Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
FS Great Compromise of 1787 - Looking at the numbers
Comments
-
We need a wall. On the California/Oregon border. Keep you buttfuckers outta the north.CirrhosisDawg said:
It’s interesting how American progress, ingenuity and success played out over the the 20th century, attrituable in large part to the passion of our immigrants — basque, Slav, German, Irish, Mexican... we made america great. Now the narrow-minded, unskilled, and uneducated say we need to build a “wall”YellowSnow said:
Agree to some extent pyrrhic aspect. I lived in SD till '92 and my Dad's business was definitely affected. Brutal recession. My point is, however, is that in spite of retooling themselves, CA probably wouldn't be where it is today without big government defense spending. Silicon Valley don't happen the way it did w/o Ruskies launching Webber BBQ's into outer space.CirrhosisDawg said:
Understood. Post WWII and cold war military spending created a pyrrhic cal economy: George, Norton, Sacramento, alameda, el segundo, et al all closed. I lived through it. Point is CA reformed and educated itself. We didn’t bitch and cry like today’s entitled white trash. Led by our institutions of higher education, we re-skilled and once again lead the workd economy based on an entirely revamped and highly skilled work force. Tromps can fuck off. They will get what they deserve. Ultimately.YellowSnow said:
Question for your busted liver Dawg: What state in the US would you say received the largest share (on a per capita basis) of Cold War era defense spending (which was critical to said state becoming the economic powerhouse that it is today)? Tax payer largesse is a 2 way street throughout our history.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. the vast majority of CA will see why federalism is the answer.RaceBannon said:Eliminating the state tax deduction is brilliant
Ryan losing the house is the most likely scenario.
The uneducated, unskilled and unproductive don’t want CA’s benevolence.
It’s time to let them all go. Good luck.
Fuck that. Fuck off.
CA independence. -
Rare time when we agree. I too would like to see California go.CirrhosisDawg said:
There’s a path to a rational tax and spending policy. Unfortunately, It’s not happening any time soon with the DC shit show.YellowSnow said:
The flip side to this coin is those of us living in non income states subsidizing the high state income taxes in places like CA. When prison guards are getting those ridiculous pensions, it tells me the average CA tax payer is being overbilled (yes, this is an over generalization, but you get the idea).CirrhosisDawg said:It’s clear where US law is headed in the absence of any sensible public policy direction.
— thoughtless GOP tax reform (under which cal taxable income earners of $200k pay an additional $2,000 per person or so subsidy to red states)
— isolationist economic and trade policies
— mindless nationalist, populist and “Christian” rentrenchment.
Troomps need educated, skilled and productive California more than we need you.
I am a Californian.
The tax code is like the Papacy selling indulgences and in general it should be made to be as neutral as possible.
CA independence. -
Your benevolence is, um.... yeah.CirrhosisDawg said:
Understood. Post WWII and cold war military spending created a pyrrhic cal economy: George, Norton, Sacramento, alameda, el segundo, et al all closed. I lived through it. Point is CA reformed and educated itself. We didn’t bitch and cry like today’s entitled white trash. Led by our institutions of higher education, we re-skilled and once again lead the world economy based on an entirely revamped and highly skilled work force. Troomps can fuck off. They will get what they deserve. Ultimately.YellowSnow said:
Question for your busted liver Dawg: What state in the US would you say received the largest share (on a per capita basis) of Cold War era defense spending (which was critical to said state becoming the economic powerhouse that it is today)? Tax payer largesse is a 2 way street throughout our history.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. the vast majority of CA will see why federalism is the answer.RaceBannon said:Eliminating the state tax deduction is brilliant
Ryan losing the house is the most likely scenario.
The uneducated, unskilled and unproductive don’t want CA’s benevolence.
It’s time to let them all go. Good luck.
You sound bitter. -
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
-
UCI acquittal?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW. -
You leave out how those "builders" came here legally and it only proves others will do the work illegals are stealing.CirrhosisDawg said:
It’s interesting how American progress, ingenuity and success played out over the the 20th century, attrituable in large part to the passion of our immigrants — basque, Slav, German, Irish, Mexican... we made america great. Now the narrow-minded, unskilled, and uneducated say we need to build a “wall”YellowSnow said:
Agree to some extent pyrrhic aspect. I lived in SD till '92 and my Dad's business was definitely affected. Brutal recession. My point is, however, is that in spite of retooling themselves, CA probably wouldn't be where it is today without big government defense spending. Silicon Valley don't happen the way it did w/o Ruskies launching Webber BBQ's into outer space.CirrhosisDawg said:
Understood. Post WWII and cold war military spending created a pyrrhic cal economy: George, Norton, Sacramento, alameda, el segundo, et al all closed. I lived through it. Point is CA reformed and educated itself. We didn’t bitch and cry like today’s entitled white trash. Led by our institutions of higher education, we re-skilled and once again lead the workd economy based on an entirely revamped and highly skilled work force. Tromps can fuck off. They will get what they deserve. Ultimately.YellowSnow said:
Question for your busted liver Dawg: What state in the US would you say received the largest share (on a per capita basis) of Cold War era defense spending (which was critical to said state becoming the economic powerhouse that it is today)? Tax payer largesse is a 2 way street throughout our history.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. the vast majority of CA will see why federalism is the answer.RaceBannon said:Eliminating the state tax deduction is brilliant
Ryan losing the house is the most likely scenario.
The uneducated, unskilled and unproductive don’t want CA’s benevolence.
It’s time to let them all go. Good luck.
Fuck that. Fuck off.
CA independence. -
CA could probably actually get by on its own water supply (i.e., no more Colorado River imports) if they were not such a bunch of tree huggers and would build more reservoirs, get more of the So Cal rainfall (yes they get a fair bit) stored in aquifers, plus maybe some more desalinization plants. There's a lot of water in the state; it's just about storing it properly and moving it from point A to B. Some farmers would have to be bought ought to which would be expensive.salemcoog said:
So if gurgle is the drown sound. What sound would best describe your State cut off from outside water?CirrhosisDawg said:
Understood. Post WWII and cold war military spending created a pyrrhic cal economy: George, Norton, Sacramento, alameda, el segundo, et al all closed. I lived through it. Point is CA reformed and educated itself. We didn’t bitch and cry like today’s entitled white trash. Led by our institutions of higher education, we re-skilled and once again lead the world economy based on an entirely revamped and highly skilled work force. Troomps can fuck off. They will get what they deserve. Ultimately.YellowSnow said:
Question for your busted liver Dawg: What state in the US would you say received the largest share (on a per capita basis) of Cold War era defense spending (which was critical to said state becoming the economic powerhouse that it is today)? Tax payer largesse is a 2 way street throughout our history.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. the vast majority of CA will see why federalism is the answer.RaceBannon said:Eliminating the state tax deduction is brilliant
Ryan losing the house is the most likely scenario.
The uneducated, unskilled and unproductive don’t want CA’s benevolence.
It’s time to let them all go. Good luck.
Crackle???
Plus no one wants your dirty Willamette water anyhow which is polluted with Salem bum piss, fecal matter and full blow AIDS. -
Mainly just LA. I like the restSwaye said:
Rare time when we agree. I too would like to see California go.CirrhosisDawg said:
There’s a path to a rational tax and spending policy. Unfortunately, It’s not happening any time soon with the DC shit show.YellowSnow said:
The flip side to this coin is those of us living in non income states subsidizing the high state income taxes in places like CA. When prison guards are getting those ridiculous pensions, it tells me the average CA tax payer is being overbilled (yes, this is an over generalization, but you get the idea).CirrhosisDawg said:It’s clear where US law is headed in the absence of any sensible public policy direction.
— thoughtless GOP tax reform (under which cal taxable income earners of $200k pay an additional $2,000 per person or so subsidy to red states)
— isolationist economic and trade policies
— mindless nationalist, populist and “Christian” rentrenchment.
Troomps need educated, skilled and productive California more than we need you.
I am a Californian.
The tax code is like the Papacy selling indulgences and in general it should be made to be as neutral as possible.
CA independence.
-
and heroin. lots and lots of heroin.YellowSnow said:
CA could probably actually get by on its own water supply (i.e., no more Colorado River imports) if they were not such a bunch of tree huggers and would build more reservoirs, get more of the So Cal rainfall (yes they get a fair bit) stored in aquifers, plus maybe some more desalinization plants. There's a lot of water in the state; it's just about storing it properly and moving it from point A to B. Some farmers would have to be bought ought to which would be expensive.salemcoog said:
So if gurgle is the drown sound. What sound would best describe your State cut off from outside water?CirrhosisDawg said:
Understood. Post WWII and cold war military spending created a pyrrhic cal economy: George, Norton, Sacramento, alameda, el segundo, et al all closed. I lived through it. Point is CA reformed and educated itself. We didn’t bitch and cry like today’s entitled white trash. Led by our institutions of higher education, we re-skilled and once again lead the world economy based on an entirely revamped and highly skilled work force. Troomps can fuck off. They will get what they deserve. Ultimately.YellowSnow said:
Question for your busted liver Dawg: What state in the US would you say received the largest share (on a per capita basis) of Cold War era defense spending (which was critical to said state becoming the economic powerhouse that it is today)? Tax payer largesse is a 2 way street throughout our history.CirrhosisDawg said:
Agree. the vast majority of CA will see why federalism is the answer.RaceBannon said:Eliminating the state tax deduction is brilliant
Ryan losing the house is the most likely scenario.
The uneducated, unskilled and unproductive don’t want CA’s benevolence.
It’s time to let them all go. Good luck.
Crackle???
Plus no one wants your dirty Willamette water anyhow which is polluted with Salem bum piss, fecal matter and full blow AIDS. -
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW. -
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
-
AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
TJ's personal writings are irrelevant. If its not in the Constitution it doesnt matter. If you think the founders intended for one or two states to have a perpetual monopoly on presidential elections, you are more retarded than I thought. -
do you think that my call for proportional representation is about Presidential elections?oregonblitzkrieg said:AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
TJ's personal writings are irrelevant. If its not in the Constitution it doesnt matter. If you think the founders intended for one or two states to have a perpetual monopoly on presidential elections, you are more retarded than I thought. -
AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
You don't like the rules? Change them.
It takes 3/4 of the states to agree.
Good luck.
-
Yeah, that was kinda TJ's poont.PurpleThrobber said:AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
You don't like the rules? Change them.
It takes 3/4 of the states to agree.
Good luck. -
So TJ was for the Constitution before he was against?AZDuck said:
Yeah, that was kinda TJ's poont.PurpleThrobber said:AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
You don't like the rules? Change them.
It takes 3/4 of the states to agree.
Good luck.
If he liked his Constitution, could he keep it?
-
He liked his constitutions like he liked his women. No more than 19 years old.PurpleThrobber said:
So TJ was for the Constitution before he was against?AZDuck said:
Yeah, that was kinda TJ's poont.PurpleThrobber said:AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
You don't like the rules? Change them.
It takes 3/4 of the states to agree.
Good luck.
If he liked his Constitution, could he keep it? -
YKWAZDuck said:
He liked his constitutions like he liked his women. No more than 19 years old.PurpleThrobber said:
So TJ was for the Constitution before he was against?AZDuck said:
Yeah, that was kinda TJ's poont.PurpleThrobber said:AZDuck said:
you're too dumb to argue with, so imma let Thomas Jefferson do itoregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.--It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law has been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal.
You don't like the rules? Change them.
It takes 3/4 of the states to agree.
Good luck.
If he liked his Constitution, could he keep it?
-
sorry I didn't have a daguerrotype handy
-
Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW. -
I learned that proportional representation can affect the election of a unitary executiveTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW. -
Not everyone gets an invite for the Higher Level History Discushion Bored.TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Fuck off. Electoral college is there for a reason, to prevent NY and CA from deciding every election. You lost you fucking crybaby. Fair and square. The rules are the rules. Did your mommy change them every time your spoilt ass started crying and threw a tantrum?AZDuck said:PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW.
PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NOW. -
Man history is gay. Only class I got a B in in middle school.
I do enjoy 19 year old girls though I'm down with that. -
Pitchfork51 said:
Man history is gay. Only class I got a B in in middle school.
I do enjoy 19 year old girls though I'm down with that.
-
Shit man I forgot that line. UnderratedYellowSnow said:Pitchfork51 said:Man history is gay. Only class I got a B in in middle school.
I do enjoy 19 year old girls though I'm down with that. -
Underrated film IMO.Pitchfork51 said:
Shit man I forgot that line. UnderratedYellowSnow said:Pitchfork51 said:Man history is gay. Only class I got a B in in middle school.
I do enjoy 19 year old girls though I'm down with that. -
Clearly not for meYellowSnow said:
Underrated film IMO.Pitchfork51 said:
Shit man I forgot that line. UnderratedYellowSnow said:Pitchfork51 said:Man history is gay. Only class I got a B in in middle school.
I do enjoy 19 year old girls though I'm down with that. -
Like AZ said - too fucking stupid to argue with.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.
Fucking idiot should be fed to the hogs. -
They still do that? Thought that was just A Deadwood thing?dflea said:
Like AZ said - too fucking stupid to argue with.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.
Fucking idiot should be fed to the hogs. -
YellowSnow said:
They still do that? Thought that was just A Deadwood thing?dflea said:
Like AZ said - too fucking stupid to argue with.TierbsHsotBoobs said:Today I learned California was a thing when the electoral college was invented.
Fucking idiot should be fed to the hogs.
