Robin Weirauch and her extreme liberal values

[FenixofWow]

Liberal - favoring progress or reform and individual rights. It's in the dictionary almost in those same words, it's soooooo scary. Them Damned Liberal Hippies Runnin' around Necked talkin' about Peace!? It's Evil! We need War! No Progress or Reform of any kind good or bad! And god damn it we need clothes!... Idiots.

[BestObamaVideos]

Robin has My Support!!

[tempusandfugit]

extreme liberal is better than any type of conservative

[opios80]

You have NO common sense.

[thesquonkstear]

Search "Mena Arkansas" and try not to puke about Hillary and Bill's money laundering of Barry Seal's cocaine trafficing at Mena Airport.

They used the dirty cash and the Arkansas Development Finance Authority and her Rose Law Firm to make loans to anyone who would give bill 50,000 dollars.

Anyone else who did 1/4 of what Hillary did would be gone. They highjacked the Democratic party and are running the two party system into the ground.

Research your vote and stop the delegate fix!

[matchbox555]

the estate tax (death tax) is essential

why should people be allowed to inherit tons of money for doing nothing and giving them an advantage over the rest of us ? abolishing the death tax is a step toward aristocracy, something our founders struggle to get away from.

the estate tax should be INCREASED.

[birdyb24]

"why should people be allowed to inherit tons of money for doing nothing" what do you think taking money from people and redistributing it is? you're a commie scumbag who obviously hasn't earned a dime.

[matchbox555]

the job of govt is to redistribute wealth

otherwise it all naturally concentrates and causing a depression

if you dont know this you are a dumb fuck

[birdyb24]

You're a fucking commie, clearly. Try reading something other than Marx moron.

"and causing a" Yeah, I'm dumb. If you need a tutor, I know a disabled kid that's about your speed. He's 7, but would help you no doubt.

[birdyb24]

The role of gov't is to make laws, to provide security and order. Idiot.

[matchbox555]

role of government is to tax and redistribute money, government does this on a CONSTANT basis, 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

if government did not redistribuet wealth, the economy would collapse into a depression, because wealth naturally concentrates.

free markets dont lead to an 'equilibrium' they ALWAYS result in wealth concentration and monolpoly UNLESS the govt prevents it.

quit listening to fruitcakes like ron paul, milton friedman and grover norquist.

[birdyb24]

You idiot, the power to tax wasn't even in our original constitution! You're a fool. Keep listening to Marx, Chavez, and Stalin, socialism/communism has worked so well. Moron.

[matchbox555]

are you fucking insane ? the power to tax wasnt in the original constitution ? how the fuck do you think they funded the government ?

it WAS in the original constitution. it is in article 1 section 8 "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,".

you obviously have never even fucking read the constution, read it sometime fool.

[birdyb24]

Dichead, that was put in via Amd. XIV. Also, Amendment XVI is the provision that permitting congress to take people's money and redistribute it. You're an idiot. Look it up on law dot cornell dot edu backslah constitution. Moron.

[matchbox555]

you REALLY need to read the constitution

the powerof congress to tax is NOT an amendment, it is in article 1 section 8

the 16th amendment is about the INCOME tax specifically, but the power of congress to tax is NOT an amendment, its article 1 section 8.

[birdyb24]

Retard, if you visit the cornell site and click the link in Art.1 Sec. 8, it takes you to the amendment which inserted the language there. Duh. Try actually doing it rather than talking out of your ass.

[birdyb24]

The founders never envisoned taking people's wealth and redistributing it as welfare. Taxation was for the limited purpose of a shared defense, not commie redistribution. Try reading the founders' works.

[matchbox555]

wrong birdy, you need to read the fucking constitution, the power of congress to lay and collect taxes is in article 1 section 8 the ORIGINAL constitution NOT an amendment.

the 16 amendment refers to INCOME tax specifically, but the power of congress to tax is in article 1 section 8, read it motherfucker.

[birdyb24]

"general welfare of the United States" does not mean taking people's money and giving it to other people. hence, why welfare was created hundreds of years AFTER the Constitution.

[matchbox555]

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"

what dont you understand about the words GENERAL WELFARE ?

It is NOT exclusivly for defence. im sorry but you have been lied to by conservative dickheads all these years.

[birdyb24]

general welfare then did not mean welfare benefits as used today idiot.

[birdyb24]

General welfare does not equal taking people's money and giving it to other people, which is why such programs did not exist then asshole.

[matchbox555]

general welfare can mean ANYTHING which the federal government deems to be in the general welfare of the united states

what is deemed neccessary for the general welfare has changed a great deal over time, and the founders knew it would, thats why they didnt specify exactly what they meant, they put in an ambiguous term so that the federal government would have that discretionary power.

[birdyb24]

Moron, it never meant that. Besides, the plain text = OF THE UNITED STATES (the federal gov't) not individuals or citizens of the US. It was never used in the way you described until centuries later.

[birdyb24]

"The Constitution contemplated no taxes as direct taxes" JAMES KENT, COMMENTARIES ON AMERICAN LAW (1826). Read Thomas Paine, The Crisis Extraordinary: On the Subject of Taxation (1780) which breaks down what taxes in England went to (not social welfare as you commies would have us believe) and in America. Try reading Federlist Papers Nos. 30-36, the Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (July 12) and the law by Frederick Bastiat.

[birdyb24]

Thomas Paine, The Crisis Extraordinary: On the Subject of Taxation (1780) breaks down what taxes in England went to and in America, you're WRONG.

[matchbox555]

the federalist papers are essentially a debate and they contain contrary views, but they are NOT law. the constitution is the law.

thomas paine's book isnt the law either.

[birdyb24]

They are used to understand the intent behind the Constitution just like legislative history is used to clarify statutes. They show what the founders believed the role of gov't to be, and it did not include taking money from Peter to pay Paul.

[matchbox555]

the founders did not all agree with each other, anyone who has read the federalist papers understands this.

but the fact is you cant have a govt without redistribution of wealth. that is the WHOLE point of taxation is to take tax from people and distribute it how the govt sees fit, it does this 24/7.

[birdyb24]

"you cant have a govt without redistribution of wealth" absolute bullshit. as shown by England and the early US, this statement is FALSE. In fact, the monarch goverments certainly took from people, but they didn't redistribute, they kept it for themselves! You're outrageous. You're a commie.

[matchbox555]

the government may put the money into roads, schools, police, sewers, transportation, research, NASA agriculture, social security, medicare, postal service, unemployment compensation, fire department, or an 'economic stimulus package' in order to fulfil their responsibilty to PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE.

lol.

[birdyb24]

Now you're playing word games like a liberal politician. You were talking about taking from the wealth and redistributing to the poor to assure there was no concentration of wealth. Now you're describing it differently. Stop the nonsense.

[matchbox555]

im not playing any word games. its the same thing, you can do it directly, such as welfare, pensions, tax credits, subsidies etc... AND/OR you can create jobs for the poor with infrastructure investment etc.

either way you are redistributing wealth

FDR had to do it in 1933, because wealth had become too CONCRENTRATED, so he set up welfare programs and public works projects to redistribute the wealth.

[birdyb24]

NO, it's not the same. You're not taking from John and giving to Joe. You're investing in common things, it's not the same, and you were talking originally about the former, not the latter.

[matchbox555]

yes it is

the federal govt takes from bill(gates) and gives to jim (guy on social security or welfare or getting a tax credit)

social security is a redistribution program, and will become even more so if they lift off the $97500 cap on contributions.

[birdyb24]

Exactly, now we're talking about the same thing. Social security was never part of the original scheme. It's not a required gov't function. Neither is medicare/caid. They may be desirable, beneficial, and appropriate, but not an essential fundamental role of gov't, contrary to your original point. This is proven by the fact that such programs never existed in this country (and other) for centuries.

[matchbox555]

hillary is going to give middle class tax breaks, and tax credits for buying healthcare and tax the rich more to pay for it

its good healthy wealth redistribution, and many of the rich, like bill gates and warren buffet AGREE with hillary that its the right thing to do for a healthy economy and a healthy social culture.

[NoGuff]

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,Duties"

--Before the Amendment to allow the government to tax income, the Constitution allowed only commerce to be taxed.

[birdyb24]

Thank you.

[matchbox555]

social security, medicare etc are part of the governments duty to PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE.

[NoGuff]

"social security, medicare etc are part of the governments duty to PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE."

--Yes, and they do so pretty well. But to me, "promote the general wellfare" doesn't mean the same as "provide all with free housing and medical care." It may just be me, though.

[birdyb24]

You and all those who ran the country for a century before we had such programs.

[birdyb24]

and they were never included in the original governmental plan established in this country; thus, demonstrating that is not gov't primary purpose.

[matchbox555]

the country sucked 100 years ago, its been a lot better since teddy roosevelt and FDR.

[birdyb24]

Right, so you were wrong. Took 20+ posts and a lot of wasted time for you to realize the sole purpose of gov't is not to take money from joe and give it to john via social welfare programs. FDR, btw, didn't envision social welfare being permanent, i.e. even he wanted social security privitized at some point.

[matchbox555]

stop building strawmen, i never said redistribution of wealth was the SOLE purpose of government, i said redistribution of wealth is ESSENTIAL and you cant have a government without it.

so i am right and you are fucking way WRONG.

and dont try to rewrite history about FDR

[birdyb24]

your words "the job of govt is to redistribute wealththe job of govt is to redistribute wealth" "role of government is to tax and redistribute money" Nice try.

Your ignorance of FDR doesn't make my statement revisionist.

[matchbox555]

the job of govt is to redistribute wealth

i stand by that

[birdyb24]

You and the other commies. I'll give you my address, you can redistribute your wealth to me.

[NoGuff]

"the death tax is a step toward aristocracy, something our founders struggle to get away from"

--Funny how they never mentioned it in the Constitution, no? And only you are making the connection between inheritence & aristocracy, they didn't.

"why should people be allowed to inherit tons of money for doing nothing"

--That money HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED, you ninny.

[matchbox555]

i believe in economic and social justice

allowiing someone to just inherit a billion dollars for doing nothing is INSANE.. and leads to aristocracy.

families passing on huge wealth from one generation to the next and wielding huge political power as a result

e.g, bush's rockefellas, rothchild's murdoch's

fuck that noise.

[NoGuff]

"i believe in economic and social justice"

--What exactly is "economic justice?" While you're at it, what exactly is "social justice?" To me they mean "income redistribution" and "reverse discrimination."

"and leads to aristocracy"

--That's impossible here in the USA.

"wielding huge political power as a result"

--None of the rich people I know "wield huge political power." Do you actually have any concrete points, or are you just spewing hatred & jealousy in the form of political discourse?

[matchbox555]

"--None of the rich people I know "wield huge political power."

wow you naive motherfucker

[NoGuff]

"wow you naive motherfucker"

--So I'm naive just because your Marxist beliefs don't actually ring true in the real world? Why don't you get that gigantic chip off your shoulder and act like an adult? Oh, and by the way, FUCK YOU, you Liberal imbicile.

[ScaryBears]

dumb gop

[crapo87]

"Death tax"? Are we still calling it that? I guess I didn't get the updated memo.

[grazon]

Latta is such a loser that the club for growth refuses to endorse him.

youtube . com/watch?v=CopXXfgO8Xw

[NoMoreBlatherDotCom]

madhaus: There are billions of people around the world who'd like to come here to get health benefits. Could you specify how many billions or millions the Dems would like to allow to come here to claim those benefits, despite the effects of that on current U.S. citizens?

Or, does the Dem magic number just include another 14% of Mexico's workforce, minus the ones who don't die in the desert?

[jukinj3]

If you throw facts or their own words back at leftists you will be branded a swift-boater.

[madhaus]

Looks like my reply to you was removed. USA is dead last in health care among industrialized nations. No way "billions" are coming here for that reason.

Health care is the issue that could destroy the GOP. How many Americans are uninsured? 40 million? And how many are under-insured? How many are staying in jobs they hate to keep health bennies? How many are bankrupt because of a huge med bill? If you want more of the same, keep voting Republican.

[ReuWil]

That's a bunch of baloney. Typical liberal boilerplates with no basis in reality.

[NoGuff]

"USA is dead last in health care among industrialized nations."

--Proving statistics don't lie, people lie with statistics. That survey has been misinterpreted since it was made, and it was made that way to serve Liberals' purposes. The USA is "dead last" because we don't have Socialized Medicine like other 'industrial nations' (meaning Europe). But people from those nations come HERE to have procedures done because we have the best medical care you can get.

[NoGuff]

"How many Americans are uninsured? 40 million?"

--To the average, impressionable, tuned-out American, that sounds like a whole lot. But when put into perspective, it's only about 15% of the nation. For a nation without a general Socialized Medicine system, and a free market economy and philosophy, I'd say that's pretty darn good. We have 85% coverage. Not bad.

[madhaus]

Your attitude is why the US has sunk so low in life expectancy and so many other indicators. After World War II, the US was tops not only militarily but economically. Unfortunately we have squandered that lead. Unlike you, I want to be proud of our country and for us to return to #1 rather than being complacent with shoddy results. We haven't been the leading country in quality of life in more than 25 years! Thank you for your cheerleading us down to #30.

[NoGuff]

"Your attitude is..."

--What a bullshit-laden, fact-twisting, made-up pile of donkey shit. You MUST be a Liberal because only Liberals can lie like that. Are you Hillary Clinton?

[madhaus]

Nope. I'm a patriot. Too bad you hate America so much. I guess that makes you a terrorist.

[NoGuff]

"Too bad you hate America so much. I guess that makes you a terrorist."

--So I "hate America" and I'm a "terrorist" because I have facts, reason, & perspective on my side? Okay, fine, whatever you say, friend. Debating an issue with Liberals is like arguing with a 3-year-old.

[madhaus]

My dear, I'm a conservative. Your responses make you a terrorist.  Ta ta.

[NoGuff]

"My dear, I'm a conservative"

--And you defend people like Robin Weirauch, Nancy Pelosi, and Hillary Clinton? The word "misguided" doesn't begin to describe you, then.

[flyingbird0214]

Not, I actually mean that she's is a Jewess. Member of the very same people who nailed Jesus Christ the Lord and Savior of real Americans. She can't win in a place that belongs to those who are saved. It would as if the people of Ohio crucify Jesus all over again. Do you understand?

[scumbauggio]

I believe it ws the Romans in the mythology who nailed Jesus to the cross - You are a biggot of the absolute worst kind. If you are an example of a "real" American and of a "good Christian", this country is well and truly fucked.

[mykol13v]

Being American isn't about being a Christian or we wouldn't need the Constitution if that were so. We'd just use the Bible. Being American is about about being tolerant of our fellow Americans, sharing our common bonds for freedom and fighting the enemies of our Peace.

[scumbauggio]

Blind theocratic ideologues like "flyingbird0214" disregard both the constitution and the words and example of the man they claim as Savior. They are more in love with their own fear, hatred and biases than they are either god or country. "flyingbird0214" has created Jesus in their own frightened, hate filled image. Unfortunately most people calling themselves religious seem to tend to do the same.

[flyingbird0214]

flyingbird0214 was being sarcastic from the beginning.

[scumbauggio]

Difficult to tell farcical sarcasm from right wing christian loony bile anymore. Nothing you stated has not been stated by others in earnest. That in itself is a sad statement.

[jukinj3]

Actually it is about blending in and believing in ideas rather than tribes.

[flyingbird0214]

She doesn't even share the religion of most real Americans.

[grazon]

And this is the way her Republican opponents think.

[Skellytoncrew]

There is no such thing as a "...common sense restrictions on abortion."

[blogagog]

Indeed. Killing babies is not a 'common sense' issue.

[JakeandElwoodBlues]

Choose Latta!