Rebublican use of the term "class warfare"

[carnivorousplant]

@gonzomax

Eleven Swiss banks have released the manes of the Americans who are hiding income and wealth.

Sounds as though they are taking scalps.

[Fear_Itself]

@Terr

Those that think that “general welfare” is a separate clause are negating the rest of Article 1, Section 8. There is no need for enumeration of powers, since every one of them falls under “general welfare”.

Nevertheless, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you don’t govern with the constitution you wish you had, you govern with the constitution you were given. The welfare clause is in there, and it has stood up to court challenges against it. You can argue till you are blue in the face, but you won’t get rid of all the social programs on a constitutional basis.

[Terr]

@Fear_Itself

Nevertheless, to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, you don’t govern with the constitution you wish you had, you govern with the constitution you were given.

And the Constitution we’re given doesn’t have the “welfare clause” as a “power” of Congress.

As for “arguing until you’re blue in the face” - that applies to every thread on this board. Arguing on the Internet has no influence on real world.

[Fear_Itself]

@Terr

And the Constitution we’re given doesn’t have the “welfare clause” as a “power” of Congress.

In your opinion; the Supreme Court begs to differ.

[Terr]

@Fear_Itself

In your opinion; the Supreme Court begs to differ.

Sure. The Supreme Court also determined, in its infinite wisdom, that growing a plant in your backyard for your own consumption constitutes “interstate commerce”.

So - how many legs does a dog have if the Supreme Court decided that the tail is a leg?

[Beware_of_Doug]

@elucidator

As a lefty, I’ve always had a nostalgic amusement for old-style leftism. I’ve spent many a happy hour listening to Trotskyists belabor Leninists and, Goddess preserve us, Stalinists. Of course, it helps if both participants have a Jewish heritage and exemplify the tradition of ferocious argument over arcane distinctions.

If you ask me (not that you did), the Jews are about the only mind the left has…left. People from other traditions just don’t seem to have a voice that combines caring, outrage, and a sense of history.

[user_hostile]

@Terr

Sure. The Supreme Court also determined, in its infinite wisdom, that growing a plant in your backyard for your own consumption constitutes “interstate commerce”.

So - how many legs does a dog have if the Supreme Court decided that the tail is a leg?

Could you provide a cite please? Thanks in advance…

[UltraVires]

Terr is right and SCOTUS is wrong. Promoting the general welfare can’t be a power of Congress in a list of supposedly limited powers.

It would make the limitation absolutely meaningless as any bill passed could be said (by its supporters) to be in furtherance of the general welfare. Why have a list at all?

Since 1937, SCOTUS has completely abdicated its duty to reign in the federal government.

[Terr]

@user_hostile

Could you provide a cite please? Thanks in advance…

Wickard v. Filburn
Gonzales v. Raich

[Evil_Captor]

@Beware_of_Doug

If you ask me (not that you did), the Jews are about the only mind the left has…left. People from other traditions just don’t seem to have a voice that combines caring, outrage, and a sense of history.

Yes, we must all be thankful to the Jews for guiding us poor lost souls … try substituting “white men” for “Jews” and “America” for “the left” and see how that sounds …

[Evil_Captor]

@jtgain

Since 1937, SCOTUS has completely abdicated its duty to reign in the federal government.

Yes, let’s go back to the halcyon days of the Great Depression … oh, wait … that’s just what the Republicans appear to be aiming at! I sense a pattern here!

[Chronos]

OK, so if the Constitution didn’t really mean that part about the general welfare, then why is it in there? Twice, even! I could see once maybe being an editing mistake, but wouldn’t you think that if they put it in twice, they really meant it?

[elucidator]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/elizabeth-warren-on-class-warfare-there-is-nobody-in-this-country-who-got-rich-on-his-own/

Elizabeth Warren just recently on the subject:

I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever. No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own — nobody.

“You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police-forces and fire-forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory — and hire someone to protect against this — because of the work the rest of us did.

“Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is, you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

Sic 'em, Lizzy!

[Terr]

@Chronos

OK, so if the Constitution didn’t really mean that part about the general welfare, then why is it in there? Twice, even! I could see once maybe being an editing mistake, but wouldn’t you think that if they put it in twice, they really meant it?

To emphasize that the Congress’s duty is to provide for US welfare (again, read “well-being”). Do you object to that?

[Terr]

@elucidator

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/elizabeth-warren-on-class-warfare-there-is-nobody-in-this-country-who-got-rich-on-his-own/

Elizabeth Warren just recently on the subject:

Sic 'em, Lizzy!

"There is nobody in this neighborhood who got rich on his own — nobody.

You opened a store here? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You get your goods to your store on the trucks that we protect. Your store does not burn down because we watch it so it doesn’t happen. You don’t get robbed because the robbers would answer to us.

Now look, you opened your store and it turned into something terrific. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But you gotta pay your protection money. It’s the “underlying social contract””

[BrainGlutton]

From Al Franken’s Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair And Balanced Look at the Right:

Anytime a liberal points out that the wealthy are disproportionately benefiting from Bush’s tax policies, Republicans shout, “class warfare!”

In her book A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century, Barbara Tuchman writes about a peasant revolt in 1358 that began in the village of St. Leu and spread throughout the Oise Valley. At one estate, the serfs sacked the manor house, killed the knight, and roasted him on a spit in front of his wife and kids. Then, after ten or twelve peasants violated the lady, with the children still watching, they forced her to eat the roasted flesh of her husband and then killed her.

That is class warfare.

Arguing over the optimal marginal tax rate for the top one percent is not.

[Chronos]

Quoth Terr:
To emphasize that the Congress’s duty is to provide for US welfare (again, read “well-being”). Do you object to that?

No, I’m a Democrat. You, however, have objected to it as recently as this thread.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Terr

"There is nobody in this neighborhood who got rich on his own — nobody.

You opened a store here? Good for you. But I want to be clear. You get your goods to your store on the trucks that we protect. Your store does not burn down because we watch it so it doesn’t happen. You don’t get robbed because the robbers would answer to us.

Now look, you opened your store and it turned into something terrific. God bless — keep a big hunk of it. But you gotta pay your protection money. It’s the “underlying social contract””

Yes, because comparing taxation for necessary services to the mafia is always such a great route to take. :rolleyes: I assume that you would prefer we abolish the fire department and the police department, and perhaps all other forms of government?

[BrainGlutton]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

Yes, because comparing taxation for necessary services to the mafia is always such a great route to take. :rolleyes: I assume that you would prefer we abolish the fire department and the police department, and perhaps all other forms of government?

Nice Fire Department ye got here, Chief . . . Shame if anything wuz to happen to it . . . Like, you know, a fire . . .

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@elucidator

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/elizabeth-warren-on-class-warfare-there-is-nobody-in-this-country-who-got-rich-on-his-own/

Elizabeth Warren just recently on the subject:

Sic 'em, Lizzy!

She said “social contract”!!! She’s a socialist! You can’t trust socialists! It’s just like they’re stealing your money with a protection ring! Taxes are stealing!!!111one!