Comments on: Update II: Pelosi Proctology (Constitutional Creativity)

By: Roy Bleckert

Roy Bleckert — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:01:58 +0000

You SHALL OBEY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx-RBem-tGs&feature=player_embedded

http://mcclintock.house.gov/2009/11/3400-shalls.shtml

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:29:33 +0000

The 10th Amendment addresses health care: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Then there’s always:
“What about the ‘GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE’ ” ????

ANSWER: We used to have PROPRIETARY COLONIES run for profit for investor/proprietors. The “general welfare” meant that the powers of the government were to be used for everyone, not specific people or groups. This is expressed explicitly in Article IV of the Virginia Declaration of Rights:

http://www.avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/virginia.asp

“That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services; which, not being descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate, legislator, or judge be hereditary.”

Madison also commented on the general welfare clause:

http://www.connorboyack.com/blog/general-welfare

“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.”

I recommend reading the entire link about the “GENERAL WELFARE” clause. But, as Franklin predicted 9/17/1787, the people have “become corrupted”.

By: Van Wijk

Van Wijk — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 12:32:09 +0000

That is Constitutional which gives the federals more power. This is the mindset of your enemies. At this point in the game they are not to be reasoned with, chided, or cajoled into changing their course.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:33:10 +0000

Quick comment: I am very suspicious of “Republicans” who argue against Socialist Medicine Plan XYZ in that it will endanger Socialist Medicare or Romneycare or Bushcare Medicine Plan ABC – there is no “RIGHT” to take the money of one taxpayer to pay for “health care” for others period.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:41:07 +0000

The $1.5 Trillion Fraud

“The CBO describes an individual mandate as “an unprecedented form of federal action” whose closest analogue in federal law is the draft. But as President Obama told a joint session of Congress, the rest of the legislation won’t work unless the federal government forces Americans to purchase health insurance.”

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10944

By: Steve Hogan

Steve Hogan — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:38:06 +0000

Here are a few more questions the media should be asking these thugs if they weren’t already co-opted by the fascist corporate-state:

1. Have you read the entire bill? If not, how can you vote for it without knowing what it contains?

2. Are you and your colleagues exempt from the bill’s provisions? If this is such a wonderful thing you’re foisting on the public, why aren’t you subject to its dictates, including the hefty fines and prison sentences?

3. What assumptions were made when estimating costs? Why has the total increased from $800 billion to $1.2 trillion in a matter of a few weeks? Can you cite an example of a large federal program that actually controlled costs and improved quality, as proponents have claimed?

4. Do you think it’s fair to saddle healthy people with the same coverage as the sick? The young with the old? Why should thin people be forced to pay for obesity coverage? Are you not creating a moral hazard by punishing moderate drinkers while rewarding alcoholics?

5. Can you define the term “insurance”? If you can’t obtain insurance for a car you’ve already wrecked or for a house that’s already flooded, how can you call it insurance if the person has a pre-existing condition?

By: Vic Jones

Vic Jones — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:32:46 +0000

On youtube, via CNS news, Pelosi was asked where in the Constitution is it granted that the federal government can mandate individual health insurance choices. [Why not provide BAB readers a hyperlink? Guys, get into that habit.] Her only response to the question: “Are you serious.” I would have to find documentation, but what I have heard is that later there was a release that stated that the Interstate Commerce clause was the basis. Evidently, her response was embarrassing to someone, and so they had to come up with an answer.

I wish more of our “investigative reporters” would ask tough questions like this one and follow up with such questiions as:

Can you show in the enumerative powers granted the Federal Government, where exactly it has the right to bail out businesses and determine health care for individuals?

Can you explain how the Interstate Commerce clause grants the Federal Government power to mandate health insurance for individuals?

What is your understanding of the “promoting the General Welfare” clause in the Constitution?

What is your understanding or inalienable or natural rights?

Do you know where, in the Constitution, the “promoting the General Welfare” clause is located and what exactly it addresses? Ditto with the Interstate Commerce clause.