How many Jews are ‘Liberals’?

The Dem’s are having their wet dreams so the idea of hard-line Democrats showing up protesting the crap that 0bama is doing is st00pid to even expect it.

You sure are obsessed with skin color. Don’t forget your prezzie poo is have white-devil.

Sums up race-baiting, wards of the state, leftists perfectly. Who do you suppose will do your dirty work because I know you ninnies would just as soon piss yourselves before handing out any beatdowns.

“It’s a populist movement . . . young, old, liberal, conservative, white, black . . . etc.”

Well, no, it’s not. You want people to believe it is, but when people start asking, “OK, but I don’t see any black people” you say, “Well of course not. Why would there be black people?”

Why indeed. Or Hispanics. Or Jews. Come to think of it, I didn’t see any independents, either. Of course they’re easier to claim, ain’t that right . . . far right.

We have to read the Constitution as it was meant to be read by the Framers, not bringing our own modern prejudices to it. At the time of its writing, the United States was a new, separate entity, a union of theoretically independent nation-states. The general welfare wording meant that if there was something Congress saw fit to do that benefitted that union qua union, they could do it, not to interfere with the personal lives of the people, or the proper functioning of the states.

And, give us a couple more Scalias, Roberts, or Thomases on the SCOTUS, and who knows? Maybe we’ll see a substantial dismantling of the monstrous bureaucracy of federal gov’t we have now, built substantially by gross misreading of the Constitution, like yours.

Most people are indifferent to Obama’s skin colour and his parentage (white skinned mother; black-skinned father). After all, most people voted him in as President.

However, all presidential and Congressional actions are open to debate, analysis, criticism and support. That’s because this is a republic, not a totalitarian state. Obama’s actions are open to a LOT of criticism, from his pork-filled ‘stimulus’,his actions with the banks, and the auto companies, his insults to foreign heads of state, his constant denigration of America – and – his denigration of Congress by insisting that they pass bills without reading or debating them.

Could you tell me what is particularly ‘black-skinned’ or ‘white-skinned’ about any of his actions? I’m afraid I can’t see any relation. I can’t see that his skin color makes him behave or act as he does. Therefore, we have every right to crticize him.

Oh – and you are missing a vital, a key point in your reference to the Constitution. The vital point is a colon. You see, after the colon, the exact nature of ‘what is understood as the general welfare’ is listed. Specifically.

Do you seriously assume that the Founding Fathers, who worked very hard to separate powers and to limit government, would insert a clause that was OPEN rather than Limited?

Why, if you had a clause that set up the federal govt as having the power to do anything ‘for the general welfare’…that could include anything that any sophist could dream up. But..there’s that fact, that colon: and after that colon:…is listed, specifically, the nature of the actions that constitute this ‘general Welfare. And guess what..health care isn’t among them. After that colon:

So, try again. Try understand that Obama is not immune to criticism; that we have the right and duty to observe, examine, analyze.and critique his actions. For you to say that such is ‘racist’ on our part is boneheaded.

Oh..and read the Constitution. Remember what a Colon means: it is used to introduce a list. And that list, which outlines the specific actions understood to contribute to the ‘general welfare’..is finite. Specific. Closed. And no health care. Sucks, doesn’t it?

ROFLMAO!