You’d have to HAVE a heart to be disheartened. You said you were in this for the money?
You’d have to HAVE a heart to be disheartened. You said you were in this for the money?
The reason that progressives want these awful criminals to have the right to vote isn’t because they condone their actions but because these laws can be used to prevent thousands of unjustly incarcerated people from voting.
Same reason NRA supporters want people on the no fly list to be able to have guns. Because that law may be used to expand who else cannot get guns.
To the voting thing, the thirteenth amendment outlawed slavery ... except for punishment for a crime.
This gave rise to arresting black people for any crime they could to enslave them. And then they passed laws to say criminals cannot vote.
Runningart2004 wrote:
agip wrote:
Our outlaw president in action. This is shameful. No Republican can say he is a constitutionalist anymore. Every Spankist R must say 'I do not believe in the Constitution anymore. I believe in an authoritarian state run by a right wing strongman.'
Say it, Rigged. Say it Sally.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1120803419709747200It simply sets a precedent that all future presidents, Republicans and Democrats alike, can follow.
The US is becoming an authoritarian representative democracy. If there is such a thing.
Alan
I just did a little reading on this - it's interesting. The oversight powers of Congress are actually not written into the Constitution. Numerous Supreme Court decisions have made it clear that Congress has the power to monitor how its spending is being done. But that kind of gives spankers some wiggle room.
I mean many, many rules are not enumerated in the constitution...that's why we have the supreme court. But what one Supremen Court enumerated...another can take away.
In theory, this supreme court could take away Congress' right to oversight of the executive branch. Or limit it. THat would alter the balance of powers, for sure. That's probably waht trump is hoping for, so he can hide more crimes.
Fat hurts wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
These dem candidates are all trying out to "out socialist" each other. What a joke. If you guys want to beat Trump, this NOT the way to do it.
And then there's Pocahantas advocating more stupid sh!t:
FREE money to black people (reparations) plus FREE college, AND a reimbursement if you took out any student loans.
WEEEEE!!!! Everything is going to be FREEE!!!
Thanks dems, you are making it sooooooo easy for a Trump 2020 win.
KAG2020
It won't be free. The wealthy who have been sucking at the government teat for decades will pay for it.
The voters are not going to keep voting against their self-interest any longer. Nobody believes in coddling the rich any more.
Seriously, dude? Do you ever say anything that is NOT absurd?
Suddenly voters are going to behave totally differently than in the past? And what is the mechanism that will realize this sea change? Magic perhaps?
Sally Vix wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It won't be free. The wealthy who have been sucking at the government teat for decades will pay for it.
The voters are not going to keep voting against their self-interest any longer. Nobody believes in coddling the rich any more.
Coddling the rich? The "rich" 20% pay 87% of income taxes. We are coddling the rich? The non-coddled 80% pay 13% of income taxes. Who really is "coddled?"
And what percentage of the total wealth is held by the top 20%? My guess is that it is a whole lot higher than 87%.
agip wrote:
Our outlaw president in action. This is shameful. No Republican can say he is a constitutionalist anymore. Every Spankist R must say 'I do not believe in the Constitution anymore. I believe in an authoritarian state run by a right wing strongman.'
Say it, Rigged. Say it Sally.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1120803419709747200
Kyle Griffin is a producer for PMSNBC and his tweets are liberal opinions. FAIL, agip.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
agip wrote:
Our outlaw president in action. This is shameful. No Republican can say he is a constitutionalist anymore. Every Spankist R must say 'I do not believe in the Constitution anymore. I believe in an authoritarian state run by a right wing strongman.'
Say it, Rigged. Say it Sally.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1120803419709747200Kyle Griffin is a producer for PMSNBC and his tweets are liberal opinions. FAIL, agip.
You are the dumbest poster here, and you use that term PMSNBC that you learned from right wing nut jobs. Come up with your own thing. You probably can't because you're so stupid.
Sally Vix wrote:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/top-20-of-americans-will-pay-87-of-income-tax-1523007001
Do you propose we increase the tax rates on the middle class and poor to even that percentage out some?
Smh...I expect more from people who post here!
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Kyle Griffin is a producer for PMSNBC and his tweets are liberal opinions. FAIL, agip.
I'm not familiar with this individual and will take your word that his opinions are liberal.
Are you disputing the facts that he listed, though?
I mean, obviously you're entitled to your own opinion--but you're not entitled to your own facts.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
agip wrote:
Our outlaw president in action. This is shameful. No Republican can say he is a constitutionalist anymore. Every Spankist R must say 'I do not believe in the Constitution anymore. I believe in an authoritarian state run by a right wing strongman.'
Say it, Rigged. Say it Sally.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1120803419709747200Kyle Griffin is a producer for PMSNBC and his tweets are liberal opinions. FAIL, agip.
That's a weird post. The link showed a list of FACTS. And you come back to deride his opinions as liberal?
In what universe is the liberal nature of his opinions relevant to the FACTS presented? Or don't you understand the difference between facts and opinions?
;oji wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Kyle Griffin is a producer for PMSNBC and his tweets are liberal opinions. FAIL, agip.
I'm not familiar with this individual and will take your word that his opinions are liberal.
Are you disputing the facts that he listed, though?
I mean, obviously you're entitled to your own opinion--but you're not entitled to your own facts.
Oops, you beat me to it.
Well done.
Under the Constitution:
Congress has sole power to impeach (accuse). Clearly such an accusation would be deliberated. We call this oversight.
President takes an oath to defend & protect the Constitution, so failure to do so is a crime.
L L wrote:
The reason that progressives want these awful criminals to have the right to vote isn’t because they condone their actions but because these laws can be used to prevent thousands of unjustly incarcerated people from voting.
Same reason NRA supporters want people on the no fly list to be able to have guns. Because that law may be used to expand who else cannot get guns.
To the voting thing, the thirteenth amendment outlawed slavery ... except for punishment for a crime.
This gave rise to arresting black people for any crime they could to enslave them. And then they passed laws to say criminals cannot vote.
Are you drunk?
There is no wiggle room. Our entire constitutional government is based on checks and balances. You can't take away congressional oversight unless you throw out the constitution altogether.
Tiny's attempts to block oversight will go nowhere in the courts.
Serious Dude wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It won't be free. The wealthy who have been sucking at the government teat for decades will pay for it.
The voters are not going to keep voting against their self-interest any longer. Nobody believes in coddling the rich any more.
Seriously, dude? Do you ever say anything that is NOT absurd?
Suddenly voters are going to behave totally differently than in the past? And what is the mechanism that will realize this sea change? Magic perhaps?
These sea changes happen in politics. It is happening now.
The voting public simply rejects the old paradigm and latches on to something new.
But if you are looking for a mechanism, the primary one is death. The people who believe in trickle down economics are dying. Their place in the voting booth is being taken over by younger voters who came of age during the Great Recession. These younger voters have a very different attitude toward the wealthy than their parents and grandparents.
Our checks and balances do more than just keep a president or legislature in check. It prevents us from being our own worst enemy. The history of the modern world is filled with instances of the people allowing authoritarian rule to happen because “the trains run on time.”
A President/White House trying to tell the Fed what to do, a President/White House telling border patrol to break laws, a President/White House telling people to ignore subpoenas, a President/White House stonewalling Congressional Investigations.....it wasn’t right when Nixon tried to do it, it wasn’t right when Clinton tried to do it, and it’s not right now. Innocent people don’t act this way. Obey the rule of law.
Alan
Sally Vix wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
It won't be free. The wealthy who have been sucking at the government teat for decades will pay for it.
The voters are not going to keep voting against their self-interest any longer. Nobody believes in coddling the rich any more.
Coddling the rich? The "rich" 20% pay 87% of income taxes. We are coddling the rich? The non-coddled 80% pay 13% of income taxes. Who really is "coddled?"
Yes, the rich are coddled. In terms of total taxes, the rich pay less of their income than many middle class Americans. For instance, when Mitt Romney released his tax returns I found out that he pays a lot less than I do. This is because the rich are able to lobby for special tax loopholes that only extremely wealthy people can take advantage of.
The rich have accumulated most of the total wealth, which is protected by the US government. The poor get none of these benefits because they have no wealth to protect.
The rich tend to own most of the businesses that are given huge tax breaks and subsidies. So taxpayer dollars are spent to make the businesses of wealthy people more valuable. The primary asset of middle class people is a home. But nobody is giving me a taxpayer subsidy to fix up my house.
This is just a few ways that the rich are coddled by our government. There are many, many more but I don't have time to list them.
The fact is that the wealthy have purchased politicians who use the federal government to make the wealthy even wealthier. Hence, the rich are coddled like little children.
Sally Vix wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
If they completed their sentence and paid their debt to society, yes.
Since those guys are either dead or serving a life sentence, we don't have to worry that they might vote.
Bernie and Kamala don't care if they paid their debt to society. They want them to vote while in prison, meaning they have not paid their debt to society.
Bernie is wrong. Bernie does not represent the views of most Democratic candidates on this issue.
Kamala has NOT said that people in prison should vote. Get your facts straight.
But the point is that you can take the Dems to court easier if 'congressional oversight' is a supreme court opinion and not actually in the constitution. As it is.
I'm sure the dems will win in court, but it will be the year 2022 and President Buttigieg won't be affected.
The spankers are just going to stonewall on everything for years. Decades on some things, no doubt.
The US already has one of the most graduated federal income tax systems on the planet. Around 40% of households don't pay any federal income tax. Yeah you can start talking sales tax and whatnot...but building a nation on an even narrower tax base than we have right now is probably not going to end well. In the next recession tax receipts will fall by huge amounts if we are relying on just a few people to pay. This happens in CA every recession - budgetary disaster.
I'm not saying the tax system is good or fair. But I am saying that it helps no one to exaggerate it. The rich pay the vast majority of income taxes. Vast.