It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => General Board => Topic started by: whimsicalmamapig on May 23, 2014, 07:14:03 PM
-
Am I hallucinating or did obama just make a speech in which he said that he could govern a lot better if the founding fathers hadn't gotten it wrong when they gave senate seats equally to each state while apportioning representatives by population. He thinks it would be better if senate seats were also based on population. Is he such a narcissist that he really believes he has a better idea. Just how far from reality has the left gone? They are strictly EJM (ends justify the means) type thugs. they are willing to blow the whole thing just to keep power.
what is the best prediction of what will happen if he doesn't leave office in 2016?
-
War.
.
-
WAR.
-
Deja vu . . .
Lincoln. Kennedy . . .
-
It's not by accident that they're called the Democrat party. They believe everything is subject to majority vote (unless it's a gay marriage referendum), and if 51% of the population votes to deny you life, liberty, and happiness, then tough sh*t for you. Mob rule by any other name.
It furthermore betrays a fundamental lack of intellectual grasp of why the Founders arranged it this way. Populous states of the original 13, such as New York and Virginia, would totally dominate small states like Connecticut if population alone was how we apportioned representation. They quite cleverly designed a bicameral legislature, with one house apportioned by population and the other by statehood alone.
Is it any surprise that he believes what he said? They've been working to dismantle the Electoral College for the exact same reason. Because, you know, the urbanites of NYC, LA, and San Fran should totally be able to dictate how people in places like South Dakota live their lives.
-
but, as a supposed constitutional scholar, wouldn't he be aware of this? I think his education of the constitution was done as a blueprint on how to dismantle it. He knows what makes it work so well and those are the points he wants to weaken or destroy. remember, those marxists believe in the long plan.
-
but, as a supposed constitutional scholar, wouldn't he be aware of this? I think his education of the constitution was done as a blueprint on how to dismantle it. He knows what makes it work so well and those are the points he wants to weaken or destroy. remember, those marxists believe in the long plan.
Constitutional scholar my ass, supposed or not. That's bullsheet; he studied Alinsky and that's from whom he learned how to dismantle it. The Left has studied on it for a hundred years or more.
-
but, as a supposed constitutional scholar, wouldn't he be aware of this? I think his education of the constitution was done as a blueprint on how to dismantle it. He knows what makes it work so well and those are the points he wants to weaken or destroy. remember, those marxists believe in the long plan.
The Senate was destroyed way back when they (the progressives) made senators popularly elected instead of appointed by the legislature. Obama is just the last in a long line of leftist, statist, jerks undermining the constitution.
-
Bear in mind that he supposedly was matriculated at Columbia when Cloward & Piven were still befouling the minds of undergrads.
-
His mind was already a compost pit way before that.
-
His mind was already a compost pit way before that.
Now you've done it. You've just insulted compost pits everywhere.
-
I was going to say latrine but was worried about insulting perfectly good turds.
-
Man . . . and His Measure
John Locke, wrote:
The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which … teaches all mankind who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions; for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise maker, all the servants of one sovereign master, sen into he world by His order and about His business; they are His property.
. . . And, being furnished with like faculties, sharing all n one community of Nature, there cannot be supposed any such subordination among us that may authorize us to destroy one another.
–Second Essay Concerning Civil Government.
William Blackstone penned the following:
“Those rights then, which God and nature aave established, and are therefore called natural rights, such as are life and liberty, need not the aid of human laws to be more effectually invested in every man than they are; neither do they receive and additional strength when declared by the municipal laws to be inviolable. On the contrary, so human legislature has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the owner shall himself commit some act that amounts to forfeiture.
Our rights then, are granted to us from God, and not from man or any of the writings of mankind. They are, in fact, natural rights that we enjoy at the pleasure of our master & owner, the God of the Bible.
And it is why Marxism/Communism/Liberalism seeks to eradicate God & His influence from culture & society. For once eliminated and/or erased . . . man can get back to what it is he already feels he is . . . the measure of all things.
-
We will find out soon enough the measure of the Left's commitment to abridging our God-given liberty as I have no doubt about free people's resolve to stop it, and with God will be the ultimate verdict.
-
We will find out soon enough the measure of the Left's commitment to abridging our God-given liberty as I have no doubt about free people's resolve to stop it, and with God will be the ultimate verdict.
As Ravi Zacharias says, "God tends to outlive His pallbearers." The best they can to is to marginalize via ridicule & the "separation" fable.
Romans 1:16 | New International Version
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.
-
Amen!