Do you support universal health care?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Enlighten me NDN what alternative do you have to our current system? National Health Care wouldn't necesarily be the best but our system as it is broken...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The corps want national health care because it would be CHEAPER than now. You can tell our health care system is FAIL when even drastically increasing government is cheaper...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

True but euro countries manage it without the kind of problems we have. Then again unlike many liberals I'm willing to see reality on taxes/spending...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Why not let the states experiment with solutions?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

One thing all of us(me, Ernst, Yak's hairbrust, NDN) can agree on is that we shouldn't cover things like elective surgery, erectile dysfunction medicine or free coke for cokeheads

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

The Constitution is an outdated document for a past time.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

I'm perfectly serious. We need to toss it out and replace it with a document which keeps most of what's in it currently but clears it up(so we don't have things like the supreme court after the ACW forcing unrestricted capitalism on the country until the 30s).

1 Meh. I'd reserve the right to vote for the more educated and or people who have some money. This is to keep out the bumpkin/peasant types.
2 I'd clarify free speech as to prevent government attempts at things like FCC censorship/mandating filters in libraries.
3 I'd strenghen the first amendment to state that the US is a secular nation and not a christian nation.
4 Keep that
5 to 10- I'd keep it.
11 Yawn. I'd keep democracy but do some changes to it.

I'm not talking about replacing it with stalinism. Simply clearing it up.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Given how I'd clarify the language of the constitution abotu 90% of the current wording would be removed at minimum.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

A constitution is written precisely so that a government does not so readily fluctuate with 'the times,' or more precisely, the passions (often irrational) of the present political majority. The objection is not to a particular method of interpreting a constitution, but to the very nature of a constitution itself.

Sounds like a quotation from someone, but, from whom?

Uh, what? The 'quotation' is from me.

I don't think you are allowed to quote yourself under Straha's new and improved Constitution. 

My Constittion 2.0 doesn't remove the free speech clause. In fact it strenghens it to prevent things like FCC censorship, mandating censorship of the internet in schools/libraries. You fail.