The liberal final exam

[Mornac]

• Tweet

1) Cite the line in the Constitution that gives Congress permission to attempt to “create jobs”

[Case_Closed]

Isn't there a clause in there that requires the government to make us happy?

[DougRich]

Isn't there a clause in there that requires the government to make us happy?

You're confusing politicians with a different kind of whore.

[Case_Closed]

And also Health Care is (should be) a RIGHT!!!

[Case_Closed]

"Because it is the right thing to do."

Arguing with a liberal

[Pepsi]

1) Cite the line in the Constitution that gives Congress permission to attempt to “create jobs”

Cite the politician who won an election on a platform which didn't have policies they described as being helpful to the economy, ie job creation.

[Case_Closed]

Cite the politician who won an election on a platform which didn't have policies they described as being helpful to the economy, ie job creation.

That is an entirely different question.

One is regarding policy and procedure, the other involves a placement service.

[IM2]

1) Cite the line in the Constitution that gives Congress permission to attempt to “create jobs”

Pure stupidity.

[Case_Closed]

Pure stupidity.

Translation:  "Hurf durf."

[IM2]

Translation: Badnews is a chickenshit little bastard.

[Case_Closed]

Translation: Badnews is a chickenshit little bastard.

[IM2]

But you are and you have shown yourself to be:

The Super Chicken Cartoon Theme Song	Small | Large

[flyboy]

1) Cite the line in the Constitution that gives Congress permission to attempt to “create jobs”

It's exactly the same line in the Constitution that gives congress "permission" to fund the building of the Interstate highways. You are a really stupid fool on the order of Boffo the Mofo.  If a bill authored by Congress isn't prohibited expressly in the the Constitution, then it is by defninition constitutional.   Cite the line in the Constitution that makes possession of heroin a crime?  Where does the consitution mention "controlled substances"?  Possession by an individual of fissionable materials?  Yet these are federal crimes.  As long as you agree that congress can regulate Interstate commerce, then you have to agree that any allocation of funding that acts in the Interest of Interstate Commerce, which incidentally will add to jobs, is constitutional. He's not a lawyer but he plays one on the Web.

[Observer]

It's exactly the same line in the Constitution that gives congress "permission" to fund the building of the Interstate highways. You are a really stupid fool on the order of Boffo the Mofo.  If a bill authored by Congress isn't prohibited expressly in the the Constitution, then it is by defninition constitutional. 

You got that exactly backwards. The only powers the Constitution grants Congress are those specifically enumerated. It has NO powers other than those. Anything it does that exceeds those powers is unconstitutional.

You obviously attended the IM School of Constitutional Studies.

[DougRich]

You got that exactly backwards. The only powers the Constitution grants Congress are those specifically enumerated. It has NO powers other than those. Anything it does that exceeds those powers is unconstitutional.

You're actually the one who has it backwards, Obs. You're confusing the enumeration of the things that Congress is charged with doing, with some sort of comprehensive list of things that it can only do. If that were not the case, why would the Bill of Rights have been seen as necessary? What reason would the Founders have had for setting up roadblocks to the government's restriction of free speech, the press, etc, since nowhere in the body of the Constitution is Congress charged with regulating or overseeing those activities? They were well aware that the Congress, over time and in the course of governance, would need to create and fund items not specifically listed among its required duties, and to approve laws regarding things not even forseen or imagined in that time.