Wednesday, May 21, 2014

The Heart of a Democrat-Check Out :50-:60

I do NOT think it was a Freudian slip. I think it is at the heart of the Democrat Party.


Fredd said...

Yup, give everyone a government job.


I can do even better than that, Joe. Let's make everyone millionaires. And give everybody a beach house in Boca Raton.

And then there will be no crime, since millionaires living in beach houses don't commit crimes.

I think I should get a Nobel Peace Prize for this brilliance, Joe, will you nominate me?

Xavier Onassis said...

You have clearly lost your ability to detect sarcasm.

He was taking a swipe at his Republican opponents.

The far right wackos are targeting a Cuban Democrat in Florida and trying to catch him in some manufactured "James O'Keefe" style gotcha video.

Grow up! The Democrats are trying to move this country into the 21st Century and solve real problems.

We don't have time for your nonsense.

Joe said...

Fredd: Nahh. No Peace Prize. You forgot to get me my BMW.

XO: You just proved my point.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - Only in the Conservative Fact Vacuum is it possible to prove someone is right by proving that they are wrong.

Nice try.

Duckys here said...

Bout to XO in the first on a knockout.

Joe said...

XO: You need to read actual words. I understand that he was making a feeble attempt at sarcasm. I understand that he thought he was "being funny."

What I said was not that HE believed Communism works (which he might or might not), but that liberals, especially the leftists like yourself and Ducky, think it works, even when you call it something else.

I believe, perhaps unknowingly, he hit on the heart of the Democrat Party.

The idea that the people obey the government, have little or no say in the decisions the feds make and must be prevented from attacking the government at ALL costs is the essence of totalitarianism.

The idea that the fed runs the people, instead of the other way around, is a Communistic, or at least a socialistic, concept.

We have representatives who do not represent, a president who rules by fiat, instead of presiding, and a court that supports both of them.

And they think they are making it work.

Xavier Onassis said...

Joe - "We have representatives who do not represent, a president who rules by fiat, instead of presiding, and a court that supports both of them."

No. Our representatives ARE representing.

As you always so eager to point out, this ain't a Democracy. It's a Constitutional Republic.

You elect the Representatives that you trust and feel will govern according to your values and you send them off to the Senate, The House of Representatives or the Executive Office.

For the rest of their term, they do as they please. If you don't like it, you get to vote for someone else when their term is over.

So they are representing according to how our government is structured.

The President is not "ruling by fiat" and he is under no Constitutional restriction to merely "preside". The Vice President "presides" over the Senate and The Speaker of the House "presides" over the House.

The Presidency of the United States is not a passive role of someone sitting in a funny shaped office waiting to either sign of veto legislation.

The Representatives in the House represent the people of the Congressional District in their state. A very small, narrow and intensively gerrymandered constituency.

The Senators, 2 from each state, both represent ALL of the people in their state. Their are no Senatorial Districts. But they still represent a fraction of the citizens of the United States.

The President, is elected by ALL of the people in ALL of the Congressional Districts and ALL of the States and represents ALL of the people.

[yeah, yeah, I know, Electoral College, don't get me started on that. Gore beat Bush! You don't want to go there]

Th mandate and charter of the President of the United States is to always represent and do what is best for ALL of the people.

The Supreme Court is the referee. The House and the Senate can pass any law they can muster the votes for. But the SCOTUS gets to decide whether the law is Constitutional and they have the power to strike it down. And so they should.

The President can issue any Executive Order that falls within his sphere of authority as our Chief Executive and Commander in Chief. But the SCOTUS gets to decide whether his orders and directives are Constitutional. And so they should.

As we in the computer industry are prone to say, "the system is working as designed".