The proposed amendment, which is completely idiotic, takes away government's ability to use countercyclical economic policies.

I love how he presumes to read everybody's minds to know what "you guys" are thinking. Just more of Robert talking about stuff he doesn't know anything about or understand, which is pretty much everything.

Still, his persistence reminds me of another with about equal credibility;

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:39 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:33 PM)Smaug Wrote:  And the left doesn't?

When did I ever say they didn't? THe point is it is YOU guys that make a point of "following the Constitution", yet you continually want to change it.

Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:39 PM)RobertN Wrote:  When did I ever say they didn't? THe point is it is YOU guys that make a point of "following the Constitution", yet you continually want to change it.

Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Supporting the reelection of GWB in 2004 does not mean that you approve of GWB's politics and policies. Remember, GWB was running against Kerry in 2004, so the choices were either a big government Republican or a big government Democrat. You are drawing an erroneous conclusion.

(06-27-2011 09:52 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Supporting the reelection of GWB in 2004 does not mean that you approve of GWB's politics and policies. Remember, GWB was running against Kerry in 2004, so the choices were either a war hero or a coward. You are drawing an erroneous conclusion.

Wise choice

No I would not support such and amendment for more reasons than I am willing to type here.

But did you notice the genius of RobertN? In just a couple of posts he had changed the whole nature of the conversation. He completely takes everyone off of the topic and into foolishland.

(06-27-2011 10:05 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:52 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Supporting the reelection of GWB in 2004 does not mean that you approve of GWB's politics and policies. Remember, GWB was running against Kerry in 2004, so the choices were either a war hero or a coward. You are drawing an erroneous conclusion.

Wise choice

I thought you were better than that. You obviously have no response to me challenging your false dichotomy; i.e., you can only love GWB unquestionably and support everything he did or you can't stand GWB and hate everything about him and what he did. Altering posts is pretty weak.

(06-27-2011 10:24 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 10:05 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:52 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Supporting the reelection of GWB in 2004 does not mean that you approve of GWB's politics and policies. Remember, GWB was running against Kerry in 2004, so the choices were either a war hero or a coward. You are drawing an erroneous conclusion.

Wise choice

I thought you were better than that. You obviously have no response to me challenging your false dichotomy; i.e., you can only love GWB unquestionably and support everything he did or you can't stand GWB and hate everything about him and what he did. Altering posts is pretty weak.

You vastly over estimated me I just couldn't pull the trigger for Bush in '04 and I am 100% sure I will not vote for Obama. I am doomed to never support the incumbent I suppose. I apologize for alterng your post (that is weak)

(06-26-2011 02:51 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  According to the lefters the constitution is a living, breathing document, with grey area to change at a moments notice. This fact is not disputable.

So you ignore all the amendments then?

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:39 PM)RobertN Wrote:  When did I ever say they didn't? THe point is it is YOU guys that make a point of "following the Constitution", yet you continually want to change it.

Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Difference is that he thinks Obama should be picking cotton instead of being President.

(06-27-2011 09:52 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Supporting the reelection of GWB in 2004 does not mean that you approve of GWB's politics and policies. Remember, GWB was running against Kerry in 2004, so the choices were either a big government Republican or a big government Democrat. You are drawing an erroneous conclusion.

Dude, nobody here believes your crap. You had no damn clue that Bush was a big government guy. I knew he would be a disaster the moment I heard about his bankrupt oil company and nearly bankrupt baseball club. If he can nearly bankrupt 2 nearly unbankruptable(is that a word? ) businesses, then he certainly was going to do the same to the country.

(06-27-2011 10:22 AM)TheDancinMonarch Wrote:  No I would not support such and amendment for more reasons than I am willing to type here.

But did you notice the genius of RobertN? In just a couple of posts he had changed the whole nature of the conversation. He completely takes everyone off of the topic and into foolishland.

No, actually the topic took us into foolishland.

(06-27-2011 10:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-27-2011 09:22 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:56 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:54 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-26-2011 02:47 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Changing the Constitution is far different than ignoring it.

Who ignores it?

Obabba

Obama is a Dubya clone (Which is not to defend the president but, if you supported Bush in '04 you should be lining up to support this guy)

Difference is that he thinks Obama should be picking cotton instead of being President.

No but he does need to get off the porch.

(06-26-2011 01:52 PM)RobertN Wrote:  Why do tea baggers always want to chage the Constitution?

Really? do you want to go there?

Quote:By contrast, any talk of revising or revisiting the U.S. Constitution is, of course, seen as heresy. The United States Constitution was, as you know, drafted in a cramped room in Philadelphia in 1787 with shades drawn over the windows. It was signed by 39 people.

America at the time consisted of 13 states. Congress had 26 senators and 65 representatives. The entire population was about one percent of today’s number – four million people.

America was an agricultural society, with no industry – not even cotton gins. The flush toilet had just been invented. -- Fareed Zakaria

The man wants to use twitter and facebook to tune the 'new' consitution...