Obama blames Founding Fathers

[ralphc1]

Well he's had the senate his entire term and now he's in danger of losing if for his policies. Reid doesnt help either

The House has the population-based structure he wishes the Senate had. Ironically, he lost that years ago and unlikely to it back. He started with both, losing them to racism

How has he had the Senate? It takes a 2/3 majority to get around the stalling tactics that can be used when a party decides to use a scorched earth policy.

 

[n...not crazy]

What an asshole.

But I only say that because he's 1/2 black and I'm 1/3 racist.

 

[second sight]

I am saying this whole thread is utterly ridiculous, as are you.




I am saying people in this country of mine don't like Obama because he is black. This isn't a secret.

The thread was doing just fine until you started posting

here's real racism for you


http://mychal-massie.com/premium/why-i-do-not-like-the-obamas/

 

[The Creeses**]

I think you're mistaking my observations for something your wife said to you after you rolled off her last night. "That was pretty feeble, you idiotic troll."

That, Sir, was funny.

 

[The Creeses**]

The thread was doing just fine until you started posting

here's real racism for you


http://mychal-massie.com/premium/why-i-do-not-like-the-obamas/

A link to The Daily rant? Please tell me this is a joke.

 

[second sight]

Here's a great article and a peek behind the curtain at what he is talking about when he complains about not being able to bring about all the changes he want.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...ng-been-on-record-in-favor-of-redistribution/

 

[The Creeses**]

Here's a great article and a peek behind the curtain at what he is talking about when he complains about not being able to bring about all the changes he want.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrod...ng-been-on-record-in-favor-of-redistribution/

There is a whole bunch of paraphrasing in that article. What point are you trying to make? The constitution is not perfect. The people who crafted the document knew this. This is why we have amendments and a Supreme court to dissect it.

 

[ultramanhyata]

No, it doesn't.

Because the House is still set up by population. So the minority will never dominate both sides of Congress. But it does limit the tyranny of the majority.

By "tyranny of the majority" you really mean true democracy. Because it certainly does limit that.

Equality of Senate representation and the electoral college both need to be thrown into the dust-bin of history.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

By "tyranny of the majority" you really mean true democracy. Because it certainly does limit that.

Equality of Senate representation and the electoral college both need to be thrown into the dust-bin of history.

Not really because a true democracy requires that the majority allows the minority to exist and have representation in government.

 

[AgentOrange24]

He's correct.

Congress was designed to not get much done.

 

[OldGoat]

By "tyranny of the majority" you really mean true democracy. Because it certainly does limit that.

Equality of Senate representation and the electoral college both need to be thrown into the dust-bin of history.

Wrong. Pure democracy does not work.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Not really because a true democracy requires that the majority allows the minority to exist and have representation in government.

A true democracy certainly allows a minority to have representation - but only relative to their number.

If two couples take a vote on where they're going for dinner, everyone gets a say. But if three people vote "Vito's" and one person votes "Applebee's" everybody is eating at Vito's.

 

[OldGoat]

A true democracy certainly allows a minority to have representation - but only relative to their number.

If two couples take a vote on where they're going for dinner, everyone gets a say. But if three people vote "Vito's" and one person votes "Applebee's" everybody is eating at Vito's.

A true unconstrained democracy is bad.

 

[ultramanhyata]

A true unconstrained democracy is bad.

It is certainly bad for capitalists... Since those who will always be in their economic system's minority - the rich - will not be able to control and dictate policy.

Complete democracy and complete capitalism are entirely incompatible.

 

[OldGoat]

It is certainly bad for capitalists... Since those who will always be in their economic system's minority - the rich - will not be able to control and dictate policy.

Complete democracy and complete capitalism are entirely incompatible.

Who is advocating complete capitalism? That's a different thread is it not? We are talking about constraints on democracy which are needed to prevent the ignorant mobs from ignorant mobbery.

 

[The Creeses**]

We are talking about constraints on democracy which are needed to prevent the ignorant mobs from ignorant mobbery.

Be clear here. Who are you talking about when you say "ignorant mobs". Be specific.

 

[Cold Front]

Be clear here. Who are you talking about when you say "ignorant mobs". Be specific.

It's not a specific matter. It's a general matter, referring to all kinds of possibilities from both the left and the right and even the apolitical middle.

 

[The Creeses**]

It's not a specific matter. It's a general matter, referring to all kinds of possibilities from both the left and the right and even the apolitical middle.

I know that, dude. I just wanted OG to say what he is really thinking and not float these abstracts. You know full well what I was getting at.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

Be clear here. Who are you talking about when you say "ignorant mobs". Be specific.

Unemployed high school dropouts from low income housing.

 

[Cold Front]

I know that, dude. I just wanted OG to say what he is really thinking and not float these abstracts. You know full well what I was getting at.

But you asked for specifics. Why? Specifics don't matter. Mob rule can come from anywhere.