New York Primary Election Sept 14: Will you vote?

Created by Top Mod2 on Sep 13, 2010

3,706 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

WOWW

Massena, NY

#18190 Mar 13, 2013
obamas socialist welfare liberal dems suck.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#18192 Mar 13, 2013
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Car insurance isn't a right, either, but everyone has to buy that.
Nonsense. No one is compelled to buy auto insurance unless they freely choose to own a motor vehicle and operate it on pblic roadways.

The individual mandate in ObamaScare is an entirely different matter - this is a case of Government-compelled purchase of insurance simply to LIVE.

Thus your auto insurance comparison is a completely bogus and irrelevant one.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
I think universal health insurance would "promote the general welfare". But I guess conservatives like you would rather just go to the ER for your care and mooch off those of us who pay for it.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. However, you're not entitled to your own bogus interpretation of the US Constitution.

First, you've cited the Preamble. The preamble of the constitution establishes no powers or rights of the federal government. It merely states the purpose of the constitution. No further development of what "general welfare" means can be made based on the mention of it in the preamble.

The only other place the term "general welfare" occurs is in Article I Section 8 - and even here the general welfare clause has absolutely nothing to do with the confiscation of wealth from one group of individuals and the transferring of it to another. Lib Progressives have completely distorted the meaning of that clause.

"General welfare" as the term is used in the US Constitution refers ONLY to the general welfare of the STATE, not the general welfare of INDIVIDUALS. Thus Article I Section 8 only grants congress the power to collect taxes for the promotion of a general state of well-being for the country as a whole provided the money collected will only be spent by congress according to the limited powers explicitly granted to congress.

Per The 10th Amendment, powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution (such as the wealth redistributive power you are advocating), are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. So if you wish to bring about your lib progressive nirvana, you need to do it throught the States and/or the free private sector (horrors!!), because the federal Gov't does not have the requisite power.

If you doubt the truth of this, please review the transcripts of the Convention debates, Federalist Paper 41 written by James Madison, and the Ratification debates of the Constitution.

De Odumbo Conser

Herkimer, NY

#18193 Mar 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
Nonsense.
No. Fact.
Teddy R wrote:
The individual mandate in ObamaScare is an entirely different matter - this is a case of Government-compelled purchase of insurance simply to LIVE.
Thus your auto insurance comparison is a completely bogus and irrelevant one.
Nope. People are "free" to choose to have me pay for their healthcare instead of paying for it themselves. That's complete crap.
Teddy R wrote:
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. However, you're not entitled to your own bogus interpretation of the US Constitution.
First, you've cited the Preamble. The preamble of the constitution establishes no powers or rights of the federal government.
So it doesn't establish a right to life? Cool. So abortion should be 100% legal. And we can also do away with the military as well, seeing as - according to you - there is no common defense to be provided. Neato. I like this.
Teddy R wrote:
The only other place the term "general welfare" occurs is in Article I Section 8 - and even here the general welfare clause has absolutely nothing to do with the confiscation of wealth from one group of individuals and the transferring of it to another.
So then blue states don't have to provide for red states anymore and I can get my tax money back? Gosh, I'm liking this!
Teddy R wrote:
Lib Progressives have completely distorted the meaning of that clause.
"General welfare" as the term is used in the US Constitution refers ONLY to the general welfare of the STATE, not the general welfare of INDIVIDUALS. Thus Article I Section 8 only grants congress the power to collect taxes for the promotion of a general state of well-being for the country as a whole provided the money collected will only be spent by congress according to the limited powers explicitly granted to congress.
Per The 10th Amendment, powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution (such as the wealth redistributive power you are advocating), are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. So if you wish to bring about your lib progressive nirvana, you need to do it throught the States and/or the free private sector (horrors!!), because the federal Gov't does not have the requisite power.
If you doubt the truth of this, please review the transcripts of the Convention debates, Federalist Paper 41 written by James Madison, and the Ratification debates of the Constitution.
Blah blah blah blah blah.
Remiesong

Potsdam, NY

#18194 Mar 13, 2013
So you say you can't afford a tank, an airplane and an air craft carrier for your own personal defense? Maybe you would like the taxes I pay to provide for your defense? How is healthcare for those who cannot afford it different. Why don't we have defense insurance ?
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#18195 Mar 13, 2013
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me ask you something: exactly which other people's money are we spending in this country? Think of the economic output and taxes paid by blue states vs. red states, e.g. New York vs. Alabama, California vs. Kentucky, Connecticut vs. Louisiana, Massachusetts vs. Arkansas, etc. etc.
The topic on which I posted was federally-mandated purchase of healthcare insurance, and the redistribution of wealth between PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS (not States) that this involves.

Please try to stay on it.

As for your more general question here, I have no problem at all with the federal gov't taxing and spending, so long as:

1) The spending and taxing is within the express limits imposed on Congress by the Constitution, and

2) The spending levels are affordable on a sustainable basis without bankrupting the Treasury and destroying the private economy from which the tax revenues are confiscated.

Unfortunately, vast sums of current and projected future federal spending do not pass either of these tests.

As for your desire to engage in a partisan red state vs. blue state Dems good, GOP bad debate, I'm afraid you'll have to find someone else to rant with - I'm completely disinterested, as I find it to be a tedious and pointless argument.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Seriously, dickweed,...
"Dickweed?" My, my. Why, that's the nicest thing anyone's called me all week.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
... who's picking up the tab for whom? It sure as hell isn't the conservatives paying for liberals in this country.
I would be very interested in seeing the data that backs up this rather sweeping assertion.

If you indeed have data from an unbiased and authoritative source showing the percentage of US annual federal tax revenues being confiscated from "conservatives" vs. the percentage being confiscated from "liberals," this would be most enlightening, as I have never seen such a breakdown.

Also, while I realize your lib progressive gene genetically predisposes you to pretend private philanthropy does not exist, please make sure to include a breakdown of the $300 billion or so of annual private giving between giving by "liberals" vs. "conservatives," if you have that data.

If you in fact have data to back up your assertion and were just posting out your azz in a partisan huff, that's ok too. Just let us know.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Quite the effing opposite, in fact. If you're against redistribution of wealth, as a taxpayer of the state of New York, can I please have my money back? Because I've been paying for roads, schools, bridges, hospitals and memorial coliseums in every backassward, dunghole state in the Republic since I took my first job.
<Sigh>

Textbook lib progressive dodge & deflection - again, please try to remain on-topic - which is the forced wealth redistribution by the federal government between INDIVIDUALS under federal entitlement programs that are bankrupting the nation, not between States, and not spending on public infrastructure.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#18196 Mar 13, 2013
*If you in fact do not have data to back up your assertion ...
Remiesong

Potsdam, NY

#18197 Mar 13, 2013
And it is not wealth redistribution. It is providing that which the greedy and selfish would not otherwise participate in. Ever put any money in the offering plate at church? I wish I was in a lifeboat with you so I could throw you to the sharks.
Teddy R

Houston, TX

#18198 Mar 13, 2013
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. People are "free" to choose to have me pay for their healthcare instead of paying for it themselves. That's complete crap.
Your post is completely disingenous crap.

Under the ObamaScare individual mandate, I am COMPELLED to purchase healthcare insurance, and if I "choose" (as you so absurdly put it) to disobey this mandate, I will be compelled to pay a large FINE.

Spin, spin, spin all you like - that's not free choice, brother - that's federal government denying me a FREE choice whether I purchase healthcare insurance or not.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
So it doesn't establish a right to life? Cool. So abortion should be 100% legal. And we can also do away with the military as well, seeing as - according to you - there is no common defense to be provided. Neato. I like this.
Another bullshyte sophomoric strawman and deflection from you.

Article the seventh [Amendment V]: "No person shall be ... deprived of life ... without due process of law ..."

You'll have to take your bullshyte off-topic strawman deflection over the constitutionality of abortion up with someone who gives a rat's azz - I have no interest. Enjoy.
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
So then blue states don't have to provide for red states anymore and I can get my tax money back? Gosh, I'm liking this!
Totally cretinous attempt at an "argument."

No point to answer here ...
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>
Blah blah blah blah blah.
Translation:

"Waah!! I am left completely destroyed with neither fact nor reasoned, on-topic, intellectually honest argument!! Alinskyite deflection shields failed!!"

"Waah waah waah waah WAAAAH!!!"

See ya, tool - you've bored me now also.
De Odumbo Conser

Herkimer, NY

#18199 Mar 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
The topic on which I posted was federally-mandated purchase of healthcare insurance, and the redistribution of wealth between PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS (not States) that this involves.
Please try to stay on it.
In other words, I destroyed your argument and you have no comeback? Thought so.
De Odumbo Conser

Herkimer, NY

#18200 Mar 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
If you indeed have data from an unbiased and authoritative source showing the percentage of US annual federal tax revenues being confiscated from "conservatives" vs. the percentage being confiscated from "liberals," this would be most enlightening, as I have never seen such a breakdown.
Also, while I realize your lib progressive gene genetically predisposes you to pretend private philanthropy does not exist, please make sure to include a breakdown of the $300 billion or so of annual private giving between giving by "liberals" vs. "conservatives," if you have that data.
Pardon me, sir, but your post was about federally-mandated purchase of healthcare insurance, and the redistribution of wealth between PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS (not States) that this involves. Please try to stay on it.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#18201 Mar 13, 2013
Remiesong wrote:
And it is not wealth redistribution. It is providing that which the greedy and selfish would not otherwise participate in. Ever put any money in the offering plate at church? I wish I was in a lifeboat with you so I could throw you to the sharks.
Americans are the most charitable people on earth, rich and poor alike contribute to those in need, your argument that the wealthy {who earned it} are greedy unfeeling subhumans is absurd, dheck what your Lib congress people contribute, they are mostly all millionaires, you'd be surprised how it's all about them, they are good only at spending other peoples money.
De Odumbo Conser

Herkimer, NY

#18202 Mar 13, 2013
Teddy R wrote:
<quoted text>
Your post is completely disingenous crap.
Under the ObamaScare individual mandate, I am COMPELLED to purchase healthcare insurance, and if I "choose" (as you so absurdly put it) to disobey this mandate, I will be compelled to pay a large FINE.
Spin, spin, spin all you like - that's not free choice, brother - that's federal government denying me a FREE choice whether I purchase healthcare insurance or not.
<quoted text>
Another bullshyte sophomoric strawman and deflection from you.
Article the seventh [Amendment V]: "No person shall be ... deprived of life ... without due process of law ..."
You'll have to take your bullshyte off-topic strawman deflection over the constitutionality of abortion up with someone who gives a rat's azz - I have no interest. Enjoy.
<quoted text>
Totally cretinous attempt at an "argument."
No point to answer here ...
<quoted text>
Translation:
"Waah!! I am left completely destroyed with neither fact nor reasoned, on-topic, intellectually honest argument!! Alinskyite deflection shields failed!!"
"Waah waah waah waah WAAAAH!!!"
See ya, tool - you've bored me now also.
Blah blah blah blah blah. Another one of those clowns who thinks if he types a lot and says nothing, nobody will notice. Boring.
SirBlatsALot

Corinth, NY

#18203 Mar 13, 2013
Oh, look at me, I'm gonna whine and cry 'cuz that's what I DO.

Am I lying ?
Remiesong

Potsdam, NY

#18204 Mar 13, 2013
The difference with car insurance and medical insurance is this - you may never need or want or choose to drive a car; and if you do compulsory laws mandate you are insured. But if someone throws you out of a life boat to the sharks and you somehow miraculously live and are treated for your sharkbites and you are not insured, someone has to foot the bill. So foot the bill, pay for your insurance like a good dumbo or pay the fine, but quit your pissing and moaning. Ignorance is bliss, and you dwell in yours.
Hag from Hagaman

Garden City, NY

#18205 Mar 13, 2013
Lick obamas balls, ball licker
TrollBot

Mclean, VA

#18206 Mar 13, 2013
De Odumbo Conser wrote:
<quoted text>

(Another tediously juvenile and inane troll snipped)
Troll. Ignore.

"Flagging trolls until Topix lets you killfile the scum."
Wloclawek Warrior

Petersburg, VA

#18207 Mar 14, 2013
Hingle McCringleberry wrote:
<quoted text>
To mo&#380;e inny sposób, np. k&#261;piel w wannie pe&#322;nej piany z aromaterapi&#261;, przy nastrojowej muzyce?
- E tam, Panie Doktorze, tego tez próbowa&#322;am piana mnie wkurwia, bo szczypie w oczy, muzyka mnie wkurwia, ka&#380;da muzyka mnie wkurwia, ta nastrojowa najbardziej mnie wkurwia, a te olejki zapachowe, to dopiero wkurwiajace, klej&#261; sie, lepi&#261;, plami&#261;, nie, nie olejki najbardziej mnie wkurwiaj&#261;!
- No dobrze, to mo&#380;e sex? Jak wyglada Pani &#380;ycie seksualne?
- Sex !?
A co to takiego?
- Nie wie Pani co to sex!? No dobrze, zaraz Pani poka&#380;e, prosz&#281; za parawan. Po chwili na parawanie l&#261;duj&#261; kolejne cz&#281;&#347;ci garderoby: spodnie, spódnica, kitel, bluzka, biustonosz, majtki. Po kolejnej chwili s&#322;ycha&#263; sapanie i wzdychania, wreszcie s&#322;ycha&#263; g&#322;os kobiety:
- Panie Doktorze, prosz&#281; si&#281; zdecydowa&#263;? Wk&#322;ada Pan czy wyci&#261;ga, bo
Es stheht hier geschreiben das Ehren Polnish geschreibenen antwort fehlt ein bisschen. Was Ich hab' Fruher da geschreiben ist kein luge. Sie Konnem mir zeigen was Sie willen und es ist mir nichts. So Deiner Polnisch ist gut genug das Sie velleicht ein Bisschen schreiben can. Machts mir nichts. Es ist auch mit mir, so wie dir, mein leiber freund,
Die Frau, wie Ich sind Polnisch, Verstehen was da steht da geschreiben macht mir auch nichts. Wie Ich fruher geschreiben hab', stehe' es bei. Da sind veilen Polaken, so Deutschen, macht mir nichts. Was Ich fruher geschreiben hab', stehts geschreiben.
reffef

Pittsburgh, PA

#18208 Mar 14, 2013
youtube.com/watch...
Vote Putin
Remiesong

Danielson, CT

#18209 Mar 14, 2013
Fick dich ins Knie du Arschloch

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

#18210 Mar 14, 2013
that obama is the Panderer-in-Chief, in all of his speeches he carefully crafts point words to evoke the readers emotions, such as "balanced" fair share" "Jet owners", "Millionaires and Billionaires" "education" "investment" "our Children" all of us are not sent into a trance by his hypnotic verbal flourishes, but enough are duped into believing his lies. Ergo, the destruction of our economy continues. Just listen to the clowns in here, marching lemmings headed to the bottomless pit of economic collapse, you have to be an abject MORON to believe the obama, still.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Centereach Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 4 min scirocco 119,646
Slime Bags (May '12) 1 hr Busted 16
Complaints against CPS, Supervising Judge David... (Dec '09) Thu Scottu 56
Subway (May '14) Thu Taxes Due 3
10,000 packets of heroin seized in Smithtown dr... (Nov '08) Dec 15 Streetrunner 153
Mother loses custody of daughters over 'House o... (Apr '07) Dec 14 Democracy 7
everett emery house and post office -- 1932 (Oct '10) Oct '14 rspin1 4

Centereach News Video

Centereach Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Centereach People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Centereach News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Centereach

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:37 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:37PM
Washington's Moss fined $22K for abusive language - NBC Sports
NBC Sports 2:40 PM
Calvin Pace says it has "been a pleasure" to play the Patriots
NBC Sports 2:56 PM
Jets' Ryan on sense of humor: 'I'm not dead yet' - NBC Sports
NFL 3:27 PM
Santana Moss fined $22,050 for outburst toward ref
CBS Sports 4:41 PM
Jets DE Sheldon Richardson: I'm on the same level as guys like J.J. Watt