law, you'll get a kick out of this:
"In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667, 61 L.Ed2. 153, 99 S.Ct. 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp. 312 U.S. 600, 604, 85 L.Ed. 1071, 61 S.Ct. 742 (1941)).
"A Sovereign cannot be named in any statute as merely a 'person' or 'any person'".
Wills v. Michigan State Police, 105 L.Ed. 45 (1989)
In American law, the people are sovereign. The citizens are subjects.
Check the "law" and see if they use the pronoun "Who" or the term "persons liable". The former is general, the latter is specific.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." [14th Amendment, Section 1.]
Did the 14th amendment impose citizenship on the sovereign Americans?
Paranoia is a mind state that a lot of people do experience when they have an emotional breakdown. They start to feel suspicious towards other people and that then results in them feeling angry towards other people. Paranoia is thankfully treatable, but it is a long process for many people because the doctor has to in effect go into the patients mind and help them relax more. The doctor has to first do the impossible by getting the patient to trust them and that can be very hard for any doctor to get from a paranoid patient.
Beck says "I don't need no damn doctor. I've got
George Washington"
if what he talks about doesn't matter to you, then just let it go, be sure that you are well informed on the truth and let beck be the homeless man on the corner yelling "the end is near!"
if it does matter to you, research the topic, and post your opinion on the facts, either exposing or supporting glenn beck for what he has said on air.
he's no leader, he's a talking head, yet you talk about him as if he's destroying the country.
if liberals were truely worried about the conservatives being misguided, they would come with barrelfuls of information on what is really going on.
But as you know I used to watch him a lot, and I remember him saying the TARP was not enough, and he thought the bailouts was a great idea. Isn't it strange how his mind changed?
he agreed with TARP while it was being misrepresented, as our gorvernment likes to do. he trusted our government to tell the truth about TARP, and they didn't. now they are, and he's being ridiculed for accepting the current TARP because everyone knows its not the panacea they made it out to be.
once he found out the truth, he rejected it.
as with all bailouts, they are good for the short term. they slingshot the economy back by stimulating spending and confidence in the american people. but if the people aren't regaining confidence, then its a waste of money. if the confidence and spending is so low that a bailout cannot stimulate it, more bailouts are a bad idea.
bailouts are equivalent to steroids, they work to make you stronger in the short term, but if you want to be stronger for a longer term you need to work out.
with bailouts in the trillions, thats like taking a ton of steroids to replace working out. working out breaks down the muscles and rebuilds them. this is what we need to do with the government.
break down the weak programs (make spending more efficient, or eliminate it) and build them stronger so they can handle our nations economy as it grows.
Last edited by Orincarnia; 05-26-2010 at 09:29 AM..
In the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America, you have to get permission (i.e., license) from government to live, work, travel, buy, sell, build a house, own a dog, marry and die (attempted suicide is a crime). You have to pay a tax to live, work, own, buy, sell and die. Your individual rights are inferior to the collective rights of the State.
Is that what Glenn is objecting to?
Shame on him.
Just another straw man.
Neo-McCarthyists are so quaint.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.