2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

For the record, the drinking age is enforced through the spending clause. Congress tells the states to set their drinking age at 21 or they'll lose all sorts of federal transportation funds. The postal roads clause has nothing to do with it.

The specific funding that is cut is highway funding. That sounds like postal roads to me.

 

[unofan]

The specific funding that is cut is highway funding. That sounds like postal roads to me.

The only thing the postal route clause establishes is the post office. Which makes it all the funnier when libertarians like you want to abolish it, considering its explicitly mentioned in the constitution.

the drinking age is attached to a spending bill and is therefore enforceable under the spending clause. It's literally a textbook example of that, as in that's one of the examples straight from the textbook in constitutional law classes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Dakota_v._Dole

 

[joecct]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Pat - once again on free trade. He excoriates the GOP Congre$$.
http://m.townhall.com/columnists/Pa...983?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I want one of the Leaders to bestow upon me honorary knuckledragger status (Flaggy, joe, Bob, etc etc) because I agree with the bahstids. I just don't see the federal gubmint retracting any so I too am curious why Kep feels that way. However, I'm sure I'll lose my honorary status when I point out the federal powers were expanded more by so-called conservative hero George W Bush than any other President since LBJ!

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I want one of the Leaders to bestow upon me honorary knuckledragger status (Flaggy, joe, Bob, etc etc) because I agree with the bahstids. I just don't see the federal gubmint retracting any so I too am curious why Kep feels that way. However, I'm sure I'll lose my honorary status when I point out the federal powers were expanded more by so-called conservative hero George W Bush than any other President since LBJ!

You might not get knuckledragger status, but I will welcome you into the light of states' rights. Republicans evolved (by a few "generations") from the Federalists, so of course they champion big government.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Pat - once again on free trade. He excoriates the GOP Congre$$.
http://m.townhall.com/columnists/Pa...983?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

"Truckle" is a great word.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

But the growth of fed power isn't the same as the encroachment of fed over what was formerly state power. A lot of fed growth just reflects the country's growing interconnectedness. Interstate commerce wasn't all that common in the 18th century. Now it's nearly unavoidable. Likewise, lots of government functions benefit from economy of scale -- things like social security would be ridiculously complex and inefficient if there were 50 individual systems. Little by little we're learning the same is true with health care.

You're fighting technology and demographics, not mission creep. If, for example, the US went through a period of population contraction and/or globalization began to reverse and economies became more local, we'd expect to see federal power diminish. That's just fluctuation of the amount of activity within scope, rather than an actual change of scope.

As with some other areas, we just fundamentally disagree. Really pretty much any federal government function you look at, it has grown over time and eventually is far beyond what it was intended to be when it started.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

As with some other areas, we just fundamentally disagree. Really pretty much any federal government function you look at, it has grown over time and eventually is far beyond what it was intended to be when it started.

I think it's one of those things that can't really tested -- we can't run the clock on technological change, population growth, and globalization backwards. Well, unless something very nasty happens with one or more of the four horsemen.

 

[Jimjamesak]

I think it's one of those things that can't really tested -- we can't run the clock on technological change, population growth, and globalization backwards. Well, unless something very nasty happens with one or more of the four horsemen.

Well we could. Just takes a few phone calls and a few key turns...

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Well we could. Just takes a few phone calls and a few key turns...

Fair point.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

And Obama just can't bring himself to call the Armenian genocide a genocide, despite him ripping on Bush for not doing so and promising to do so as he courted Armenian-Americans to vote for him. Even the Euros and the Pope are coming out now and saying it was a genocide. What an embarrassment. Typical Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/14/be-as-brave-as-kim-kardashian-and-the-pope-mr-president-call-the-armenian-genocide-a-genocide/

I'm curious to see how people try to spin this one into a positive for Obama.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

And Obama just can't bring himself to call the Armenian genocide a genocide, despite him ripping on Bush for not doing so and promising to do so as he courted Armenian-Americans to vote for him. Even the Euros and the Pope are coming out now and saying it was a genocide. What an embarrassment. Typical Obama.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/14/be-as-brave-as-kim-kardashian-and-the-pope-mr-president-call-the-armenian-genocide-a-genocide/

I'm curious to see how people try to spin this one into a positive for Obama.

Out of curiosity, has any American president ever called it a "genocide"? This sounds like one of those times when the State Department says, "Yeah, I know, but..."

I'm not defending the practice, but why do you think this has anything specifically to do with Obama, as opposed to prior administrations? I know you loath him, but that seems to be something you're reading into it, if it's been a universal presidential policy.

 

[Priceless]

Out of curiosity, has any American president ever called it a "genocide"? This sounds like one of those times when the State Department says, "Yeah, I know, but..."

I'm not defending the practice, but why do you think this has anything specifically to do with Obama, as opposed to prior administrations? I know you loath him, but that seems to be something you're reading into it, if it's been a universal presidential policy.

But he's black!

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

But he's black!

I know you're kidding, but I'd like to say I do not believe that has anything to do with why Bob hates Obama. I think Bob's bought into the "he's a disengaged professorial intellectual" narrative, which is something conservatives are always trying to pin on liberals because we don't jump up and down yelling kill, kill, kill and they think that means we're not a team player.

 

[Foxton]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I know you're kidding, but I'd like to say I do not believe that has anything to do with why Bob hates Obama. I think Bob's bought into the "he's a disengaged professorial intellectual" narrative, which is something conservatives are always trying to pin on liberals because we don't jump up and down yelling kill, kill, kill and they think that means we're not a team player.

He's just demographically symbolic.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Out of curiosity, has any American president ever called it a "genocide"? This sounds like one of those times when the State Department says, "Yeah, I know, but..."

I'm not defending the practice, but why do you think this has anything specifically to do with Obama, as opposed to prior administrations? I know you loath him, but that seems to be something you're reading into it, if it's been a universal presidential policy.

Uh, because he specifically ran his campaign and appealed for Armenian-American votes on his promise to reverse this policy? That's a gimmee. I know his supporters don't care about him saying one thing and doing another, since they think everyone does it, but some of us do notice and don't see it as a positive characteristic.

Here is what he said in 2008:

"I also share with Armenian Americans – so many of whom are descended from genocide survivors – a principled commitment to commemorating and ending genocide. That starts with acknowledging the tragic instances of genocide in world history. As a U.S. Senator, I have stood with the Armenian American community in calling for Turkey’s acknowledgement of the Armenian Genocide. Two years ago, I criticized the Secretary of State for the firing of U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, after he properly used the term “genocide” to describe Turkey’s slaughter of thousands of Armenians starting in 1915. I shared with Secretary Rice my firmly held conviction that the Armenian Genocide is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence. The facts are undeniable. An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical facts is an untenable policy. As a senator, I strongly support passage of the Armenian Genocide Resolution (H.Res.106 and S.Res.106), and as President I will recognize the Armenian Genocide."

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Out of curiosity, has any American president ever called it a "genocide"? This sounds like one of those times when the State Department says, "Yeah, I know, but..."

I'm not defending the practice, but why do you think this has anything specifically to do with Obama, as opposed to prior administrations? I know you loath him, but that seems to be something you're reading into it, if it's been a universal presidential policy.

Wilson, Harding, Coolidge? Could probably go on?

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Wilson, Harding, Coolidge? Could probably go on?

Sources, please.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

Uh, because he specifically ran his campaign and appealed for Armenian-American votes on his promise to reverse this policy?

I had no idea. Yes, he should recognize it. You are absolutely correct.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part X - A link to a fore gone conclusion

I know his supporters don't care about him saying one thing and doing another, since they think everyone does it

You are wrong about this, but I do not believe you will ever realize it.

I will say this about Obama Derangement Syndrome. I'll bet if Obama had recognized it, the professional pundits in the Echo Chamber would have resounded with cries that he put his personal campaign pledge ahead of concerns from the Pentagon and State Department. ODS logic is never, "x is bad, Obama did x, therefore Obama is bad." It is "Obama is bad, Obama did x, therefore x is bad."