"Fair Share"?

WTF, you're ignoring ExNYer's ignorant and patently fallacious contention that Congress is NOT bound by the Constitution to "provide for the common defence." Surely, you don't mean to join him in that very ignorant assertion. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Spin all you want, but Congress is NOT bound to spend one red cent on the DoD.

Article 1 grants powers to the Congress including the power to raise taxes. It does NOT obligate it to spend anything for defense. Supreme Courts decisions have clearly spelled out that spending is be left to the discretion of Congress. Any other arrangement would impose a dictatorship by the Courts to determine spending for them. The Supreme Court won't do that.

And I conceded nothing in my $1 hypothetical. I ALSO gave a hypothetical where Congress zeros out the budget for the DoD (whichyou ignored).

So, let me repeat it for you.

If a Congress of Dennis Kucinich and Bernie Sanders types decides to completely defund the military in the budget (i.e., ZERO dollars) and that all federal revenues will be used for the general welfare (i.e., entitlements and pork), what is your remedy?

Who overturns that decision and sets aside money for the DoD? And how much money?

Don't fight the hypothetical. Answer it.

I'll bet you don't have a coherent answer for that. You already know the answer is "no one", but you won't admit it. Because then you would have to admit your BS about "mandated spending" for the DoD is WRONG. And as everyone who reads this forum knows, IB Hankerwrong is incapable of conceding a point. He just piles on more and more shit to try to change the subject.

That's why you will respond to this post with some pseudo-intellectual bullshit about Locke and Rousseau and the Preamble.

What you won't do is point to a Supreme Court case that says that the Congress is mandated to spend X amount of money on defense.

What you won't do is say "If Congress spends $0 on the defense budget, then XYZ will happen that will FORCE Congress to spend the money."

Because you have NO FUCKING IDEA what "XYZ" would be.

You just had your ass handed to you. Which is a considerable accomplishment considering your head is stuck in it.

WTF, you're ignoring ExNYer's ignorant and patently fallacious contention that Congress is NOT bound by the Constitution to "provide for the common defence." Surely, you don't mean to join him in that very ignorant assertion. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I have said that all I am arguing about is the degree. IMHO, we spend way to much on ''common defence." I have also said there is no set amount. If congress decided that a hundred bucks would do it, we would either spend a hundred bucks or elect new congressmen. There would be no law broken.

Congress has the duty of providing for defense. There is no way to force them to do the job other than through the election process so Congress could drop the military budget to $0 if they chose. It would never happen but it is technically possible.

Congress has the duty of providing for defense. There is no way to force them to do the job other than through the election process so Congress could drop the military budget to $0 if they chose. It would never happen but it is technically possible. Originally Posted by Laz

That is all I have been trying to get through IB's head. There is no law that we have to spend a certain amount on Defense.

If we the people elect folks that choose to spend nothing on Defense, there is nothing we can do about it but elect others.

Which is why all I have ever argued is the degree of spending. I realize that some folks are scared of their shadow and think they should be able to reach in my pocket and take more of my money to alleviate their fear.

Spin all you want, but Congress is NOT bound to spend one red cent on the DoD.

Article 1 grants powers to the Congress including the power to raise taxes. It does NOT obligate it to spend anything for defense. Supreme Courts decisions have clearly spelled out that spending is be left to the discretion of Congress. Any other arrangement would impose a dictatorship by the Courts to determine spending for them. The Supreme Court won't do that.

And I conceded nothing in my $1 hypothetical. I ALSO gave a hypothetical where Congress zeros out the budget for the DoD (whichyou ignored).

So, let me repeat it for you.

If a Congress of Dennis Kucinich and Bernie Sanders types decides to completely defund the military in the budget (i.e., ZERO dollars) and that all federal revenues will be used for the general welfare (i.e., entitlements and pork), what is your remedy?

Who overturns that decision and sets aside money for the DoD? And how much money?

Don't fight the hypothetical. Answer it.

I'll bet you don't have a coherent answer for that. You already know the answer is "no one", but you won't admit it. Because then you would have to admit your BS about "mandated spending" for the DoD is WRONG. And as everyone who reads this forum knows, IB Hankerwrong is incapable of conceding a point. He just piles on more and more shit to try to change the subject.

That's why you will respond to this post with some pseudo-intellectual bullshit about Locke and Rousseau and the Preamble.

What you won't do is point to a Supreme Court case that says that the Congress is mandated to spend X amount of money on defense.

What you won't do is say "If Congress spends $0 on the defense budget, then XYZ will happen that will FORCE Congress to spend the money."

Because you have NO FUCKING IDEA what "XYZ" would be.

You just had your ass handed to you. Which is a considerable accomplishment considering your head is stuck in it.
Originally Posted by ExNYer

You’ve been authoritatively rebuked, ExNYer! Article I, Section 8, says it all! And now that you’ve had your ass handed to you, why don't you pack-up your lame-ass and fallacious POV and your lame-ass hypotheticals and carry them on down the road.

I have said that all I am arguing about is the degree. IMHO, we spend way to much on ''common defence." I have also said there is no set amount. If congress decided that a hundred bucks would do it, we would either spend a hundred bucks or elect new congressmen. There would be no law broken. Originally Posted by WTF

If you want to decrease DOD expenditures, bring back the draft, WTF -- and proscribe E-4s and below from marrying and having children.

Congress has the duty of providing for defense. There is no way to force them to do the job other than through the election process so Congress could drop the military budget to $0 if they chose. It would never happen but it is technically possible. Originally Posted by Laz

Sorry, Laz, but you are wrong. Congress cannot collect taxes and drop the defense budget to “$0” – that’s unconstitutional. As long as Congress collects taxes, it has to “provide for the common defence,” & etc.

Article I, Section 8, clause 1 states: "The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." Note the added emphasis and that there are no “should’s”, “may’s” or “maybe’s” in the text – Article I, Section 8, emphatically states Congress’s power to tax exists because it has to “provide for the common defence”, & etc., and that interpretation is based on Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story’s authoritative determination.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Story

I agree with the draft...that is why they got rid of it. To much protesting going on!

Obviously you weren't drafted...

Obviously you weren't drafted... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

nope, I was DMG in my ROTC class, making you a "light weight snuffy", hence the "CPT" JOHNSTONE but sense you are a clueless donkey that means Distingquished Military Graduate

How dare you, asshole. How fucking dare you?

You gonna tell me that draftees weren't real soldiers? That they didn't get their blood spilled for no goddamned reason, while pussies like you sat behind the lines drinking commandeered whiskey, Neidermeyer?

I guess that something you earned by wearing your Killer Commando clothes to high school. or was it just to get out of gym?

I resent the shit out of your comment. You piss on the memory of fallen Americans, and are less than nothing to me. I think you owe all of the 650,000 who were drafted in my era a big apology and a big thank you.

GEEK DIPSHIT!

I'm still waiting for people who think we need to cut spending to tell us how much it should be cut.

What's a fair budget? Originally Posted by Doove

And I am still waiting on an answer to the question, "what percentage of a persons income should go to city, county, state, and federal taxes".

What is a fair assesment?

And I am still waiting on an answer to the question, "what percentage of a persons income should go to city, county, state, and federal taxes".

What is a fair assesment? Originally Posted by Jackie S

Person A asks a question. Person B (that would be me) asks an analogous question to point out how silly person A's question is.

Person C (you) then steps in and claims that, for asking the question (that he didn't really expect an answer to because that's not why he asked it) person B (again, that would be me) should answer person C's analogous question.

No.

nope, I was DMG in my ROTC class, making you a "light weight snuffy", hence the "CPT" JOHNSTONE but sense you are a clueless donkey that means Distingquished Military Graduate Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

As far as I am concerned the Cpt only speaks for himself!

During the late 60's and early 70's, I was an Officer in the U S Army (OCS not ROTC). I can assure you that most of my fellow officers (at least the ones I served with) did not look at draftees as a "light weight snuffy" or "a clueless donkey."

I knew some very good soldiers who were draftees! A few were not but the same could just as easily have been said about my fellow officers. It didn't matter what rank you were. There were soldiers (officers as well as enlisted men) who were very good at what they did. Some were not! As far as I am concerned, ones level of competence (or incompetence) knew no specific rank!

I knew draftees who would not hesitate to put their lives on the line for the good of their unit. Prior to being drafted, each could have easily made the decision to go to Canada. They chose to serve their country instead. I always respected them for their loyalty and their patriotism and will leave it at that!

OK, I was drafted. In the 1960's, it was understood that if you did not aquire some type of deferment, that was your fate.

You graduated from High School, got a job, and waited for the famous letter. The letter I got did not say "greetings, your friends and neighbors have chosen you"....... It simply had a heading "From The President of the United States, you are ordered to report to"..........

Once drafted, it did not take the Army long to strip you down, remove your civilian mentality, and make you become part of a unit. In fact, that is really what Basic Training was all about. They had to take young kids and turn them, in 12 weeks, into Soldiers with a common bond to other Soldiers and loyalty to a common unit.

They then taught you how to be good Soldiers in AIT.

I really can't say that we were "good Soldiers". I say that because we were in a Bad War. All of us were aware that the Country was divided about Vietnam, it was hard reconciling being over there in that hell hole when you knew that half of the Country back home was totally against the entire endevour. After the initial shock of being "in country" wore off, you got into a routine of just living from day to day, one day at a time.

Keep in mind, your tour of duty was 12 months. Think about having to spend an entire year under those circumstances.

I can honestly say that I never saw an act of cowardness while in 'Nam. I also did not see much in the way of heroics, but my job in Commo did not allow me to get exposed to those situations on a regular basis, except the night I got hit.

I never got spit on in an airport. Nobody ever came up to me and said, "baby killer". The truth is, the entire experience was rather surreal. One day you get drafted, and two years later you were back home. What the fuck happenned?

WW2 proved that Draftees can be good Soldiers. But that was an entirley different kind of war. It was a noble cause. The war we fought was a huge mistake, a 'Bad War', and it's hard to make good soldiers out of Draftees and then tell them to go fight for a cause that they did not understand, and did not believe in.

I feel like I am part of a dying breed. I will be 66 soon, and the draft ended in the early '70's. So that means in the future you will see a headline that says, 'The Last Draftee Dies"

I hope it's me

I hope it's me Originally Posted by Jackie S

I do, as well! Best of luck!

nope, I was DMG in my ROTC class, making you a "light weight snuffy", hence the "CPT" JOHNSTONE but sense you are a clueless donkey that means Distingquished Military Graduate Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

Fuck we had to lead the rotcy boys around bu the nose so they wouldn't get lost.Keep working and you will learn how to spell distinguished....