Sold out by IFR

"Newps" wrote in message
news:dMbTb.198677$I06.2194088@attbi_s01...


Jeff wrote:
Ameritrade is the same way.
after using them, we got hundredss of spam (and still do) from stock
places.

Really? I've had Ameritrade for myself since about 1996 and for my kids
college trusts since 1997. Never got any spam from financial
institutions of any kind.

I have to agree with Newps.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt


You could not have named two that did more to let the "cat outta the bag".
Well, no, they weren't puppets, but they sure liked to pull the strings.

It's a quetion who money was worse, J. Davis' Confederate money, or
Lincoln's "Greenbacks". Lincoln started us on the road to the overarching
state, and Teddy gave us the start (and a goodly trip down the road) to
the
Military-Industrial Complex.

And a segregated military.

"Pixel Dent" wrote in message
news
In article . net,
"Mike Rapoport" wrote:

We could dabate whether these fall under "provide for the common
welfare"
but lets not.

Mike
MU-2


The preamble, like the AIM, is non-regulatory ;-)

Exactly right. The Preamble is a statement of _purpose_ (why a government
exists), not a statement of _powers_.

If it designated powers, then Section 8 is contradicted and merely fluff.

Ignorant About the American Constitution?
by Walter Williams (December 10, 2003)

Article website address: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3393

The Federalist Papers were a set of documents written by John Jay, Alexander
Hamilton and James Madison to persuade the 13 states to ratify the
Constitution. In one of those papers, Federalist Paper 45, James Madison
wrote:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal
Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State
Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised
principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign
commerce; with which last the power of taxation will for the most part be
connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the
objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives,
liberties and properties of the people; and the internal order, improvement,
and prosperity of the State."

If we turned James Madison's statement on its head, namely that the powers
of the federal government are numerous and indefinite and those of the
states are few and defined, we'd describe today's America. Was Madison just
plain ignorant about the powers delegated to Congress? Before making our
judgment, let's examine statements of other possibly misinformed Americans.

In 1796, on the floor of the House of Representatives, William Giles of
Virginia condemned a relief measure for fire victims saying it was neither
the purpose nor the right of Congress to "attend to what generosity and
humanity require, but to what the Constitution and their duty require." In
1854, President Franklin Pierce vetoed a bill intended to help the mentally
ill, saying, "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public
charity," adding that to approve such spending "would be contrary to the
letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory
upon which the Union of these States is founded." President Grover Cleveland
was the king of the veto. He vetoed literally hundreds of congressional
spending bills during his two terms as president in the late 1800s. His
often given reason was, "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in
the Constitution."

Today's White House proposes and Congress taxes and spends for anything they
can muster a majority vote on. My investigative query is: Were the Founders
and previous congressmen and presidents, who could not find constitutional
authority for today's bread and circuses, just plain stupid and ignorant? I
don't believe in long-run ignorance or stupidity, so I reread the
Constitution, looking to see whether an amendment had been passed
authorizing Congress to spend money on bailouts for airlines, prescription
drugs, education, Social Security and thousands of similar items in today's
federal budget. I found no such amendment.

Being thorough, I reread the Constitution and found what Congress might
interpret as a blank check authorization -- the "general welfare clause."
Then I investigated further to see what the Framers meant by the "general
welfare clause." In 1798, Thomas Jefferson said,

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but
only those specifically enumerated."

The Constitution's father, James Madison said:

"With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,' I have always regarded
them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To
take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the
Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not
contemplated by its creators."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It is precisely the notion of the preambe giving unlimited powers that got
us into the mess that Mike finds offensive. Yet how many become
extraoridinarily evasive when faced with these points from the very people
that wrote the Constitution in the first place?

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...
We could dabate whether these fall under "provide for the common welfare"
but lets not.


There's nothing to debate. The notion of the Preamble granting Carte Blanche
is probably the most blatent myth of the modern era.


"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...
I would argue that national parks and medical R&D are National issues
and
as
such should be funded at the National level.

And neither are government issues...state of federal.


An artifical rain forest in
Iowa is clearly not a National issue

Quite! That would be one for Disneyland.

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...

Another of my pet peeves is when a business extends different prices
to
different customers.

It's called volume discount.

The poster was purchasing one subscription. I agree that volume discounts
are perfectly fair as long as the same deal is offered to everyone.



"Every man deserves a square deal" Theodore Roosevelt

Speaking of government costs out of control, there's the guy who started
much of it (the American Empire).


The real problem started when the government started distributing money to
individuals, cities and states.

It goes back way before that. Do you think that transition of power just
came down the road one day...with no precedent? You might be dismayed to
find your hero, Lincoln, began the process.

http://www.lneilsmith.com/abelenin.html

http://freedom.orlingrabbe.com/lfeti...al_lincoln.htm

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_ph..._bolshevik.htm

Teddy Roosevelt just continued the trend with the American empire. It was
the only logical conclusion.

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...
| I used to subscribe to IFR until I realized that they offered a much
better
| rate to new subscribers than to existing ones. After realizing this,
my
| four year old decided to subscribe :-). Today he recieved a
solicitation
| from another aviation magazine. Obviously they sold his (and my) name
and
| address. I always check the little box indicating that I don't want
my
| information shared and I don't want to recieve any offers. I will
never
| subscribe to any Belvoire publication again.

Many magazines offer discounts to attract first time subscribers, just
as
landlords offer discounts on the first six months lease, restaurants
offer
two for one specials, etc. It is not an attempt to cheat you.

In sending your son an ad for another magazine, they were no more
dishonest
than you representing yourself as your own son. I figure you're about
even.
Maybe they should send you a letter saying they never want you as a
customer
again. :-)



To be clear, I didn't represent myself as my son.

You couldn't! In that case, you couldn't reach the rudder pedals.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt


You could not have named two that did more to let the "cat outta the
bag".
Well, no, they weren't puppets, but they sure liked to pull the strings.

It's a quetion who money was worse, J. Davis' Confederate money, or
Lincoln's "Greenbacks". Lincoln started us on the road to the
overarching
state, and Teddy gave us the start (and a goodly trip down the road) to
the
Military-Industrial Complex.

And a segregated military.

The military was segregated long before Teddy's time.

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...
Actually ending our dependence on foriegn oil would be pretty easy but
people don't want to do it. In round figures:

We import about a third of our Petroleum
Two thirds of petroleum is used for transportation

It is possible to cut transportation use in half through a combination of
fuel efficiency and more efficient trip planning.

The reason we don't is that the costs are horrendous. As for trip planning
and fuel efficiency, I'd like to see how Soccer Mom's® driving SUV's and
mini-vans are going to improve their trip planning.

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt


You could not have named two that did more to let the "cat outta the
bag".
Well, no, they weren't puppets, but they sure liked to pull the
strings.

It's a quetion who money was worse, J. Davis' Confederate money, or
Lincoln's "Greenbacks". Lincoln started us on the road to the
overarching
state, and Teddy gave us the start (and a goodly trip down the road)
to
the
Military-Industrial Complex.

And a segregated military.

The military was segregated long before Teddy's time.

Nope.

A segregated military was TR's response to Blacks refusing to do a human
wave attack on Spanish machine guns in Cuba.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
nk.net...
Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt


You could not have named two that did more to let the "cat outta the
bag".
Well, no, they weren't puppets, but they sure liked to pull the
strings.

It's a quetion who money was worse, J. Davis' Confederate money, or
Lincoln's "Greenbacks". Lincoln started us on the road to the
overarching
state, and Teddy gave us the start (and a goodly trip down the road)
to
the
Military-Industrial Complex.

And a segregated military.

The military was segregated long before Teddy's time.

Nope.

A segregated military was TR's response to Blacks refusing to do a human
wave attack on Spanish machine guns in Cuba.

You might want to check the records during the Mexican War, the Indian Wars,
the War of Northern Aggression...