Val Jarret...government is for.....livelihood????

[newtothegame]

Obama’s Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett: The Point of Government Is to Give People a Livelihood so They Can Provide for Their Families

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obamas-senior-advisor-valerie-jarrett-to-african-americans-the-point-of-government-is-to-give-people-a-livelihood-so-they-can-provide-for-their-families/

Umm here's some news for ya valerie......That is NOT what the government is for.....
At least they are open about their agenda!!

[Tom]

Amazing!
How do these people cross the street without getting hit?
The brightest and best........not in this administration! :lol:

[ArlJim78]

what percentage of Americans agree with her? I'm afraid its not a small insignificant portion. we have been dumbed down and force fed this notion for years now, that good ole uncle sam will take care of our needs for our whole lifetime. many people have the idea that we are the United States of Government

[Tom]

If one agrees with her, is one rally an American?
I don't think so.

[boxcar]

If one agrees with her, is one rally an American?
I don't think so.

Oh, now, now....you have just insulted this site's premier "patriots": Hcap, Mosty, NJ, Sec, SugarPlum, FannyDan, Goren, etc.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

Obama’s Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett: The Point of Government Is to Give People a Livelihood so They Can Provide for Their Families

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obamas-senior-advisor-valerie-jarrett-to-african-americans-the-point-of-government-is-to-give-people-a-livelihood-so-they-can-provide-for-their-families/

Umm here's some news for ya valerie......That is NOT what the government is for.....
At least they are open about their agenda!!
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

In case you don't recognize it, the above is the Preamble to the United States Constitution. This Preamble states five reasons for the enactment of the Constitution. One of these is to "Promote the General Welfare." In this case, "Welfare" is defined as health, happiness, prosperity and well being.

This does not mean, and Jarrett did not say, that everyone should work for the government. It means that government should afford everyone the opportunity to work at a well paying and safe job. It means that there are times when government must insert itself into the economic picture by initiating necessary projects which will help business to provide jobs.

Necessary projects would include repairing roads and bridges, building schools, modernizing our electrical grid.

[bigmack]

It means that there are times when government must insert itself into the economic picture by initiating necessary projects which will help business to provide jobs.

Necessary projects would include repairing roads and bridges, building schools, modernizing our electrical grid.
Golly, it sure sounds neat. Let's hear more from your buddy.

4p4-vPrcDBo

[so.cal.fan]

Valerie Jarrett is a MARXIST.
Marxist's are responsible for 100 million deaths in the last century.
:mad:

[mostpost]

Valerie Jarrett is a MARXIST.
Marxist's are responsible for 100 million deaths in the last century.
:mad:

From wikipedia:

Until joining the Obama Administration, Jarrett was the CEO of The Habitat Company, a real estate development and management company which she joined in 1995. She has been replaced by Mark Segal, a lawyer who joined the company in 2002, as CEO. Daniel E. Levin is the Chairman of Habitat, which was formed in 1971.[7] Jarrett was a member of the board of Chicago Stock Exchange (2000–2007, as Chairman, 2004–2007).
She is also the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University of Chicago Medical Center,[6] Vice Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University of Chicago and a Trustee of Chicago's Museum of Science and Industry.[8] Jarrett serves on the board of directors of USG Corporation, a Chicago based building materials corporation.

Amazing how many Real Estate CEOs are Marxists. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And the Chicago Stock Exchange is a well known hive of Marxists. :rolleyes:

You do not have a clue about what a Marxist is or who is a Marxist. :mad: :mad:

[PaceAdvantage]

You do not have a clue about what a Marxist is or who is a Marxist. :mad: :mad:Are you sure about that? Because it appears this Jarret character is giving off plenty of them (clues that is).

[ArlJim78]

Jarret is a Chicago area slumlord, we know that much. Part of the same corrupt group as Obama and Rezko

[boxcar]

From wikipedia:



Amazing how many Real Estate CEOs are Marxists. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And the Chicago Stock Exchange is a well known hive of Marxists. :rolleyes:

You do not have a clue about what a Marxist is or who is a Marxist. :mad: :mad:

Don't you know that there there are two classes in Marxism? This hypocrite is obviously in the Elite Class -- the very class she will swear she despises.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Obama is a marxist......values of Karl, brains of Groucho, oratory skills of Harpo.

[PaceAdvantage]

Obama is a marxist......values of Karl, brains of Groucho, oratory skills of Harpo.Is this a Tom original? If so, I have to give you a patented "Amen Bruddah" for that one... :ThmbUp:

[Tom]

Is this a Tom original? If so, I have to give you a patented "Amen Bruddah" for that one... :ThmbUp:

Do we have a bowing emoticon? :D

[HUSKER55]

SEE WHAT A GOOD BREAKFAST WILL DO FOR YOU! :D :D

[so.cal.fan]

Remember Chico, he was the TOUT in the classic Marx brother's Day at the Races!

Obama is a TOUT....he touts destructive "obamacare" and other socialism proven failure ideas.

Most of us here on Pace Advantage don't fall for touts. In fact our wonderful moderator and owner of this popular blog.....I believe doesn't allow such shady characters (touts) on this board?

Mike may let Obama sign on, however, because there would be some lively traffic, we may get more hits than the DRUDGE report! :lol:

[hcap]

Do we have a bowing emoticon? :DMaybe, but how about

http://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/g/gagging-928.gif

[Tom]

You made my day! :D

[melman]

Speaking of the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson wrote this "NO provision in our constitution ought to be dearer to man that that which PROTECTS the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority". Mostpost would stand that statement on it's head. But of course he knows more about the Constitution that Mr Jefferson. In his worldview the "correct, the smart people (i.e."progressive liberals) will set the government regs and all most follow.

[Tom]

Great point, melman!
The whole point of the constitution was to LIMIT what the government could do to specific things. The FREEDOM of the individual was goal.

[melman]

Tom---Not sure who said this or even if it's an exact quote but "The more laws that a nation passes the less freedoms it has". What is worse in todays world is government regs are being used the same as new laws.

[Tom]

Obama believes in government of the people, by the people, and in spite of the people.

[fast4522]

Bullshit!

[mostpost]

Speaking of the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson wrote this "NO provision in our constitution ought to be dearer to man that that which PROTECTS the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority". Mostpost would stand that statement on it's head. But of course he knows more about the Constitution that Mr Jefferson. In his worldview the "correct, the smart people (i.e."progressive liberals) will set the government regs and all most follow.
Here is the whole quote; "No provision in our Constitution ought to be dearer to man than that which protects the rights of conscience against the enterprises of the civil authority. It has not left the religion of its citizens under the power of its public functionaries, were it possible that any of these should consider a conquest over the consciences of men either attainable or applicable to any desirable purpose."
Jefferson was writing on religion. The provision he refers to is the First Amendment. You're trying to make us believe that Jefferson was advocating anarchy, where every man can pick and choose what laws he wants to obey. There is a name for people like that. CRIMINALS.

No doubt you found that quote somewhere and thought it expressed your views. But when we see the whole quote it means something quite different than what you think.

[mostpost]

Tom---Not sure who said this or even if it's an exact quote but "The more laws that a nation passes the less freedoms it has". What is worse in todays world is government regs are being used the same as new laws.
I tried googling that quote and came up with zero results. More importantly it is just nonsense.

In 1935 we passed the Social Security Act. What freedom did that take away? The freedom to spend your declining years in poverty? In 1965 we passed the Medicare Act. What freedom did that take away? The freedom to die of treatable diseases because you can't afford the cure. In the early part of the last century we passed laws forbidding the employment of children. What freedom did that take away? The freedom to kill our children? We have passed laws protecting the environment. Sounds like a blow to our freedom to destroy the planet to me.

If you are a homeowner and want to run an auto body shop out of your garage, that is a freedom you should not have. If you run a print shop and decide to throw ink into the alley, that is a freedom you should not have. If you are a doctor and decide this sterilization thing is overblown, that is a freedom you should not have.

[melman]

I believe you missed the entire point of my post and Mr Jeffersons statement.
My biggest fear is a central authority with too MUCH power. Yours seems to be a central authority with no enough power. Of course there is a need for a central authority no one I know would think any differently. Abuse of to much central authority power leads to people like Stalin, Mao, Hitler. To little leads to abuse of people by greedy people with no morals. Let's take an example that is not so dumb as those you have listed. NJ Stinks likes to smoke. He knows this is very bad for him. Should we pass a law that says he must stop?? NJ has also posted about how he would like to be able to go into a casino or sports betting place and light up. No not in the entire area but in an area just for those who smoke. I agree with him. Not because I smoke but because I believe he should have that freedom. Maybe just maybe on your list of freedoms that I should NOT have you would like to add my ability to freely express my views. By far the worst governments this world has ever seen were ones with to much central authority. Or maybe you would like to go back to the days of Stalin's "re-education camps". The gulags? I guess you think they were a myth.

[melman]

It's funny you mentioned SS. Yes I feel that did take away my freedom. Also created a group of people who believe that the central government will take care of you no matter how wasteful you were during your lifetime. You seem to not like people who take personal responeability. Your government is your granddaddy and will take care of you.

[mostpost]

I believe you missed the entire point of my post and Mr Jeffersons statement.
I got the point of your post and I am saying that Mr. Jefferson's statement does not back up your opinion. Mr. Jefferson feels government should have no power in the area of religion. But Mr. Jefferson never said your right to practice your religion as a Christian includes the right to persecute other religions. Just as your right to post on this board does not include the right to slander other posters. (Which you have never done.)
My biggest fear is a central authority with too MUCH power. Yours seems to be a central authority with no enough power. Of course there is a need for a central authority no one I know would think any differently. Abuse of to much central authority power leads to people like Stalin, Mao, Hitler. To little leads to abuse of people by greedy people with no morals.

What we disagree on here is where the tipping point comes and what the role of government is in society. You can not look at the number of regulations a government has imposed and use just that as a guide to how repressive a government is. Of course we have more regulations now than in the 19th century. We have a much more complex civilization.



Let's take an example that is not so dumb as those you have listed. NJ Stinks likes to smoke. He knows this is very bad for him. Should we pass a law that says he must stop?? NJ has also posted about how he would like to be able to go into a casino or sports betting place and light up. No not in the entire area but in an area just for those who smoke. I agree with him. Not because I smoke but because I believe he should have that freedom. Maybe just maybe on your list of freedoms that I should NOT have you would like to add my ability to freely express my views. By far the worst governments this world has ever seen were ones with to much central authority. Or maybe you would like to go back to the days of Stalin's "re-education camps". The gulags? I guess you think they were a myth.

NJ can smoke at home (if his wife lets him :lol: ) He can smoke outdoors. Banning smoking everywhere is as good an idea as prohibition. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: As far a designated smoking areas, there is no such thing. At least some of the people in the nonsmoking area will be near enough the smoking area to be affected, especially in an open floor plan like in casinos and sports books.

[mostpost]

It's funny you mentioned SS. Yes I feel that did take away my freedom. Also created a group of people who believe that the central government will take care of you no matter how wasteful you were during your lifetime. You seem to not like people who take personal responeability. Your government is your granddaddy and will take care of you.

Quite the opposite of discouraging personal responsibility, Social Security encourages it. Maybe you did not notice it, but money is (was?) being taken out of your check every pay day for Social Security. What you earn is based on what you put in. So if you are irresponsible and don't work, you don't get Social Security. It's not a gift. It's not welfare. It's definitely, absolutely, positively. without a doubt, not a Ponzi scheme.

[Mike at A+]

Quite the opposite of discouraging personal responsibility, Social Security encourages it. Maybe you did not notice it, but money is (was?) being taken out of your check every pay day for Social Security. What you earn is based on what you put in. So if you are irresponsible and don't work, you don't get Social Security. It's not a gift. It's not welfare. It's definitely, absolutely, positively. without a doubt, not a Ponzi scheme.
Social Security is a reverse life insurance policy. If you live, you collect. But unlike a life insurance policy, you're forced to pay into it. Obamacare is a forced health insurance policy. You must buy health insurance if Obama says you can afford it. If he thinks you can't afford it, Obama gives it to you for free at the expense of those who he thinks can afford it. The freeloaders all vote for Obama to no one's surprise.

[melman]

Of course SS is taken out of your paycheck and the employer's pocket. I would much prefer the FREEDOM to do with that money which I earned to invest in my own savings plan. To me this is the federal govenment "your not smart enough or wise enough or prudent enought to plan ahead for your own retirement. One thing I do like is Mrs Obama message to youth to maintain a good diet and to get excerise. This is what should be done not pass a law that says you MUST do it. I have no problem with putting a fat content message on items but they are mostly ignored anyway. Don't you find it ironic that in our country so many are saying "people are starving" and yet we have a major obesity problem. And that problem is not confined to rich kids.