Global Warming News

[FallbrookFarmer]

I have a friend who never married and never had kids. He had a stroke about five years ago. Prior to the stroke, when he could talk, he voiced the same libertarian point of view Mike. The affects of the stroke are debilitating to a degree that he needs 24 hour nursing care. He was wiped out financially in less than a year.

They didn't have nursing homes when they wrote the constitution.

Wha ??????????????
They also didn't have hula hoops. Sorry don't get the point.

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

And now for something completely different a post about Global Warming.
Can you post a article from a newspaper here? One of these days I'm going to figure out this whole internet number thing!
Anyway, Go to Drudge, look for the link:" UN Panels based claims about disappearing ice based on student dissertation"
I think this pretty much sums it up.

 

[dave1949]

1. I don't intend to make a religion out of the Constitution.
The president of the United States take an oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution".
Why do you think that he takes this oath(while resting his right hand on a bible)?Similar oaths are taking by officers inducted into the services. Why?
Our whole society is based on a reliance on our elected officials swearing allegiance and obeying the Constitution.
Obviously some of them feel that it is a "living document"
Personally, I feel that my basic rights as a citizen should not be subject to some politicians interpretation of what those rights should be. Question ,is your mortgage a "living document" Would you be upset if the bank decided to change the terms to increase the payment . I fell that my rights as a citizen should be as least as sacrosanct as some mortgage.
So if someone comes along and starts advocating for "rights" that are not granted by the Constitution(Particularly is those "rights" are going infringing on my rights) I'm am not going to go along quietly.
In terms of "making changes to the government,does not automatically mean making it bigger" Please give me just one example when we have made a change to government and it got smaller! If you can come up with one, I will be surprised and then show you 10,000 with the opposite result.

Why is it that making changes to gov't is unconstitutional? The Pres. swears to uphold the constitution in it's current form, not what is was 200+ years ago. You have lost me there.

It certainly isn't something I would advocate willy-nilly, I think we are protected from any one region or interest group or cause of the moment hijacking the constitution by the requirements of the amendment process.

I realize that often changes result in the growth of the government. Those changes were all made by duly elected folks who swore to uphold the constitution. Were they all wrong or all traitors? The Supreme Court exists to make the determination as what is or isn't constitutional. They have struck down many laws.

This doesn't mean I personally believe only bigger is better. I'm just remarking on what has happened. Maybe, since it seems we cannot afford our current lifestyle, people will lean towards smaller gov't in the future by necessity.

It would be nice if we constrained our defense spending to what it actually costs to defend our country. In that area of spending and policy, you have to stretch the intent of the constitution to justify what we do also. But, all those dollars are voted on by duly elected people who also swore to uphold the constitution.

I don't know what else to say about it, it's a messy process, always has been. You seem to think the framing documents are infallible for all ages. From day one, if you take the slavery issue for example, what was written and what actually happened are two different things. An ideal was written, and a practical agreement (for non-slaves at least) was reached and followed for decades.

I feel pretty certain many of the framers went along to get along on that issue. They weren't willing to let their ideals scuttle the practical solutions to the challenge of organizing a working nation out of disparate states.

I think you have higher expectations than the framers ever did. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it needs to be realized. Didn't we have these same conversations in the 'love it or leave it' days of the 60's and 70's? There are many ways to love one's country.
Dave.

 

[dave1949]

Wha ??????????????
They also didn't have hula hoops. Sorry don't get the point.

I think the point may be, you should offer your opinion as to whether or not we should use tax dollars administered by gov't agencies to keep him alive?

I hate to hear of stories like that. I am not sure I would wish to be alive, but that would be a personal choice.
Dave.

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

Why is it that making changes to gov't is unconstitutional? The Pres. swears to uphold the constitution in it's current form, not what is was 200+ years ago. You have lost me there.

It certainly isn't something I would advocate willy-nilly, I think we are protected from any one region or interest group or cause of the moment hijacking the constitution by the requirements of the amendment process.

I realize that often changes result in the growth of the government. Those changes were all made by duly elected folks who swore to uphold the constitution. Were they all wrong or all traitors? The Supreme Court exists to make the determination as what is or isn't constitutional. They have struck down many laws.

This doesn't mean I personally believe only bigger is better. I'm just remarking on what has happened. Maybe, since it seems we cannot afford our current lifestyle, people will lean towards smaller gov't in the future by necessity.

It would be nice if we constrained our defense spending to what it actually costs to defend our country. In that area of spending and policy, you have to stretch the intent of the constitution to justify what we do also. But, all those dollars are voted on by duly elected people who also swore to uphold the constitution.

I don't know what else to say about it, it's a messy process, always has been. You seem to think the framing documents are infallible for all ages. From day one, if you take the slavery issue for example, what was written and what actually happened are two different things. An ideal was written, and a practical agreement (for non-slaves at least) was reached and followed for decades.

I feel pretty certain many of the framers went along to get along on that issue. They weren't willing to let their ideals scuttle the practical solutions to the challenge of organizing a working nation out of disparate states.

I think you have higher expectations than the framers ever did. There is nothing inherently wrong with that, but it needs to be realized. Didn't we have these same conversations in the 'love it or leave it' days of the 60's and 70's? There are many ways to love one's country.
Dave.

As of October 2009 5 states have introduced legislation that would declare certain provisions of any national health care proposal to be null and void.
So hey lets throw out the tenth amendment, it was written 200+ years ago.
And the 2nd, everybody knows that the framers couldn't have foreseen "assault weapons.
That pesky Ist amendment, Well we already got rid of that with McCann-Finegold .
The Fifth, Ha When the local authorities want to take your property for a "public use" I guess that it's okay.
As a matter of fact lets just chuck the whole thing and start over. Oh wait there is a certain politician who in a PBS interview a number of years ago made reference to doing just that. He said that the Constitution stood in the way of making "reforms". Now Let me see if I can remember his name ' Braak, or Obooma or something like that. Now that guy was onto something. Lets reform everything, so that we can "Spread the wealth around"
Yeah.

 

[FallbrookFarmer]

I think the point may be, you should offer your opinion as to whether or not we should use tax dollars administered by gov't agencies to keep him alive?

I hate to hear of stories like that. I am not sure I would wish to be alive, but that would be a personal choice.
Dave.

To Paraphrase Dickens " Are there no more poorhouses"....
All conservatives/constitutionalists believe that the poor should be locked away so they don't upset the fragile nature of the upper class.
C'mon talk about setting up a straw man argument.

 

[dave1949]

To Paraphrase Dickens " Are there no more poorhouses"....
All conservatives/constitutionalists believe that the poor should be locked away so they don't upset the fragile nature of the upper class.
C'mon talk about setting up a straw man argument.

Wasn't the 'Artful Dodger' a Dickens character? Yes, he was in 'Oliver Twist', I just googled it.

Whatever, I'm off to bed.
Goodnight.

 

[keegs]

To Paraphrase Dickens " Are there no more poorhouses"....
All conservatives/constitutionalists believe that the poor should be locked away so they don't upset the fragile nature of the upper class.
C'mon talk about setting up a straw man argument.

Healthcare spending continues to grow as a proportion of federal and state budgets. A relatively small number of us consume a disproportionately large share of those healthcare resources and among that group there are those of every political and socioeconomic persuasion. The rate of increase in healthcare spending is unsustainable.

Those facts have nothing to do with straw men and very little to do with one's perceived abuse of emergency ambulance services.

 

[IH3444]

And now for something completely different a post about Global Warming.
Can you post a article from a newspaper here? One of these days I'm going to figure out this whole internet number thing!
Anyway, Go to Drudge, look for the link:" UN Panels based claims about disappearing ice based on student dissertation"
I think this pretty much sums it up.

Fallbrook, see post #668.

 

[IH3444]

I think the point may be, you should offer your opinion as to whether or not we should use tax dollars administered by gov't agencies to keep him alive?

I hate to hear of stories like that. I am not sure I would wish to be alive, but that would be a personal choice.
Dave.

Ditto....Doc, give me the needle to end it all, and let me move on.