under&quot

[sandy7827]

Originally Posted by BeauEDITED FOR ORGANIZATION Please don't associate me with Ron Paul. OK nike with high heels for women , I won't associate you with Ron Paul. I think you are saying that you are not too concerned with Obama pushing for greater governmental control in all aspects of our society. Is my assumption of your position correct?No; what I said was clear; it was high heel nike , "While I disagree with the construction of the welfare state, it's not debatable (is it?) that it's been done without explicitly violating the Constitution." What Bush did is done. It is over. We have a new regime. Are you an apparachik to the new socialism? Clearly not. How is that relevant to the discussion at hand? So please tell me why we are better off to have government violate financial contracts?No thanks. How is that relevant to the discussion at hand? Tell me why it is better that we have a national healthcare policy and all must suffer higher taxation to pay for that initiative. No thanks. How is that relevant to the discussion at hand? The rhetoric of Obama is a ruse for you to be coopted by feel-good words. You have the wrong person. How is that relevant to the discussion at hand? We must restore the admiration of personal responsibility. Who do you mean by "we?" I see why you need me jordan 4 high women heel white grey black , but I don't see why I need you. Please tell me how you personally were worse off under President Bush?Everyone is worse off under the buffoon who is POTUS #44. A quadrupled deficit is absolutely unnecessary and was avoidable. It is all about a grab for more power. I was never "under" Bush and I'm not "under" Obama. My well-being is not dependent on who is the President. I'm the same today as I was yesterday and will be tomorrow. See bolded parts in-line above for responses. I hope this is sufficiently deciphered.