Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
so i assumed that there was something comparable on welfare programs, that the real issue for you is outside the argument that you're making, but shapes that argument by giving it a direction. my sense is that you don't want to come out and say why you oppose welfare programs, if you in fact do, on other than strict construction grounds--but i've found in general that's typically the case for folk who occupy that position on the constitution. it lets them argue against things without avowing where that argument's coming from, what animates or shapes it.
but it's hard to say the extent to which this is speculative (the motive business just above), so i just put it out as a reading of your sentences with no particular weight beyond that.
|
I'm not sure where you got the notion or idea that i'm against welfare programs. I've known some very decent people who had the unfortunate experience to have to use them, in fact, i've come very close on occasion myself in the past. Welfare programs can provide a great temporary relief for those that find themselves truly in need and I think they should continue to be used.......but at the state level only where they belong. In my view, the general welfare clause in the US constitution does not authorize the kind of welfare we are talking about right here and now.
-----Added 9/2/2009 at 01 : 24 : 29-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
Another small but symbolic change:
A president who is not afraid to face the public and take tough questions....how refreshing!
|
I look forward to seeing how this turns out. Hopefully the far left groups and politicians can avoid creating another joe the plumber.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
Last edited by dksuddeth; 02-09-2009 at 10:24 AM..
Reason: Automerged Doublepost
|