Pelosi Proves It Again....

[hoosier_daddy]

you know why it is taken literally? BECAUSE IT IS WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION...are you saying the words mean something else?  written in some sort of code?  why shouldn't it be taken literally, clown?

[jackbp]

Hooty....I was talking about the term "Welfare"....get it....literally "Welfare"....as in 45 MM members of the democratic party who receive food stamps and WELFARE......

Now do you get it?

[hoosier_daddy]

well, when poor people have kids, then giving them welfare makes sense, in a general welfare kind of way...

[sweetwater5s9]

Congress controls the debt ceiling, specifically the House. 

[sweetwater5s9]

"General welfare" in the Constitution refers to the States not individuals.

A clear distinction is made with respect to welfare as applied to persons and states. In the Constitution the word "welfare" is used in the context of states and not persons. The "welfare of the United States" is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.

The preamble of the constitution establishes no powers or rights. It merely states the purpose of the constitution. No further development of what "general welfare" means can be made based on the mention of it in the preamble.

[hoosier_daddy]

where is the word "state" in that sentence, goon?  you are inventing words that aren't there...i thought only liberals and judicial activists did that....and no, the senate has to pass any debt ceiling laws...what makes you think it is just the House?  why are you so fucking wrong about everything?

[hoosier_daddy]

read Article I, Section 8....written so clearly even you might understand it....
 
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; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
 
don't see the word "state" in there anywhere do you?  and who makes up each state, little feller?  people.  how can you aid a state without aiding individual people?  what are you even talking about? if a state is given disaster relief funds, does everyone in the state get the same share?  or is it only given to those in the state ACTUALLY AFFECTED?  why would you think it is some kind of commie program where everybody has to get exactly the same amount?

[sweetwater5s9]

general Welfare of the United States.
 
 
In the Constitution the word "welfare" is used in the context of states and not persons. The "welfare of the United States" is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.


 
 

[sweetwater5s9]

The heading statement of Article 1, Section 8 confers on congress powers to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises. It then states the purpose of this in broad terms, to be expressed in detail in the list of 16 powers that follows. This purpose is that the funding placed at congress' disposition is to be used for federal and state debts due to the revolutionary war and for future defense and for the "general welfare of the United States." It concludes with limiting the duties, imposts and excises to amounts that would be uniform among the states.
 
It is wrong to read more than a basic power to tax and spend into this, to see any other power being granted here. All other details, as to what, specifically, the tax revenue may be spent on follows in the list of 16 specific powers.
 
The welfare concerned the wholesomeness of the Union, the federal level, the matter of binding the states together for mutual benefit, the health of the arrangement of the separated powers, the federalist structure, not the well-being of groups or individuals, whether travelers, farmers, manufacturers, shop-keepers, freight-haulers or consumers, etc.
 
The strongest reading would be that the benefit of this "general welfare" had to be a benefit for all rather than some people, without it being a direct benefit to every individual. It had to be limited to "public use" in the sense of the Fifth Amendment. 
 
Until some amendments can be made, we are stuck with the confusion and the financial burden of the welfare state. Let us hope it does not end with national financial collapse.
 
 

[hoosier_daddy]

of course it is, dickstain..why do you even think that?  all states are made up of people.  if you gave a state "welfare" it has to be passed on to actual people....what the fuck are you talking about?  here is a hint- a state is not alive.   

[hoosier_daddy]

james madison, the "father of the constitution", as president signed a law creating a national bank of the united states...he admitted there was no such specific right granted by the Constitution, which he mostly wrote, that authorized a national bank, but because of the general welfare clause, he argued, Congress had the right to pass any law that provided for the common defense and general welfare of the United States...get it?  general welfare is unspecific, that is why IT USES THE FUCKING WORD GENERAL IN IT...do you know what general means?  it means unspecific.  and yet this dickheaded bozo you quoted says general only means one thing....if it only means one thing- THEN IT IS SPECIFIC, NOT GENERAL.....general basically means whatever congress decides it means, just like common defense could mean NASA because it helps our technology concerning guided missiles.  get it?  or the building of the interstate highway system, because it might be used to shuttle tanks and military supplies from one state to another faster in times of war or emergency....get it?  the Founding Fathers CONSCIOUSLY left a lot of wiggle room.  they knew future generations would face problems and questions that would be vastly different than their own...

[sweetwater5s9]

general welfare of the United States...get it?
 
We get it do you?
 
 
The welfare concerned the wholesomeness of the Union, the federal level, the matter of binding the states together for mutual benefit, the health of the arrangement of the separated powers, the federalist structure, not the well-being of groups or individuals, whether travelers, farmers, manufacturers, shop-keepers, freight-haulers or consumers, etc.

 In the Constitution the word "welfare" is used in the context of states and not persons. The "welfare of the United States" is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.