Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Fox News" channel.

  1. Bernie has an energetic base of people with no jobs. This is normal for a Bernie crowd. Being the loudest does not mean he has the majority though. On Monday afternoon most people are either working or preparing for the next day.
    6
  2.  @mgbgth5097  he doesn't. It was all fear mongering with him until Biden becomes president. Now Biden is president he is all positive. Besides, the vaccination program was started under Trump, and prior Biden entering office cases, both active and new daily ones, were dropping.
    5
  3.  @mrscelopez57  no one is forcing people to go to her salon.
    5
  4. No. This made Bernie look bad. He did not answer any questions and just spewed talking points.
    4
  5.  san juanita cruz  she was. You have a right to run your business. Also, no law was broken. Basically the judge used his position to imprison someone he disagreed with.
    4
  6. Most likely she only agreed to come on if they did not challenge her.
    3
  7.  Simon Chase  doesn't matter. Government officials will always use the excuse of keeping people "safe" to strip you of your rights. That is why the bill of rights exist. I rather take the risk of people catching the virus than have government officials imprison use to keep us "safe".
    3
  8.  @rationalvids9836 , and Bernie took advantage of it when he didn't have to. He donated 3% of his income to charity which is for someone of his income. He got rich off of his book that he could have posted for free online but didn't. The fact is that he is a corrupt politician where he wants others to pay but not himself. It is OK for him to use capitalism to get rich and for him to pay low taxes but not others.
    3
  9. She thinks it is in Palestine.
    3
  10. I feel a strong republican take over come November. Left wing politicians think the American people are dumb. Some are and are scared. But enough aren't and are going about their business. When enough people see nothing bad happening others will follow suit and will vote out these fools.
    3
  11. He did not answer any questions.
    3
  12. +Kevin Allen All a corporation can do is offer you a product and a job. It is government that can use force to make you do something. Last time I check I wasn't driving the speed limit because of a corporation, I was because of the cop around the corner.
    2
  13. Bernie fans are too far gone. Most people see the same thing you did.
    2
  14.  @younggotti8195  , exactly. He just repeats the same talking points. This is exactly what I expected from him. He just did this to grandstand and say his talking points to a right wing crowd who is too smart to fall for his BS.
    2
  15. Sanders is not kind nor genuine. However, Warren is a liar and has done so many times. At this point I don't see how anyone can support Warren.
    2
  16. Bernie fans are economic illiterate.
    2
  17. They have no jobs
    2
  18. Our standard of living is higher. I am typing to you through the internet. Compare that to 20 years ago when this was hardly possible, or even 30 years ago with this was essentially impossible. Our cars are better, our life span is higher, I have a smart phone that has access to internet, can text, play music, has a calculator, etc. Compare my standard of living to a rich person from the 50s and I am way better off.
    2
  19. He just deflected to Trump's tax return. This is how Bernie acts, he deflects and has no real answers.
    2
  20. This guy just repeats the same talking points over and over again. How does he expect to win.
    2
  21.  @Ryooken  vaccine mandates are only legal when done locally. Federal mandates on private citizens are being challenged in the courts now as they are arguably unconstitutional.
    2
  22.  @Ryooken  1777: That vaccine mandate was on federal troops, not private citizens. That is why it was legal. 1813: Ok, not a mandate though 1902: Sure, still no mandate 1977: Again, no mandate What you are laying out are not mandates. That is why Biden's vaccine mandate is being challenged in courts. It begs the question of the role of the federal government. The role of the federal government is to deal with foreign affairs and commerce between states. Arguably, an institution like OSHA should not exist. But even with it existing all it can do is create workplace safety regulations. A vaccine mandate is not that because if you are vaccinated you are safe. OSHA is about preventing putting others at risk. Also, many federal programs you listed simply encourage something. Compare it to the Department of Ed. States set up their own education standards, not the department of ed. All they do is recommend a standard and offer money to those who follow them. When Common Core was created many states refused to adopt it. So the federal government can't mandate things domestically at that point.
    2
  23.  @Ryooken  you are not a lawyer either bud. On the mandates there are challenges to them, especially the federal ones. When Biden did his mask mandate all he could do were mandates on federal property. That was it. That is because the federal government is limited in domestic laws they can pass. The vaccine mandate is arguably unconstitutional as it goes beyond the limits of the federal government.
    2
  24.  @Ryooken  I feel you are lying bud. If you know what you are talking about you would know that there are limits to the federal government. Basically, unless interstate commerce is involved there is really nothing the federal government can do. That is why Biden's mask mandate was just for federal property. And this is why the vaccine mandate is being challenged in the courts as no other time did such a mandate ever exist in the US.
    2
  25.  @kevinjackson1893  yep, also, the definition of an "anti vaxxer" was changed as well. Apparently me being against vaccine mandates makes me an "anti vaxxer" even though I took the vaccine. In reality, me being against the vaccine mandates makes me someone who questions the government's intentions and feel it should have limits. In reality, it has nothing to do with vaccines but limitations on governments as a whole.
    2
  26. +Dylan Taylor It isn't about less government but controlling government like the founding fathers wanted with the constitution. The reason why we have corruption and a "rigged economy" as Bernie puts it in the US is because of the overpower federal government that can be bought. Remove the power from the fed, go back to more state rights and you will have the corruption gone and a better economy.
    1
  27. +doubtingmantis The problem with Bernie is that while he may be sincere, he won't last forever. After he gives more power to the federal government what is going to prevent future politicians from abusing it? You have to limit the power at the federal level and give it back to the states. Money in politics is nothing more than a symptom of a disease. That disease is a federal government with too much power.
    1
  28. +doubtingmantis If you want control of the government you have to make it as local as possible. With smaller, more local government you are able to see if it is actually working for the people and remaining the servants. Bernie wants to expand the federal government which will make it so we lose the control. Most people like their representatives, they just like others. This is easily seen with congress having an approval rating of around 10% but a 96% retention rate. This was also displayed in the mid 1700s, the colonies were paying a lower tax rate then the British were. The colonist just wanted to be free from a government that was overseas and wanted a more local government.
    1
  29. +Mike Stavenes Read the constitution. The federal government is not supposed to be running most of what it does. And the federal taxes that are around are not supposed to exist. But they do, and those with money take advantage of it. That is why Warren Buffet pays a lower percent then her secretary.
    1
  30. +Mike Stavenes The basic idea of the constitution still holds, it was to place strict limitations on governments, especially the federal government. You can make changes but such changes are hard. "Are you saying there are un-Constitutional things that the government is doing? " Yes. The constitution lists what the fed can do, anything else is left up to the states. Basically almost all of what Bernie Sanders wants is unconstitutional. Individual federal taxes were unconstitutional until 1913. A "fair" tax system would be to go back to that or a flat tax.
    1
  31. +Mike Stavenes The tax laws changed due to the 16th amendment. The federal government has always had taxes, they taxed the states based on population. That is a fact that very few people sadly don't know, that there never use to be federal individual taxes but instead taxes on the states. We had a military before federal income taxes.
    1
  32. +Mike Stavenes ".but there's no way the US would have the resources to build a military like the one it has now" Yes it can by cutting other programs it should not be involved in. Plus at the local level resources are managed better meaning less waste. "Basic tariffs and levies might be enough to fund infrastructure expansion and maintain the status-quo" Which the federal government should not be involved in "Income taxes not only got the country through those wars, it helped to strengthen the middle-class economy all the way up to the 80's" That is false. We were fine after the war of 1812 without an income tax. "he entire US standard of living is supported by income taxes" Actually it is hindered "the more you invest in your own country, the nicer it is to live there." Nope, the less waste there is the better it will be. "Unless you have selfish, greedy politicians sucking like vampires off the system" And we have to control politicians, that means smaller, more local government.
    1
  33. +Mike Stavenes A few things. One, during the 50s, 60s and 70s the rest of the world was rebuilding while the US wasn't. Also what happened in the 70s was that we got off the gold standard. It is of no surprise the economy has struggled. Where do you get that 55-60% from? It is more around 20%. http://www.cbpp.org/research/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go That is from a liberal site who are typically against military spending. What government is supposed to be working for me, and how? Why can't the government work for those private interest groups? They are voters as well? That is why we need smaller, more local government. That is the government that works for you.
    1
  34. +Mike Stavenes I did, what's your point? Also defense spending is constitutional, social programs are not. That is the major difference.
    1
  35. +Mike Stavenes The constitution creates a balance in having government and being able to control it. The federal government is not supposed to be involved in those welfare programs because it is not listed in the constitution. With that those programs default to the states. It isn't to say that those programs are not necessary or helpful, it is saying that we need to keep control of the government. The article is from a left leaning think tank. So of course they will say those programs work. I cited it showing that over 50% of federal spending is not in military. It is highly debated if those programs even work. But besides that point they are unconstitutional. The constitution places limitations on all government, especially the federal so prevent tyranny. You have no problem going against the constitution as long as the ends justify the means. Consider this then, would you support removing the 4th amendment if it were going to lower crime? If the government had the ability to randomly search people's property it can see if anyone is doing any illegal activities. Who knows, they could have caught Holmes before he shot that movie theater. So now the point becomes how far are you willing to go in allowing the federal government to grow? I have a limit and it is written down, where is yours?
    1
  36. +Mike Stavenes The constitution was limitations on government. It wasn't designed to include scenarios but was designed to keep government in control. Changing the constitution is like pulling teeth, it isn't easy. It isn't easy to change federal law. Only 6 congress members represent my state. 6 our of 535. That is not representation which is why the founding fathers wanted a limited federal government and more state rights.
    1
  37. +Mike Stavenes New admendments were added but for the most part, with the exception of a few, they were amendments that expanded the idea of limiting government (like the 14th amendment). You are making it sound like that government can't do anything. That is not true. The constitution lists the role of the federal government. If something isn't listed then it falls to the responsibility of the state via the 10th amendment. Federal taxes are legal via the 16th amendment. But welfare programs are not. And the SC has made unconstitutional rulings in the past like in the Kelo vs City of New London case.
    1
  38. +Mike Stavenes General welfare means covering everyone. So when the federal government runs the military it is protecting the entire country. Welfare programs is taking money from one group of people and giving it to another. That is not general, that is selective. The federal government is giving welfare to people at the expense of others. Thus those welfare programs you support are not constitutional. It is very clear but of course politicians love to pull fast ones by people. That is the exact reason why the founding fathers wanted to place strict limitations on governments, especially the federal government.
    1
  39. +Mike Stavenes I did read the article. What you said is not true. The federal government, with the exception of treason, had no control over individuals. Individual income taxes at the federal level was unconstitutional. Plus, holding a gun to someone's head and forcing them to give someone else money is not looking after everyone. There is a role for government, and society can use government as a means of helping people, but that is at the state and local level. States were to control those programs. You complaining about the rich getting richer. The rich have no power at all except offering you a job and/or a product. Government can use force and that is it. That is why the founding fathers developed the constitution, it was to place strict limitations on governments, especially the federal. This goes back to if you want to remove rights to make America better in your eyes then why not start with the 4th amendment? Have the government randomly search people's homes. I have nothing to hide, do you? Or remove the 1st amendment. A lot of stupidity is played over the media, have the government prevent that. The constitution was not about forcing people to help others, it was about limitations on the governments.
    1
  40. +Mike Stavenes What is the "right thing"? Do you want me to to start giving food to the needy? I myself am poor. Also, in my city there was a company that was doing that. It created problems because at a certain time homeless people gathered outside the door and they started to get violent. What are the sayings? No good deed goes unpunished, or if you give them an inch they take a mile. What is the right thing is subjective and different across the country. Around 70% of fire fighters in this country are volunteers, but that is mainly in rural areas. In cities they can't expect that so they push for funding for the fire department. Every state in the country face different issues. What the "right thing" to do in one state is different in another. You can't have a one size fits all policy. Plus, who determines what if right and what isn't? Say I become successful and earn $300,000 a year. Is that right? Or should I see my money taken from me? What if I am saving up to send my kids to a great college to become an engineer that develops a great source of alternative energy. If I have my money taken away because it is the "right thing" in your eyes I can't do that.
    1
  41. +Mike Stavenes Yes, that can work on adults. You are saying "do the right thing" which is what? Define what that is? You are supporting the government using force to have have people give away their money. Is that right? You are setting arbitrary standards. In reality your argument won't work with adults. Telling children to do the right thing won't work on adults.
    1
  42. +Mike Stavenes "Common sense" is not a valid argument. When I hear someone say "common sense" I see them as either 1. being condescending 2. not having any clue what they are talking about because they can't make a valid point beyond that When you do something at times it is at the expense of others. I work a job where I am salary. I closed down the business at 8 pm kicking people out that need help. Now I can stay open but now that is hurting me. I already work 12 hour days. Should I work more to help others at the expense of my free time? But closing down means they don't get help even though they need it? According to you I am doing the right and wrong thing at the same time.
    1
  43. +Chad “Artifical Bio-Furry Lord” Robert The Koch brothers donated a lot of their money and actually produced things in our society. . All Bernie does is take.
    1
  44. +Tom Hickson So he wants another depression.
    1
  45. +john olmos Socialism hurts the middle class the most. The rich will be fine in that they can afford to pay double for things (such as public education and private education). The poor benefits off of those that actually work. The middle class can't afford private options along with paying for public options by force, thus they settle for the low quality public options.
    1
  46. +john olmos Private options are always the best in quality. Why do you want to prevent people from getting that option? " European countries have more of a socialist based society than we do. Their economic growth is a lot slower than ours, but they excel in a lot more than us. We rank last in Healthcare outcomes and are being passed up in our educational standards. " Those countries are also a lot smaller than us. It is not a valid comparison. And I can easily argue that the US is doing better in healthcare and education when compared to those countries. "Compared to tuition free (Tax funded) colleges around the world." And the US has the best university system in the world. "do you directly pay for private transportation, Fire Department, police, military, public utilities like garbage,sewers, and water treatment facilities. Do you pay to use the public roads and freeways ?" Most of those are locally funded which is constitutional and completely different to what you are trying to compared. You are trying to support federal programs by pointing towards local programs. That is like trying to justify a strategy in football at the pro level because it works with a high school team. It isn't a strong comparison. There is a difference in power and balance of power involved. It is why the founding fathers wanted smaller more local government. "We can afford it if we reorganize what the government spends and add taxes where it matters." No we can't. "healthcare inflation cost isn't caused by physicians and other allied health providers it's inflated because of big pharma and health care administration." It is actually because the federal government got involved in healthcare. "The Canadian hospital in Toronto has 2 health care administrators." It also has longer wait times and lower quality of care. "Government is better at that, as hard as that sounds it's true. We're a quasi-socialist nation and have been since FDR." And most of our problems come from that. Also under FDR we saw a depression under his policies.
    1
  47. +cristi1990an Government run programs are always inferior compared to the private sector. With that the only people who can afford private will be the rich. Thus the middle class will have to settle for the public option which is inferior. You also have to consider that the rich don't pay the taxes, they pass it on down to the workers and consumers. If you think the rich are going to just sit there and allow you take their money without resistance then you are foolish. Seemed like you have failed logic.
    1
  48. +Andreas Seifert Police: Locally funded Hospitals: Locally funded Laws: Most laws a local Military: Constitutional for the federal government to fund Fire departments: Locally funded, and around 70% of fire fighters are volunteers People want to restrict the fed like the country was designed. What you pointed out was examples that we can and still have those programs since they are locally funded.
    1
  49. He did not try to overthrow anything. He told people to go peacefully. He also told people to stop the riots in tweets that twitter took down.
    1
  50. But he is not following the CDC guidelines for reopening
    1
  51. He has no answers. That is the issue
    1
  52. True. That is what makes him a hypocrite. It is OK for him to get rich selling a book that really doesn't benefit anyone (and he could have posted it for free). But it is wrong for Bezos to start a company that creates jobs and makes shopping easier to for customers including selling Bernie's book. That is his logic.
    1
  53. On Bernie's town hall discussion recently he had a group of "experts" on his panel. One was a lawyer and another was AOC. Only one scientist out of the group. Apparently they are all "experts" to him. That is how low of a standard the far left has.
    1
  54. He never could. He just has talking points and deflects. This is why he will lose big time.
    1
  55. Jeff Allen had a great joke asking the same thing about running a cash register at a starbucks.
    1
  56. It makes the democratic party look like morons. People are going to view them as dumb and vote republican.
    1
  57. $32 trillion is a gross under estimate. It would cost much more. Universal healthcare would be much more expensive than the system we have now.
    1
  58. Right away on the first question he just went on a rant of M4A and calling Trump anti science (which is ironic considering how Bernie is anti science himself). Bernie simply dodged the question to push is communist talking points.
    1
  59. I bet most of them littered and did not clean up after wards. That is typically how they act.
    1
  60. This is all going to come to an end? Really? When you give government power they rarely give it up. Go through the next few months? At the beginning it was about flattening the curve and preventing hospitals from being over ran. It was never about waiting until finding a cure.
    1
  61. The best ultra leftists can muster is saying "Norway" or "Denmark". Reality is that many people have broken down these issues and people like AOC are in the wrong. If she does win that would be a victory for Republicans as she will not be smart enough to write a bill that is worth a shit.
    1
  62.  @rationalvids9836 , he dodged the tax question relating to him being a millionaire. If he feels the rich should pay more than why doesn't he donate more? Why did he take advantage of the loopholes? Also, he became rich off of his book sales. When addressed that is capitalism he deflected. If you want I can go question by question for you and explain to you if he answered it or not. Most he did not answer. He just deflected to his usual talking points.
    1
  63.  @glennpearson9348  the federal government is there for two things. Deal with foreign affairs and commerce between states. For the programs you listed Highways: Commerce between states for travel Roads and bridges: Same as highways, however, 3/4 of funding for roads and bridges are state and local to begin with. The only ones funded federally are ones that travel through multiple states. Airports: Funny you bring up international airports, as in foreign affairs Funding for disasters: States have to approve of them. When Katrina happened the governor of LA delayed in accepting federal aid from Bush leading people to think Bush failed and was called a racist. In reality, the federal government cannot enforce state law without consent of the governor Regulation on food and drugs: Again, only if done over state lines. Watch the movie "Tapped". At one part they discussed how a certain water bottle company does not have to follow federal regulations as they operated in only one state. Drinking water federal funds: States do not have to accept it. It is the same as the Department of Ed and education standards. States don't have to follow them and many don't. NASA: A part of foreign affairs Yes, please read the Constitution.
    1
  64. Very little indicates that universal healthcare would be cheaper. Other countries make it cheaper by lowering the quality. Also, you have no clue how insurance works.
    1
  65. @Jose Velez , it isn't consistence, it is deflection. He repeats the same talking points over and over again and never answers the questions. He never gets into details. This town hall was, once again, him grand standing. As I write this he was challenged on him writing a book and making money and how that is capitalism. He just deflected to saying that everyone should have nice things. That is not answer the question because that is how everyone feels, we just have different ideas how to accomplish it. He never describes what Democratic Socialism is.
    1
  66. @Jose Velez , Bernie believes in centralizing the economy where the federal government essentially controls and dictates it. I have read his Medicare for All bill. It makes private insurance illegal to where the federal government will have to address many economic issues such as job loss due to people losing jobs in the private sector after private insurance is outlawed and local communities losing tax revenue when insurance companies fold and no longer pay property taxes, that is just to name a couple of many. Consider that healthcare is 1/6 of our economy. Bernie does not connect well with people. He comes off as an angry old guy that just yells the same things over and over again. And with Trump's success it is getting worse.
    1
  67. Bernie said in an interview that other people can sell a book to make millions. On that logic than anyone can start a company like Bezos did to make millions as well. Bernie is a hack.
    1
  68. Yeah, what you wrote is completely wrong. To start, Trump never said to take horse pills. If you are talking about ivermectin there is a dosage level for humans and doctors were prescribing it as there was evidence it could work. It is completely safe for humans so why not try it? And what other poisons? But that aside, why not try ivermectin? There was evidence it could work, so why not try it to end this pandemic? Next, there were limits in PPE, toilet paper, etc. It isn't like it was just sitting there waiting for people to deliver. You really can't plan for this thing. When was the last time we literally shut down the nation? Never. This was all new to us. In modern times we have never shut down our nation before. It led to a poor supply chain.
    1
  69. This whole thing was a waste. This was just Bernie grandstanding saying his talking points that he always says. Bernie has zero chance of winning.
    1
  70. He didn't answer the questions. He does what he always does, deflect to talking points. He just stood there and grand standed.
    1
  71.  @Tripleexel  , having 300+ million means a larger diversity and making it difficult to micromanage these programs. Medicare for all will be far more expensive compare to what we have now.
    1
  72. You can't. Also, K-12 education is ran and funded locally and even at that are are greatly understaffed.
    1