Palin Calls Obama's Budget "Immoral"

(AP)  Sarah Palin says President Obama's proposed 2011 budget is "immoral" because it increases the national debt, which she called "generational theft."

Palin told the national "tea party" convention Saturday that America's national debt, which is held largely by other nations, "makes us less free" and "should tick us off."

(Watch Sarah Palin say what she thinks about President Obama below)

More coverage of Sarah Palin's Tea Party address
Palin: "America is Ready for Another Revolution"
Palin: GOP Should Absorb Tea Party

The 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee got one of several standing ovations from the gathering of about 600 people when she said the nation is drowning in debt. The Obama administration argues that much of the nation's debt is being caused by tax cuts and a Medicare drug program enacted under former President George W. Bush.















Watch CBS News Videos Online

[ky7474]

Mortar 29- You say it's been about 100 years since we have been a true constitution. That's pretty close to the time the illegal, corrupt prohibitions on this generation began. I believe much of the divisions and corruptions we see today are a manifestation of those illegal prohibitions. We cannot expect to be a constitutionally correct country until these prohibitaions are lifted and our freedoms reinstated. Corruption does not begat righteousness. It goes against the laws of nature.

[ToolMangler1]

"Main Entry: im·mor·al
Pronunciation: \(?)i(m)-?mo?r-?l, -?mär-\
Function: adjective
Date: 1660
: not moral; broadly : conflicting with generally or traditionally held moral principles"


"Main Entry: 1mor·al
Pronunciation: \?mo?r-?l, ?mär-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin moralis, from mor-, mos custom
Date: 14th century
1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical <moral judgments> b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior"

---------------------------------------------


That being said, It is obvious that the POTUS wannabe has no conception of 'Morals' or the part they play in running a Nation.
If the time ever comes when she has aquired the knowledge and takes steps to impliment this in her lifes philosophy, I will consider her application to lead this country.

[cidaia]

"Stealing from future generations is immoral"

This is a proposition that is true or false regardless of the moral status of the person making the claim.

[cowardlyimbecile]

It was Jefferson who wrote the Kentucky Resolutions that led to the Doctrine of Nullification that led to Civil War. It was Jefferson who sabotaged John Adams' presidency. Jefferson is an eloquent but unstable character.

[wyodutch]

I think the most idiotic statement she made was that she'd support Obama if he started a war with Iran and gave Israel "unlimited support".
.
Evidently this Alaskan rube thinks that the primary duty of an American president is to serve Israel.
.
What a moron.

[cowardlyimbecile]

I'd give the IDF unlimited support if they tracked down Nazis and Jihadis and wannabes and they blew some freakin' heads out some freakin' butts. Hope that doesn't offend.........

[deohgee]

Immoral? I wonder if she thinks underage teenage girls getting pregant is immoral?

[Mortar_29]

Probably. So what?

[wyodutch]

There is no longer any difference between the Republican Thieves Club and the Democrat Liars Club.
.
Enough of the revolving-door carp that gives us two-bit pipsqueaks like Bush and Obama.

[Mortar_29]

Too true!

[cowardlyimbecile]

And enough of those who let us down in WW1 who aren't true Germans, right?

[RobAla]

In this case, the simple fact of the matter is that any continuation of the federal government to rob the funding of future generations just to obtain "goodies" today - is immoral. Not only is it a wrong thing to do to our children and grandchildren, it may come home to roost on the heads of this generation. We are placing the entire economy of the nation at risk; and it is childish and irresponsible. Where did all the adults in Washington go??? We badly need responsible leadership.

[curse914]

" But even more so, close your eyes and imagine for a moment an America without an income tax. April 15 is no longer a day of dread. The federal tax on personal income, corporate income, and capital gains is zero. Estate and gift taxes have been abolished. The most intrusive institution in America, the Internal Revenue Service, has been shut down and its 115,000 auditors and enforcement agents have been disbanded. All federal revenues are collected through a national sales tax, and it is no longer the government's business how much money you make and what you do with it once you earn it. H&R Block has gone into Chapter 11. This would be a beautiful thing!"

=======================

This and your Jefferson quotes (that is one Founder, hardly unified) are predicated on the concept that there is no such thing as advantage and that all knowledge is equal (education). And actually, without context it does not serve much purpose to postulate what the Found Fathers would think about Progressive Taxation. They were after all some of the wealthiest slave owners of the time. The mob chose to "soak the rich" and given bad times, they will choose to soak them again and again.

We gave your form of government a try already, it was the Wild West. Citizens had to protect themselves. The laborer had no leverage and no way to gain access to the means of capital because it is all already owned by a select few.

BTW: It is good to converse with someone educated who has opposing views to mine.


"GIVE me a progressive, achievement-punishing income tax, or give me death!"

-- Patrick Henry

"HAPPINESS, moral duty, and a progressive income tax are inseparably connected."

-- George Washington

"I only regret that I have but a small percentage of my income to give for my country."

-- Nathan Hale

"WHEN in the course of Human Events, it becomes necessary to fund a Welfare State, he that has the most to give, should provide the greatest proportion of his Income."

"THE Tree of Liberty is a fragile one. Its Roots must occasionally be watered by soaking the Rich."

-- Thomas Jefferson

"THESE are the times that try men's souls. The wealthy summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country, by refusing to pay their fair, high share of taxes."

-- Tom Paine

"THE advancement and profusion of an extremely progressive income tax is the only guardian of true liberty. "

-- James Madison

[Mortar_29]

I agree. It has been a good conversation. I wish some of the idiots on here could actually carry on a conversation without insults. Just because we disagree, doesnt mean it has to be personal!!

Your quotes are funny!

On "my system of government," the Founders had found the best fo all worlds. They were students of history. They understood what had worked and what hadnt. They were also students of human nature. And thus, created a form of government that allowed maximum liberty while protecting the individual.

Progressives, on the otherhand, believe man is perfectable. Which, of course, if you are a Christian...is nonsense in the case of human nature. Thus, democracy will never work...ever. It will always lead to tyranny of the masses, and then ultimately, despotism. This is a truism we cannto escape.

The system the Founders gave us allows for the greatest amounts of liberty. Which leads to the greatest amounts of wealth production and standards of living. The American Dream.

The system we have is meant to eliminate mob rule. It is meant to curtail democracy, to make sure that even popular elections do not run rampant over liberty.

We are headed in the wrong direction, fast! It all started with progressives in the early 20th Century. Woodrow Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt were the beginnings of the problems we currently have.

The Founders wrote ad nauseum about what happens when we do what we have been doing. They predicted much of the ills that face our nation.

But our country is no longer interested in history or in truth. We want things now, in our way...no matter if these things have been tried and failed time and time again.

It has been almost 100 years since we were truly a constitutional republic. We have been perating illegally for most of this time...and have sown the seeds of our destruction.

There are two results to this. We either get back on the right track...and our future will be bright (once we clean up this mess).

Or we keep going...and the Union will be destroyed. Many states are already readying for that eventuality. I do not want to see this...but it is inevitable if we dont turn back.

[ToolMangler1]

by Mortar_29 February 7, 2010 5:29 PM EST


Seeing that things are not right with our country is one thing. Plotting the right course is neqrly impossible because you have 300 million different ideas on "WHAT" this nation should be. Obama can't do it, He is a 'Honest Black Man' in a crooked 'white mans job. The opposing party has made it their goal to stop him and make it look like it is his fault.
McCain would have met the same fate as a republican so America loses again.
Now here come "Super" Palin, a Legend in her own mind. She will Grab the Reins and show us 'ALL" how it is done.........................
WHAMMMMMM!!!....... BBBAAAAAAMMMMMM........... <silence>
wwweeeeellllllll....... Seems that our (Ansrwer to everything) has come to a full stop!!
What can be the trouble??? OH!!!!! I see... She just hit the wall of reality and as the head of a brand new party weith no experience she has alienated the other two parties and is exactly where the shrub was at the end of his two terms. (she didn't even see it coming. and has not built any aliances in the other partys) My My My!!! don't we have an interesting future...

[curse914]

It seems your trimmed down government would result in an ineffectual government. The wealthy can only purchase so many TVs. This would require analysis of the budget ie. what does the Labor department, SEC and other very important agencies that protect individuals poor and otherwise require.

What do you think of capital gains tax?

You do realize that there is a lot of precedent for the Constitutionality of the Federal government governing the individual citizen in parallel with the State, right?


Ideologically, I do think that an employer who benefits from an even partially educated citizen should be paying a higher portion of the cost of educating those employee. These employees are absolutely needed for the business to function. North Dakota with there small constituency would have to figure out how to get by without text books. Actually the premise of the Electoral College is that these less populated states would not get the representation (funding) they "need" should the majority rule (one man, one vote).

I like to bring up rural electrification, because there is no way these rural areas could afford to get those lines out to their people. But the government presumably representing the views of the majority of Americans thought this would benefit the nation as a whole.

[Mortar_29]

First off, the ultimate precedent is the Constitution. So, any "precedent" that came after the Constitution, that is in violation of the Constitution...well, it is unConstitutional. Nothing can supercede the Constitution.

I am against a capital gains tax. I am with Jefferson...we should all, individuals and businesses alike, be able to retain the fruits of our labor. we should only be taxed once on our property...not many times, such as when we earn it, then when we spend it.

If the Federal government lived within its Constitutional bounds, it would only need about 1/3rd of what it currently takes in. Funding it through a consumption tax (national sales tax) would take care of that nicely, depending on the rate of the tax.

And yes, each CONSTITUTIONAL department would need to figure out what they need for a budget, as they should be doing now! The unConstitutional departments can just fold up shop and head home.

On education of people, that is not a power the States gave to the Federal government. If the power was not given to them, then the Federal government must remain silent. States are free to tax whomever in their State they want, for how much they want, for education. If your state wants to tax businesses at a higher rate to pay for education, then so be it. that is perfectly legal.

On the electrification deal, the Federal government did have a role here...within the interstate commerce portion of its powers. Thus, connecting states to each other via power lines, building of dams and waterways between states, would be a power of regulation that the Federal government can and should be involved in, via the Constitution.

Where it has no power and cannot dictate anything, is anything that goes on in a State of a intrastate nature. Even something that is an interstate issue...let's say power lines...the Federal government only has power over that which has to do with the interstate portion of the issue. All other parts of the issue still belong to the States.

[ToolMangler1]

This article is about Palins wet dream of taking over the USA in 2012. If you wish to have a discussion about the constitution, please do it elsewhere.

[Mortar_29]

Who died and made you king? How about if you dont like what we are discussing, then go somewhere else?

[starving1968-3]

All you have to do is ask Mort to "post the facts" or "do you have links to that lie that you just fabricated".

Once you start calling him out, he tucks tail and runs every time.


Here's a good one from just the other day, where I was called a liar, because he couldn't remember what he typed just 20 minutes earlier:


by Mortar_29 February 5, 2010 9:28 AM EST
Again, shut it all down and we wont have that problem!


by Mortar_29 February 5, 2010 9:48 AM EST
You are listening to Starving. I didnt say shut it all down. Just the illegal parts!