Breaking: Finance Committee drops “death panel” provisions from Senate bill
posted at 3:23 pm on August 13, 2009 by Allahpundit
I’m surprised it took them this long. If it had been Palin and the right tossing rhetorical grenades, they might have gone to the mat to keep it in there, but as the ‘Cuda herself noted in her response to Obama last night, it ain’t just conservatives who are freaked out by these provisions. Eugene Robinson and Charles Lane at WaPo also concluded that having “outside” input into end-of-life decisions when the government’s desperate to cut costs could lead to abuse; Mickey Kaus and Camille Paglia have hammered The One about it too. And Obama’s done himself no favors trying to explain what he has in mind, as Tom Maguire reminds us. From an interview in April:
THE PRESIDENT: So that’s where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues. But that’s also a huge driver of cost, right?
I mean, the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here.
DAVID LEONHARDT: So how do you — how do we deal with it?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that’s part of what I suspect you’ll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now.
“Independent” guidance to seniors about death with an eye to reducing the lion’s share of health-care spending. What could go wrong?
Tired of the political migraines it’s getting from this, the Finance Committee finally decides to, er, pull the plug:
“On the Finance Committee, we are working very hard to avoid unintended consequences by methodically working through the complexities of all of these issues and policy options,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement. “We dropped end-of-life provisions from consideration entirely because of the way they could be misinterpreted and implemented incorrectly.”…
“The bill passed by the House committees is so poorly cobbled together that it will have all kinds of unintended consequences, including making taxpayers fund healthcare subsidies for illegal immigrants,” Grassley said. The veteran Iowa lawmaker said the end-of-life provision in those bills would pay physicians to “advise patients about end-of-life care and rate physician quality of care based on the creation of and adherence to orders for end-of-life care.
In theory it could be reintroduced in the conference committee after each chamber passes a bill, but given the outcry over this, why risk an explosion that might queer the whole deal at the 11th hour? This never should have been in the bill in the first place, frankly; the way to encourage living wills (or, say, organ donation) so that people don’t end up undergoing expensive treatments they don’t really want is through a general public education/advertising campaign, not individual meetings with ailing patients terrified that the care they need to stay alive isn’t “cost-effective” in their case. Exit question: This is a win for Palin, but is it also a win for Obama? Now he can reassure Americans that the most worrisome parts of the bill are stripped out.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
From wikipedia
The War Powers Act was inserted into the Constitution because the founders feared allowing the president to have a standing army (like a King.)
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 5:49 PM
Palin Power: Senate Removes ‘End of Life’ Provisions
Tammy Bruce.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 5:52 PM
Does this mean that the provisions for end-of-life counselling will be gone, or that the panel deciding what care you can have will be eliminated?
ProfessorMiao on August 13, 2009 at 5:52 PM
Palin Rocks
theTarCzar on August 13, 2009 at 5:54 PM
I suspect, like most fed laws, the section deleted is redundant. Smoke and mirrors are the most effective tools that Uncle Sugar possesses.
Limerick on August 13, 2009 at 5:56 PM
Moron, listen. Due to the Separation of Powers, IF the President ever tried to use the professional standing military like a King, he would be impeached by Congress faster than you can say George Bush.
Your arguments are ridiculous, America is not an empire, you are under no threat from the military we have today, or the industrial base that supplies them with the most advanced equipment in the world.
I’m done with you, your tinfoil hat is crooked.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM
U.S. Constitution online (in its entirety)
This is directly out of of article 1 section 8 (the war powers act) that lists the powers of congress. Congress is not allowed to fund any permenant standing army longer than 2 years. It is to provide a navy for the president to use. There is no power granted to have an Air Force.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM
To clarify what I said here, Romney did not set up the Connector initially to impose mandates on insurers. Indeed, the idea was exactly the opposite – to de-regulate. Those who came in after he left bastardized the program. As the Cato critique recounts:
For example, the Connector’s governing board has decreed that by January 2009, no one in the state will be allowed to have insurance with more than a $2,000 deductible or total out-of-pocket costs of more than $5,000. In addition, every policy in the state will be required to phase in coverage of prescription drugs, a move that could add 5–15 percent to the cost of insurance plans. A move to require dental coverage barely failed to pass the board, and the dentists-along with several other provider groups-have not given up the effort to force their inclusion. This comes on top of the 40 mandated benefits that the state had previously required, ranging from in vitro fertilization to chiropractic services.
No plan can work with all these ridiculous and costly mandates. Let the free market work and choices and costs will come down. The failures here are a good lesson as to what needs to be done differently from the Republican side.
In any case, if you listen to the interview I linked to earlier, you will see that he is open to many other ideas and is not stuck on his program.
Buy Danish on August 13, 2009 at 5:58 PM
Jefferson, the most Libertarian-ish of the founders, spelled out why we can’t allow the president to have a standing army.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:01 PM
The Constitutional scholar here doesn’t know the difference between an Act of Congress and a Clause in the Constitution.
Ok, now I’m done.
Back to the “death panels”.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:01 PM
To stop this bill is not Sarah’s job. She doesn’t have a vote or a bully pulpit except Facebook. It’s GOP’s job and where are they again? They were taking potshots at her all the time.
The fact is this event establishes her as one of the most powerful politician in America. Issue of gravitas? Gone. Issue of leadership? Gone. it now demonstrates she’s a true leader.
promachus on August 13, 2009 at 6:03 PM
Bravo, ‘Cuda! We love ya!
petefrt on August 13, 2009 at 6:04 PM
Brian1972,
Doesn’t change what article 1 section 8 says.
Congress is now allowed to fund a standing army longer than two years.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:05 PM
That is because airplanes did not exist in the 1780′s IDIOT!
We are no longer protected by the oceans and pure distance, as we were back then.
You can cross the Atlantic in a few hours, not weeks.
If you would prefer to pretend that military technology of potential enemies has not advanced beyond the 18th Century, then that is on you.
Thank God the rest of us are not as myopically insane as you appear to be.
For crying out loud!
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:05 PM
“Moron, listen. Due to the Separation of Powers, IF the President ever tried to use the professional standing military like a King, he would be impeached by Congress faster than you can say George Bush” Do you see the congress i do????
theTarCzar on August 13, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Both provisions could be removed. But as long as Obama or leftist is president, and as long as there is a provision in the legislation that is passed (which hopefully it will not be) that allows the administration to promulgate regulations, provide services, and establish panels as needed to effectuate the legislation, then what was removed shall re-appear when there is less light and heat to overcome. This is how it is done.
Loxodonta on August 13, 2009 at 6:08 PM
Brian1972,
Hence if you want to to add a new power that the Federal Government is allowed to do, you would have to modify the U.S. Constitution to allow congress to fund an Air Force.
Hopefully we would not do that though since we already have a permanent standing army and over 1000 bases abroad and two undeclared wars.
The Federal Government is not to be trusted and neither is Obama….or Bush for that matter.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:09 PM
When Obama and members of Congress talk about how “We” need to bring down the cost of health care, they really mean “the Government” needs to bring down the cost of health care.
But WHY does the government or anyone else “need” to bring down the cost of health care? I’m all for getting higher quality at lower cost in anything that I am buying, but that doesn’t mean that there is a “need” to lower costs.
America has the best health care system in the world. Can it be improved? Of course, but that is not the business of government! If the insurance companies or the pharmaceutical companies are making “immoral” profits, who determines how much profit a company can make before it becomes “immoral”? That is none of the government’s business. If these companies are really making such high profits, why doesn’t someone else come along and offer products (insurance or medications) of equal or better quality at lower prices and clean up on volume sales? If all these companies are working together to fix prices, then the Justice Dept. can go after them for that.
Ed had a good article elsewhere on HA about the fact that health care is not a “right”.
So again, what business is it of Obama or Congress to say that we “must” or “need” to reduce costs? Why shouldn’t people be able to buy the best coverage they can afford, as well as the best medication and treatment, if that is what they want? And if you want to talk about “all the uninsured”, Americans have always been willing to give to help those in need, and you can even find stories of those hard hearted pharmas giving medication free to people who can’t afford them (like the lady in Oregon whose State run health plan was willing to pay for assisted suicide, but not for live-prolonging medication!).
It’s great to hear about the “death panels” being taken out of the Senate version of the bill. But if any version of a bill passes Congress, it will be a defeat for America.
It’s time for the insurance companies, the pharmas, hospitals, doctors, etc. to get together and come up with some positive ideas that don’t involve the government. As an example, it would be a simple thing for insurance companies to offer lost cost coverage that would carry on your health care if you lose your job. Another problem is when individuals or self-employed people try to get insurance. But why can’t they band together in co-ops and get group coverage rates? There has to be a lot of other good ideas out there that don’t require government intervention.
The biggest problems with health care in America today are Medicare and Medicaid, both related to Social Security, which is a ponzi scheme of such proportions as to make Madoff look like a choir boy. If Obama really wants to “fix” the health care problem in America, he should find a way to put Medicare and Medicaid back in the private sector.
If health care remains in the private sector, then “we” (the American people) will have to pay for it. If the government takes over health care, then guess what, “we” (the American people) will still have to pay for it. The main difference is that we will pay more and get less! And that includes the poor who will be told that they are getting it for “Free”. But even the poor will pay in untold ways and hidden taxes. Anything the government gives you for “free” has been paid for by the American people at significantly more than what it is worth.
America is resilient and in spite of everything Obama does, we will eventually get out of this recession and people will go back to work. Unless of course we are all working for the government without pay because the government is providing us for “free” with everything that some bureaucrat has decided that we “need”. Imagine a world of equal poverty and misery for all. Except, of course, for those who are more equal than the rest of us.
Ordinary American on August 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Palin getting mentioned on Special Report.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM
theTarCzar,
I’m not referring to using the standing army as police. I’m saying congress is not to allow the funding\existence of a standing U.S. army for longer than 2 years.
No bases abroad, no undeclared wars, etc etc etcd
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Sorry, but RomneyCare has sunk any chance of a Romney candidacy in 2012. End of story.
Norwegian on August 13, 2009 at 6:15 PM
Also a standing army makes it impossible for states to exercise their rights.
Traditionally, States had the right to nullify unconstitutional laws (NOT SUPREME COURT.)
However, as long as the president has a massive standing army (plus he controls the national guard now too), the president will always be able to use it demand the States to adhere to the Surpeme Court’s decisions or his for that matter.
The standing army has created an imbalance of power so instead of having decentralized government, which was the original intent, now we have a centralized one.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:16 PM
Precedent Precedent Precedent Precedent Ogabe Obambi O-liar O-hole and a thousand and one other descriptions of the Chief Liar.
Who the hell are you? The Hot Air Mother?
GunRunner on August 13, 2009 at 6:16 PM
the force is STRONG in this one….
stlpatriot on August 13, 2009 at 6:18 PM
I feel inadequate. I only refer to him as ‘Barry’.
Limerick on August 13, 2009 at 6:20 PM
Kos Kidz aint’ happy.
corona on August 13, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Palin’s Facebook page is picking up about 1,000 supporters an hour this afternoon.
Ted Torgerson on August 13, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Am I too late to chime in that the Air Force started out as the Army Air Corps? How does changing it’s name change its Constitutionally? Would it be “more” Constitutional if we transferred it “en Mass” to the Navy and called it the Air Navy Missile Corps?
Spathi is not the brightest.
Hot Air needs better Trolls.
GunRunner on August 13, 2009 at 6:22 PM
I second that emotion.
Who needs air cover in combat anyway? It’s not like anyone else has any air assets they could attack with.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:24 PM
Oh…it goes hand in hand with the fella the other night who claimed we could ‘whip them up in the blink of an eye’ if we needed them. Arsenal of Democracy and all that rot.
Limerick on August 13, 2009 at 6:26 PM
The reaction by the right to this provision just shows how intellectually dishonest and broke the conservative movement has become.
Tom_Shipley on August 13, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Same fella.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:35 PM
GunRunner,
A permanent Navy is the only thing the president gets on a long-term basis.
Your point about changing the name is interesting, however, the air force gets its own command structure with its independence.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:05 PM
He’s nothing more than a redirection troll, think he’s one of those that appears on Palin threads and changes course of discussion. He was doing the same thing last night on the other Palin thread.
heshtesh on August 13, 2009 at 6:37 PM
That needed a little editing for accuracy.
You are welcome.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:37 PM
He’s a lunatic who does not understand the history of national security and why the National Security Act of 1947 became necessary to protect America and it’s allies after WWII.
He thinks the Pentagon should be defunded and let the states raise an army AFTER a threat has emerged, rather than squash them before they can harm our allies or us.
I’m just thankful most people have more sense than that, so we can continue to be the beacon of liberty to the rest of the world.
Brian1972 on August 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Brian1972,
How can states nullify Supreme Court rulings if the president is allowed to have a massive standing army, which can smash dissent and enforce his will or the Federal Supreme Court’s will.
Don’t you see the imbalance of power?
Better to break the armed forced up among the governors….Colorado might get a few more nukes than the the other governors, but we’ll just have to hope Colorado is peaceful.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Chuck Baldwin has a much better view of decentralized government than Bob Barr.
Even though I like the Libertarian Party, I don’t think having Bob Barr pose as republican-light is a good way to move forward.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:49 PM
I also pick the latter, especially if this thing passes in any form.
kcarpenter on August 13, 2009 at 6:52 PM
This provision? The entire bill is itself dishonest and blatantly unconstitutional.
Yo’re really reaching … sounds kinda desperate.
darwin on August 13, 2009 at 6:55 PM
HotAir front page:
Two Palin threads = 1600+ comments.
Click, click, click, the chic gets hits quick!
Limerick on August 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM
Decades ago I wrote an article describing Tammy as the most dangerous Democrat in the U.S.
She was a hard core Democrat, but so well spoken, and so articulate that I felt she was going to be the driving force of the new Democrats for years…but years after the aticle…
NOW went of the deep end, the democrats went extreme, and they left Tammy for the radical vision that they are pursuing today.
She took the logical choice, because quite frankly, she is logical, not in the “scientific” sense, but in the everyday discernment and judgment that makes us live our daily lives productive…she turned to the Republicans.
The democrats loss the Republicans gain…do all our platforms mesh? No, but the course of our country does, and the ability to adapt, to listen, to negotiate; mesh.
She is a gem, one of our great gifts…imagine we lose an Arlen and we gain a Bruce…I’ll take that trade any day.
right2bright on August 13, 2009 at 7:01 PM
This removal of the consultation does nothing to solve the problem nor is it what Governor Palin was discussing. She was talking about the actuaries and cost benefit analysts who will decide what treatment is worth.
This is not a victory but a distraction.
David
LifeTrek on August 13, 2009 at 7:01 PM
Allah -
Have you considered that Sarah Palin sat down at her keyboard and accomplished more in 15 minutes than you will in your entire life?
I think that’s gonna leave a mark.
bw222 on August 13, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Meanwhile, this intellectually dishonest movement is kicking you liberals ass…how does it feel to have “power” and within six months, you squander it.
It shows a lack of leadership, ability, honesty, integrity…everyone of those ideals you have squandered, the voters gave it all to you liberals, and all you could do is “get greedy”.
You had your chance, and you have already blown it…now it is just a wait for the elections, one after the other…you fools.
right2bright on August 13, 2009 at 7:05 PM
My fave song right now is “Die with your boots on” by Iron Maiden.Up the Irons!
theTarCzar on August 13, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at POint taken.Thanks
theTarCzar on August 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Checked out the KosKids for a little while. They are losing their minds….What am I saying?
KCB on August 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM
There is equal if not greater potential for abuse with the ‘care effectiveness’ panel that was massively funded by the ‘stimulus’ bill. I’d like to see Palin tackle that AND the government option next.
ProfessorMiao on August 13, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Now the Cuda will announce victory in a suble way and attack it for the out-of-control spending it will cause skyrocketing the deficits/debt and focus on rationing of services which will lead to an overall deterioration of average medical care.
Go Sarah! You’ve routed them. Now run them down. No quarter.
Any incremental increase in government control of healthcare needs to be slammed dead in its tracks.
No Death Panels!
No Debt!
No Rationing!
Let Freedom Ring!
Sapwolf on August 13, 2009 at 7:12 PM
The issue is that the government will set the requirements for coverage standardized throughout the US.
Even without a government ran plan this means that if someone is denied a liver and they die there will be no market pressure that can be brought to bear to force the insurance company to fix their approval system for the next time when it could be you or me because the government sets these standards and the companies can’t bend. That happens often with Medicare Advantage plans, they may offer bells and whistles but they are still limited by Medicare rules.
An unfeeling bureaucrat who answers to no one will decide. There is no CEO just 535 busybodies and a busybody community organizer in chief. That is not responsive nor does it make any sense in a sane world.
Then again, the sanity of the world changed when we all got our unicorns and rainbows. Your farts smell like peaches yet like we were promised?
David
LifeTrek on August 13, 2009 at 7:12 PM
Kos Kidz aren’t happy when they’re happy
NoFanofLibs on August 13, 2009 at 7:12 PM
They still have minds?
darwin on August 13, 2009 at 7:13 PM
RommelBarack Obama, you magnificent bastard, I read your book! (George PattonSarah Palin)Luka on August 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM
I guess I stayed there a little too long.
KCB on August 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM
It’s a little late to refight the “Articles of Confederation” vs. “Constitution of the United States” battle.
Oh, and as to the SCOTUS points you’re trying to make- the Supreme Court is included specifically in the Constitution, and was hearing cases relatively soon after the ink was dry.
Any original thoughts about Palin?
cs89 on August 13, 2009 at 7:16 PM
Sarah palin? sarah palin? I’ve heard that name before. Isn’t she that AK governor that the media ambushed after being named vp nominee by that old guy?
The one who’s life has been trashed and rehashed by the likes of bill “this stupid country” maher et al?
The one every body said was toast when she resigned from the governorship because she couldn’t get any work done with all the media gotchas and DNC operatives (jesse griffin we have a check for you!) making up stuff?
The one who all the liberals claim is a stupid c*** whore bitch barbie who couldn’t speak well enough to order a happy meal at McDonalds?
THAT SARAH PALIN???
LAME STREAM MEDIA AND LIBERAL LEFTISTS; MEET YOUR NEMESIS.
(and it’s only 8-2009! What’s it gonna be like in 12 months? In 36 months?) You betcha!
jcw46 on August 13, 2009 at 7:17 PM
cs89,
I didn’t bring up the unconstitutionality of the Air Force in this thread. Someone else did, and they asked me my opinion.
Since you just mentioned the Article of the Confederation (I didn’t until now), yes it was preferable.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:18 PM
I’m glad she’s retired.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:19 PM
They’ll be coming to take the KosKids away, ha-haaa.
They’ll be coming to take the KosKids away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa.
To the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time and they’ll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they’ll be coming to take them away, ha-haaa!!!
To the happy home, with trees and flowers and chirping birds and basket weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes and they’ll be coming to take them away, ha-haa!!!
To the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time………
Cheshire Cat on August 13, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Maybe. Maybe not. It’s far too early to tell. Just because some people can’t differentiate between Obama’s plan and Mitt’s doesn’t mean that everyone is incapable of evaluating the difference. I just happen to have noticed that the people most adamant that they are exactly the same are Palinistas.
Buy Danish on August 13, 2009 at 7:21 PM
She isn’t. Your nightmare is only beginning.
Luka on August 13, 2009 at 7:21 PM
Sarah palin? sarah palin? I’ve heard that name before. Isn’t she that AK governor that the media ambushed after being named vp nominee by that old guy?
The one who’s life has been trashed and rehashed by the likes of bill “this stupid country” maher et al?
The one every body said was toast when she resigned from the governorship because she couldn’t get any work done with all the media gotchas and DNC operatives (jesse griffin we have a check for you!) making up stuff?
The one who all the liberals claim is a stupid whore bitch barbie who couldn’t speak well enough to order a happy meal at McDonalds?
THAT SARAH PALIN???
LAME STREAM MEDIA AND LIBERAL LEFTISTS; MEET YOUR NEMESIS.
(and it’s only 8-2009! What’s it gonna be like in 12 months? In 36 months?) You betcha!
jcw46 on August 13, 2009 at 7:21 PM
So what. Isn’t that Chuckie’s site?
Sapwolf on August 13, 2009 at 7:25 PM
How about you? Thought about retiring?
darwin on August 13, 2009 at 7:27 PM
Nor the Chinese nor the Russians nor the Confederates…
unclesmrgol on August 13, 2009 at 7:28 PM
Sorry about the double post. some of the ad sites that load content to the page were choking and the comment wasn’t showing up and I thought it didn’t make it through.
allah or ed ebay.com and cdn.com are slow in responding to calls for(I guess ads that are on the page or something) content when the page loads and they are choking from all the traffic and slowing the blog.
jcw46 on August 13, 2009 at 7:30 PM
It’s the appropriation that may only last two years. As long as congress reviews and re-funds the army every two years, a “standing army” is permissible under the constition.
Fighton03 on August 13, 2009 at 7:33 PM
She don’t need to blitz. Her down 4 DL can bring all kinds of whoopass on its own.
The blitz will come when Barry-O thinks he has finally figured out the protection thing.
Sapwolf on August 13, 2009 at 7:35 PM
Riiiiight…from a guy whose party runs “I can see Russia from my house!” into the ground. And “47 million uninsured dying in the streets”. We don’t need lectures from libs about “dishonest arguments”.
ddrintn on August 13, 2009 at 7:35 PM
Looks like Dr. Emmanual is having a little Tizzy over Sarah pointing out his Death Panel involvement.
Poor Dr. Death
via The Palination
portlandon on August 13, 2009 at 7:36 PM
I don’t think this will help Obama much. Obama might now tell people that the Death Counseling is removed. However, people like me will be even more mad as hell because we were right about Death Counseling being in the bill all along. Yet, Obama continuosly lied about there not being a Death Panel. This just proves us correct, that the Dems are shoving tons of crap in this bill. If the opposition to it continues, then hopefully nothing will pass the House. Keep up the pressure people! And Good Luck!
Humphrey007 on August 13, 2009 at 7:37 PM
spathi:
Q1: What clause, if any, of the Constitution permits Congress to establish an air force?
A: Article I, § 8, provides that Congress may “raise and support Armies,” and “provide and maintain a Navy,” and make “Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.” The Air Force is “comprehended in the constitutional term ‘armies.’” Laird v. Tatum 408 U.S. 1 (1972) (Douglas, J., dissenting).
jcw46 on August 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM
They are basically the same types of plan. Rationing.
Romney is finished in his bid for POTUS. If Sarah gets kidnapped by space aliens and Romney squeeks by the primary, he will lose easily to Obama because GOP turnout will be lower than it was for Bush’s elections of 2000 and 2004.
Plus, he’s not a conservative and he’s not a libertarian.
It’s over. Move on.
Sapwolf on August 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM
You really need to widen your arguments. Saying the same things day after day wastes time and space here.
HoustonRight on August 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM
By the way, Tom_Shipley, would you say “if you like your doctor and your coverage, you can keep them” is an honest statement?
The reason your side is plummeting in the polls is that the public is pretty cunning when it comes to sniffing out frauds, ultimately.
ddrintn on August 13, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Tammy Bruce
Sarah Palin
Michelle Malkin
Laura Ingraham
Michelle Bachman
Monica Crowley
Ann Coulter
Liz Cheney
Megan Kelly
MeeAgain McCainAnyone see a pattern?
You go girls. Show us the path to liberty.
Geochelone on August 13, 2009 at 7:43 PM
jcw46,
U.S. Constitution online (in its entirety)
This is directly out of of article two section 8 (the war powers act) that lists the powers of congress. Congress is now allowed to fund any permenant standing army longer than 2 years. It is to provide a navy. There is no power granted to have an Air Force.
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:45 PM
jcw46,
So even if you classify the Air Force as the U.S. Army, then the president can only have one for two years.
Of course it has its own command structure anyway, which makes it different.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Sorry, I should have put that in quotes. You left out the key parts when you were talking about Article 1 section 8 that restricts a permanent standing army but allows a permanent Navy.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:48 PM
I am disappointed in Mitt. I was for him in the primary. Him vs Barry I will vote for Mitt.
I wish Romney would take the fight to the street instead of laying low. Seems like his game is CYA all the way. You have got to take risks and join in the fray in this new people driven revolution.
Geochelone on August 13, 2009 at 7:48 PM
So Spathi are you suggesting we disband all the armed forces except for the Navy?
mo_gunslinger on August 13, 2009 at 7:48 PM
It is amazing as to how two words (death panel), uttered by the right person (Sarahcuda), would have such a quick and positive result… and THAT is what scares the Left so, so much about Sarah Palin…
Khun Joe on August 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Interesting analysis. What were the key points in this particular story that led you to that conclusion?
anuts on August 13, 2009 at 7:49 PM
Also Palin did not favor a strong national defense unlike Ron Paul.
A strong national defense means we (militias, local and state) have all the guns, and Obama\Bush and the Federal Government don’t get any of the guns.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:52 PM
mo_gunslinger,
Hell yes….actually I would prefer to disband the Navy too, but I do feel the Constitution allows for one.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 7:53 PM
When Granny comes home with some pills in a plastic bag
Hurrah! Hurrah!
Obama will give her a hearty high five then
Hurrah! Hurrah!
The Emanuels will cheer, the Kevorkians will shout
The eugenicists they will all turn out
And the old folks will all be dead by Christmas time next year!
Get ready for the Death Czar Ezekiel Rahm Jubilee
Hurrah! Hurrah!
He’ll give Dr Obama three times three
Hurrah! Hurrah!
The Doctor of Life and Death degree is ready now
To place upon Obama’s Godly brow
And they will feel so happy and gay
When Pallbearers carry Grandma and Grandpa to the funeral home
Cheshire Cat on August 13, 2009 at 7:53 PM
Well, the interesting thing is that a guy who claims to see the “intellectual dishonesty” in the “conservative movement” doesn’t seem to see it when his side has to argue that town-hall protesters are Nazis, or racists, or militia members. Slick, isn’t it?
ddrintn on August 13, 2009 at 7:53 PM
So you think we would be able to raise an Army quick enough if we were attacked?
mo_gunslinger on August 13, 2009 at 7:54 PM
Shucks! I thought it was Sarah Palin speaking truth to power that created this tiny victory but I am gratified to see it was two journalists named Robinson and lane who struck fear into the hearts of congress. By the way, I know who Sarah Palin is but who the hell are Lane and Robinson?
Herb on August 13, 2009 at 7:54 PM
You’re thinking we’d be raising one from scratch, which is NOT what Tom was proposing.
I’m gathering that in case of national emergency, everyone would (ideally) pool together what they already had standing in addition to a general call-up bia Selective Service.
Dark-Star on August 13, 2009 at 7:59 PM
Blah, not Tom, Spathi. Wrong thread.
Dark-Star on August 13, 2009 at 7:59 PM
mo_gunslinger,
No, but you have to allow the States or private armies to exist.
Keep in mind our defense budget is larger than the rest of the world combined. I don’t believe it needs to be that high.
I also believe the reason we were attacked is because of our over seas involvement so if we defund all the military bases we’re less likely to get attacked anyway.
Spathi on August 13, 2009 at 8:03 PM
Dark Star
So ideally, we come under attack, missles air craft, atomic weapons and then bam! We are mobilized and ready to fight. It would be chaos, many live lost. I understand his Constitution approach, but in reality if we do not have a standing military we would fall.
mo_gunslinger on August 13, 2009 at 8:04 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Next »