The KGB Oracle Forums General Public Discussion (SPECIAL ACCESS) KGB Political Debate Central Powerful Paintings...

We are now mostly discussing health care, should we focus on this topic or would you like to go back to constitution?

Original painting/story introduces following arguments:





Both are unsubstantiated claims and are false.

Sinij, you studied the Constitution of the United States in what school? I am curious, because apparently you slept in that class, especially with respect as to what the Constitution was designed to do and not do.

I have no commented much in this, and have enjoyed the discourse, but there is a clear indication of a very socialist or mmarxist mentality behind your arguements, as well as slanted facts which do not have a basis in research or empirical data. Anyone can grab obscur numbers and statistics and get someone somewhere to support their arguement. That does not make it sound or even remotely realistic.

Vuldan, how about instead of empty demagoguery you respond to my post?

Show me where in the constitution it says "shall make no entitlement programs" and name all Obama's wealth redistribution policies.

Show me where in the Constitution it says there should be entitlement programs. The Government was not created, nor designed to ensure people have a free ride life. It was designed to provide governence to a country in which people could work hard and achieve more than was possible anywhere on the face of the planet at the time. It was also written in the 18th Century and causes problems for most people today in some of it's language use, but there has yet to be a better or more freeing document written that people would sign and live with. Hell, it took something like 13 years or more before all the leaders of that time would agree.

The pre-amble does not have any force of law behind it, however, it clearly guides the intent of where our leaders wanted this to go, to improve upon previous government, to protect the citizens of the country, and that the government would be a benefit to the people. This is where many people get the misguided idea that the government is supposed to take care of them. Wrong. Being a benefit to the people means being a fair and just government that provides for the defense and gives people a country to work freely in.

Article 1 establishes the government, including the first of the 3 branches, the legislature and in various sections determines how the government should be staffed and run. While Artcile 1 deals with many things the government can and can not do, no where does it provide for the raising of entitlement funds.

Article 2 establishes the Executive branch and the important role and functions of the President. Nothing there about raising entitlemment funds tho..

Article 3, the Judiciary branch is established, establishes rules for the Supreme Court and set's out firmly what constitutes Treason. Again, nothing about entitlement dollars.

Article 4 deals with the states, and what can and cant happen there..again, nothing about entitlement dollars.

Article 5...hmm...amending, or changing, the Constitution. Nope..no fund BS here

Article 6 "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Thought that might have something for you, but no, nothing there at all.

Article 7...details the method for ratification, or acceptance, of the Constitution: of the original 13 states in the United States, nine had to accept the Constitution before it would officially go into effect. Again..nothing...perhaps in the Amendments? Lets see....


The first ten amendments to the Constitution were all adopted at the same time and are collectively known as the Bill of Rights.

The 1st Amendment protects the people's right to practice religion, to speak freely, to assemble (meet), to address (petition) the government, and of the press to publish.

The 2nd Amendment protects the right to own guns. There is debate whether this is a right that protects the state, or a right that protects individuals.

The 3rd Amendment guarantees that the army cannot force homeowners to give them room and board.

The 4th Amendment protects the people from the government improperly taking property, papers, or people, without a valid warrant based on probable cause (good reason).

The 5th Amendment protects people from being held for committing a crime unless they are properly indicted, that they may not be tried twice for the same crime, that you need not be forced to testify against yourself, and from property being taken without just compensation. It also contains due process guarantees.

The 6th Amendment guarantees a speedy trial, an impartial jury, that the accused can confront witnesses against them, and that the accused must be allowed to have a lawyer.

The 7th Amendment guarantees a jury trial in federal civil court cases. This type of case is normally no longer heard in federal court.

The 8th Amendment guarantees that punishments will be fair, and not cruel, and that extraordinarily large fines will not be set.

The 9th Amendment is simply a statement that other rights aside from those listed may exist, and just because they are not listed doesn't mean they can be violated.

The 10th Amendment is the subject of some debate, but essentially it states that any power not granted to the federal government belongs to the states or to the people.

The 11th Amendment more clearly defines the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court concerning a suit brought against a state by a citizen of another state.

The 12th Amendment redefines how the President and Vice-President are chosen by the Electoral College, making the two positions cooperative, rather than first and second highest vote-getters. It also ensures that anyone who becomes Vice-President must be eligible to become President.

The 13th Amendment abolished slavery in the entire United States.

The 14th Amendment ensured that all citizens of all states enjoyed not only rights on the federal level, but on the state level, too. It removed the three-fifths counting of slaves in the census. It ensured that the United States would not pay the debts of rebellious states. It also had several measures designed to ensure the loyalty of legislators who participated on the Confederate side of the Civil War.

The 15th Amendment ensures that race cannot be used as a criteria for voting.

The 16th Amendment authorizes the United States to collect income tax without regard to the population of the states.

The 17th Amendment shifted the choosing of Senators from the state legislatures to the people of the states.

The 18th Amendment abolished the sale or manufacture of alcohol in the United States. This amendment was later repealed (erased).

The 19th Amendment ensures that gender cannot be used as a criteria for voting.

The 20th Amendment set new start dates for the terms of the Congress and the President, and clarifies how the deaths of Presidents before swearing-in would be handled.

The 21st Amendment repealed the 18th Amendment.

The 22nd Amendment set a limit on the number of times a President could be elected - two four-year terms. It has one exception for a Vice-President who assumes the Presidency after the death or removal of the President, establishing the maximum term of any President to 10 years.

The 23rd Amendment grants the District of Columbia (Washington D.C.) the right to three electors in Presidential elections.

The 24th Amendment ensured that no tax could be charged to vote for any federal office.

The 25th Amendment clarifies even further the line of succession to the Presidency, and establishes rules for a President who becomes unable to perform his duties while in office.

The 26th Amendment ensures that any person 18 or over may vote.

The 27th Amendment requires that any law that increased the pay of legislators may not take effect until after an election.



Nope..not one damn thing in all the Constitution to say that entitlement funds, programs or any other such horse shit was the "right" or privelege of the people. Many things there that Obama has over looked however...

What else Sin? Anything of substantive use, beyond liberal rhetoric aimed at conservatives, of which I am neither.

You lose.

Exact quote from original post explaining the video:



Own up to it or concede that you have no point.

You (plural) are saying that entitlement programs are fundamentally unconstitutional and that Obama is redistributing wealth.

These are partisan smears, misinformation and FUD.

When I start question it you (plural) ether spew Fox News sound bites or change argument and try to discuss something else. If you want to talk about something else, that is fine but decide what exactly you want to talk about.

What you should be saying is something along the lines "I believe entitlement programs should be reduced because it will benefit the country". Then we can have a discussion about what entitlement programs, how reducing them will benefit and who, and who is likely to support such notions. When you start spewing recycled bullshit in form of "freedom, Constitution and death to communists!" you are not discussing, you spewing propaganda. Trying to frame your opponents as unpatriotic and/or unconstitutional is laughable, you might not realize this but we on the left also read and unlike you understood constitution.

Were those last 2 directed at me or someone else? They make very little sense and have no basis in political or rational perspectives. What is your point?

I do not watch Fox News, as I find them as biased as CNN and MSNBC...

What is your thesis statement? The Consitution is not propoganda, but statements like yours in which you state that it is, will earn you nothing in terms of rationale discourse beyond my asking for your address.

I am more than happy to repeat myself.

Again, the answer is obvious. There is NOTHING in the Constitution granting this authority. Entitlement programs, regardless of source, are socialist instruments, and no government can sustain them. Your point would be what? That because there is no exact language in the Constitution forbidding their creation that they are ok?