Protester to Mark Warner: Which part of the Constitution says you get to take over health care?

posted at 8:23 pm on September 4, 2009 by Allahpundit

Via CNS. We’ve been down this road before but it’s one thing to kick around arguments in the comments and another to watch a U.S. Senator be put on the spot. Warner’s argument won’t appeal to strict constructionists — he concedes that there’s no health-care power, just like there’s no education power — but from a practical standpoint he’s right that this ship has already sailed. Through the Commerce Clause all things are possible, my friends.

This one might be hard to swallow so, to cleanse the palate, I’ve added a second clip below it courtesy of Hot Air Pundit. That should leave you feeling minty fresh.

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2 3 4

I wonder why they used the words PROVIDE and PROMOTE . It sure seems they meant that defense was in fact a requirement of the government. The word general would mean as a benefit to all. Therefore as most people already have insurance (AND MOST are Happy with it)— it is actually unconstitutional to go down this road.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:03 AM

Well, he certainly picked the right name. Kinda like the Democrat Party when they appropriately chose the Jackass.

GT on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Also, that’s a tantrum she’s throwing right there. Its childish.

ernesto on September 4, 2009 at 8:42 PM

You’re a moron.

Jim Treacher on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

You’re a moron.

Jim Treacher on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Who is Ernie talking about?

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Maybe Mr. Senator, you should realize that Medicare is a mandate that is forced down people’s throats the same way you want to mandate Obamacare! What a smug little ******.

Hobbes on September 5, 2009 at 12:07 AM

Jim Treacher on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Now. Now. When it comes to childish behavior, who better to point it out but the experts.

GT on September 5, 2009 at 12:08 AM

Read the CBO’s opinion on the proposed plan and take into account:

“The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.” – Thomas Jefferson

How anyone thinks this is a good thing is beyond reason.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:14 AM

The Coward ran off in the face of the words of Great Great Americans . Nothing like a little light to scatter the the cockroaches.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:14 AM

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:05 AM

The woman in the video who owns a business in Novato. There was no ‘tantrum’

Janos Hunyadi on September 5, 2009 at 12:16 AM

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:14 AM

More like he is depressed that the Constitution is misused by people who think that “the Constitution is so obvious on topic X or Y, how come no one but me can see it?”

There is a lot of room to have different interpretations here. When a clause allows you to deal with interstate commerce, a lot more that just a good crossing state line can fit in there.

mycowardice on September 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM

There is a lot of room to have different interpretations here.

mycowardice on September 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM

Um….no. What you have is a lot of rationalizing when the Founding Fathers words become inconvenient.

GT on September 5, 2009 at 12:23 AM

There is a lot of room to have different interpretations here. When a clause allows you to deal with interstate commerce, a lot more that just a good crossing state line can fit in there.

mycowardice on September 5, 2009 at 12:18 AM

What GT said

——————

It is evident the intent of the founders is lost on you.

You do realize you are OBama’s classic I mean completely classic useful idiot. Your simplistic brushing off of the words of our founders is quite scary.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:28 AM

I wonder why they did not say to provide defense AND provide for the welfare of those who need it? hmmm

Somehow I know the hard questions blow right over the heads of some. You know who you are

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 12:41 AM

Through the Commerce Clause all things are possible, my friends.

Not quite everything. Nationalizing an entire industry is not covered. The types of activities to be performed by the national government were spelled out a long time ago.

The full extent of national reach into private business via the commerce clause was done a long time ago in Heart of Atlanta Motel vs. United States

The most the Courts will do here, I think, is to knock down the state boundaries for insurers.

unclesmrgol on September 5, 2009 at 12:41 AM

Hmmm. Has anyone claimed the right to own a telephone? Did our creator endow us with the unalienable right to own a telephone?

Our best and brightest…….

Mallard T. Drake on September 5, 2009 at 2:16 AM

You’re a moron.

Jim Treacher on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Yes, yes he is.

Cindy Munford on September 5, 2009 at 2:48 AM

I think the big difference between education etc. already being “allowed” is simply the 10th amendment – we aare in effect invoking the 10th amendment now – we are not giving the government the right to impose control over our health care. Don’t argue that we do it now -the marketplace is still available. It won’t be under Obamacare.

We also need to be very careful not to get suckered by the public option being taken out. A rattler without its rattles is far more deadly because you can’t hear it coming at you.

Fight it all, if it comes from these people who support Onbamacide and now Seniorcide -by any other name..

Don L on September 5, 2009 at 5:15 AM

Memo to Ernesto…YOU ARE ESTUPIDO!

BobAnthony on September 5, 2009 at 6:52 AM

You’re a moron.

Jim Treacher on September 5, 2009 at 12:04 AM

Bwahahahahahaaaaa!!! Ernesto thinks the Revolutionary War was driven by the colonists throwing a tantrum.

csdeven on September 5, 2009 at 7:47 AM

Everytime I see this stuff (like Warner’s argument) I think:
WE NEED A NEW CONGRESS AND SENATE!

How far we have slipped from the writers’ original intentions.

balkanmom2 on September 5, 2009 at 7:56 AM

Not to get stuck on his phone comment… not funded by “taxes” but by government imposed “user fees” I heard… don’t get me wrong, I don’t promote denying a little old lady a means to get help at all but when the TV ads for this started in my state it was the little old lady saying ” Now I can call daughter in California and it’s free.” That said, it’s not just for little old ladies and would seem to lend itself to another government program ripe for abuse.
https://www.safelinkwireless.com/EnrollmentPublic/home.aspx

wubu on September 5, 2009 at 8:23 AM

In Columbus Ohio there used to be and likely still is a program to help pay for car repairs.

You got a problem ? We all can help you.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 8:31 AM

No place in the constitution for a right to a telephone? This is Americas best and brightest being elected senators?
We’re all in a sinking boat………….But. hey, thanks for letting us have toilet paper, I promise to think of you as I’m using it…………

jims on September 5, 2009 at 8:37 AM

but from a practical standpoint he’s right that this ship has already sailed.

And it can never return? That’s a winning attitude. I don’t know if guys like you in grenwich village watch football but on opening day if the opponents of the jets or giants score first are you going to turn off the tv?

peacenprosperity on September 5, 2009 at 8:50 AM

This country was created on Equal Opportunity NOT Equal Results!

xler8bmw on September 5, 2009 at 9:31 AM

Clear contrast. When told the truth, the left will refuse to accept it and fly into illogical, irrational, disinformation to get heard and confuse those that are sitting on the wire and gathering information that will help them make up their mind.

Think of the prefixes to words the left use to make them the opposite of the their true meaning, such as “ir dis il make you ill un less you agree with us.

MSGTAS on September 5, 2009 at 9:37 AM

Why should any one trust Congress or any of Obamas gifted czars, to run any program any different than they run Medicare, Social Security, U.S. Postal Service, and their own taxes! You have to be blind, deaf and dumb to believe these idiots.

Cybergeezer on September 5, 2009 at 9:45 AM

Doesn’t the US rank something like 38th out of 38 (of top industrialized countries) in education?

And Warner wants to do for health care what the government has done for education.

CJ on September 5, 2009 at 9:49 AM

The 10th amendment specifically says the federal government has no power to do this. We don’t need Health Care Reform. We need POLITICIAN REFORM!!!!!!!!!!!!

adamsmith on September 5, 2009 at 9:59 AM

My post is regarding the small business owner from CA who goes nuclear. Why isn’t the RNC scouting these town halls? I have seen video clips of at least three individuals that should be grabbed by the RNC at the end of these events.

DFCtomm on September 4, 2009 at 8:36 PM

This business woman from California is awesome. She needs to get hold of Sarahcuda… What a team they would be on the speakers tour.

Wade on September 4, 2009 at 8:37 PM

They had this woman on Hannity, or Greta, and she is an awesome speaker. Very articulate, knows how to stay on task and get her message out. I think she would be an great speech-writter for Sarah.

lovingmyUSA on September 5, 2009 at 10:00 AM

Also, that’s a tantrum she’s throwing right there. Its childish.

ernesto on September 4, 2009 at 8:42 PM

No tantrum–just righteous indignation–you know–”arising from an outraged sense of justice”. Obviously, you don’t understand about passion This is what our founding fathers felt–this is what the citizens of the colonies felt…this is the sound of revolution!

lovingmyUSA on September 5, 2009 at 10:10 AM

“righteous indignation–you know–”arising from an outraged sense of justice-lovin my usa”-I’m loving it 2.
That sound is swelling throughout the land. You will hear it shouted outside Cincy today, and thundering in DC next weekend! FREEDOM!

indypat on September 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM

“There is no limit that the Federal Government is bound to respect, because the Constitution as Interpreted has become a flaccid sieve with holes ripped in its fabric by the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare Clause and a slew of other barn-sized openings, smoothed with 200 years of precedent, that the current court will have no trouble allowing the administration through.”

Lew on September 4, 2009 at 10:13 PM

++Damn, I missed a great debate last night! A most profound statement!

lovingmyUSA on September 5, 2009 at 10:35 AM

Congressman Douchehead (inadvertantly) makes a good point. Social security, Medicare, and the Dept. of Education are NOT located anywhere in the constitution. Hmmmmmm.

bitsy on September 5, 2009 at 10:43 AM

That woman is awesome… thanks for the palate cleanser AP, I needed that after that idiot senator… and you are right, I do feel minty fresh!

painfulTruthDisciple on September 5, 2009 at 10:46 AM

Notice the Obamabots in the background with obama emblems?

She wasn’t happy.

Black Adam on September 5, 2009 at 11:01 AM

Constitutionally we SHOULD get rid of social (in)security, medicare, and the dept. of education. Let’s get rid of the Ed Dept. first ’cause that would be easier.

The look from the Obamatron was priceless too.

Mojave Mark on September 5, 2009 at 11:10 AM

I noticed the Obama followers after the third viewing. They all looked a little confused about the origin of this incredible woman’s passion.

pjean on September 5, 2009 at 11:15 AM

Call Mark Warner’s phone to counter his stupid rebuttal.

Of course there’s nothing in the Constitution about telephones. And because there’s no legislation requiring people to have a phone or pay penalty fees, supervised by the IRS, Warner deserves a kick in the @ss for stupidly dismissing his constituent’s question with a question and a telephone equation.

maverick muse on September 5, 2009 at 11:30 AM

What an idiotic statement Mark. Of course the Constitution doesn’t talk about health care. That’s up to the private sector. Of course the Constitution doesn’t talk about education, that’s a local and state issue. The Constitution doesn’t talk about telephones. Once again, that’s private enterprise.

Are you a complete idiot or do you just play one in the Senate?

Mr. Grump on September 5, 2009 at 11:31 AM

This small business owner produced CLEAN nuclear energy at her CA legislator’s Townhall.

1300 vs. 6 needs competition to bring down costs/prices and make better insurance available to all.

Love that cheer!

maverick muse on September 5, 2009 at 11:47 AM

Also, that’s a tantrum she’s throwing right there. Its childish.

ernesto on September 4, 2009 at 8:42 PM

Spoken like a truly indignant tax dodger.

maverick muse on September 5, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Warner plays hardball politics with the schoolteacher with the medicare/education argument, which politically speaking was very shrewd. Fine…

…but then he follows it up with “no right in the constitution to own a telephone”?

…friggin’ moron.

Saltysam on September 5, 2009 at 12:00 PM

Also, that’s a tantrum she’s throwing right there. Its childish.

ernesto on September 4, 2009 at 8:42 PM

That’s thirty years of pent up rage at the system. Run your own business lately?

(That means, have you ever tried to provide your own salary, provide for your children, protect your investment, and work 14 hour days consistently in order to keep food on the table, while the scum at the top gets in your way every time they wake in the morning?)

That’s wasn’t childish, that was a mother reprimanding a spoiled brat.

Saltysam on September 5, 2009 at 12:08 PM

America has come full circle regarding government involvement in health care.

We have traditional obligations: treaty commitment with our native tribes and contractual agreement with our troops as they become veterans.

But when Medicare first reared its head in 1965 with LBJ, it was applauded by “charitable” citizens AND churches who were more than willing to pass off the time honored obligation of caring for their own elderly, willing to commit everyone’s income tax and endorsement of the government to assume the godly duty as Big Good Brother. The Feds became “my brother’s keeper” along with the grotesque culture of welfare to which generations since LBJ have sold their souls. Such was the after affect of JFK’s assassination. Americans wanted to prove how “good” we were, enabling LBJ to enact his Great Society tax burdens and pompous bureaucracies filled with bureaucrats, inept in all things other than corruption, who infringe further upon liberty today.

Irony scoffs at America’s ‘GOOD INTENTIONS’ as the elderly, the first “righteous cause”, are to be passively annihilated by the public option for all.

Torch LBJ’s welfare state “Great Society” and get back to Constitutional basics including financial solvency via low taxes and free enterprise.

maverick muse on September 5, 2009 at 12:08 PM

What about Medicare? Are you against that, too?

I await your answer. Hopefully it’s not hypocritical.

2Brave2Bscared on September 4, 2009 at 11:35 PM

yes

unseen on September 5, 2009 at 12:31 PM

but from a practical standpoint he’s right that this ship has already sailed. Through the Commerce Clause all things are possible, my friends.

 
I always love hearing this from those who claim to defend the Constitution. It is only a lost cause if everyone who does defend the Constitution decides your statement is right and gives up.
 
This is the same crap we hear all the time about how we must have a Republican health reform proposal that is similar to what the Democrats are proposing because that must be what the people want.
 
And this constant homogenizing of positions by Republican Moderates to make them similar to the Democrat positions, but not exactly the same, a lite version if you will, this is why Republicans lost and why they still aren’t seen as the answer yet.
 
Even with all the socialism the Democrats are pushing, people still see the Republicans as simply being the same only slightly less of it.
 
So keep on spouting this pap about boats already sailed and other excuses for why the Republicans might as well not fight and in the end both parties will become irrelevant.
 
This strategy of giving up and being like the other party worked so well in 2006 and 2008, I am sure it will manage to screw up the easy win that appears to be coming in 2010.

woodythesingingcowboy on September 5, 2009 at 12:56 PM

As for Medicare and Medicaid, I am against anything done by the Federal government in these regards. If it is to exist the power for it resides at the Local and State levels and the Federal government should be no where near it.
 
So Medicare and Medicaid should be sent back to each State to manage and handle for their citizens and it should be up to the citizens of each State whether it is continued, replaced, or abolished.
 
I realize for the Democrats who are throwing this crap around this answer isn’t as short as a bumper sticker, so they probably won’t understand it.

woodythesingingcowboy on September 5, 2009 at 1:01 PM

The problem of states rights can be solved by the states, if all states were to say we aren’t buying your unconstitutional grab at over all power, we would be able to right the ship. The States ( read the people ) have for too long sat on their hands and watched their constitutional powers usurped by the feds.

Enough is enough, the time is NOW to bring our freedoms back on course by demanding our constitutional rights be recognized, and if not those who refuse MUST be replaced.

jainphx on September 5, 2009 at 2:07 PM

I honestly was surprised I could log in today.

I simply so disagree with this blog and its position on this issue.

I figured I would be booted.

Healthcare is not either a right or out of the limits of the constitution.

It is like other program, up for debate.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 2:23 PM

Annin please explain where it says it is legal to force people to buy such coverage from a federal perspective?

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 2:41 PM

Childish tantrum? How about righteous anger…?

CliffHanger on September 5, 2009 at 3:23 PM

please explain where it says it is legal to force people to buy such coverage from a federal perspective?

‘We won’ sums it up nicely I think

TheVer on September 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM

Let me help you with this one…

Article I, section 8 grants Congress the authority to levy taxes for the promotion of the general welfare.

Universal health care is in the interest of the general welfare.

Have a nice day.

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

This isn’t about levying taxes. This is seizing control of 1/6th of the American Economy,making life and death choices for the American Public, and eventually driving the Insurance Industry out of business. You need to pay attention. Epic fail. Have a nice day.

kingsjester on September 5, 2009 at 4:03 PM

Let me help you with this one…

Article I, section 8 grants Congress the authority to levy taxes for the promotion of the general welfare.

Universal health care National Socialism is in the interest of the general welfare.

Have a nice day.

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

FIFY. Heil Obama.

Chris_Balsz on September 5, 2009 at 4:25 PM

I have to apologize….

I was wrong to call Mr. Warner…
a piece of excrement and a lying piece of trash.

When I let my anger at the Libs diversions and lies it makes me forget that they are just trying to destroy the country. No one is a piece of excrement or a piece of trash.

I may vehemently disagree with their policies but I need to refrain from those words.

NOW……The substance of what he is saying?

It’s a total diversion, he’s just a career politician that we the voters have allowed to continue their “public service” at our expense.

We need to do a better job and throw these guys out of office…………..ASAP.

PappyD61 on September 5, 2009 at 4:32 PM

PappyD, since you want to clean up your vocab, a noble goal, I will take up the mantle for you. Warner was a complete horse’s ass for treating his constituent in this manner. It is denigrating to reply with such a sarcastic and assholish answer. He needs to goooooooo.

di butler on September 5, 2009 at 5:06 PM

Ernie is some 19 year old student who claims to be a libertarian (he must think it sounds cool) which is contradicted by his false sense of entitlement to free healthcare. All I can say, is get a job. Nobody owes you anything, you bum.

Blake on September 5, 2009 at 5:19 PM

Universal health care is in the interest of the general welfare.

Have a nice day.

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

People already have access to health care. What you and your comrades want is total control of the medical care system. That is most certainly not in the interest of the general welfare of the country.

Get that? general welfare of the country … not individuals.

However, since there are literally thousands and thousands of filthy rich liberals in this nation, I see no reason why you, and them shouldn’t set up an insurance company, or some type of national fund where liberals donate and buy people insurance. Donate generously … illegals will want you to buy them insurance too.

darwin on September 5, 2009 at 5:21 PM

I am all for the abolishment of medicare and medicade but does anybody have a plan to actually reduce our medical obligations to seniors? Will we reduce benefits or simply cut off all ties to the program? I would love to hear ideas because I haven’t heard a good one from either side so far. Dems created this mess, we all need to find a way out of it.

weilbourbaki on September 5, 2009 at 5:26 PM

The word nuclear has a negative connotation. The woman is forcefully and intelligently advocating for her position. If that causes some to pee in their pants, so be it.

Blake on September 5, 2009 at 5:29 PM

I am all for the abolishment of medicare and medicade but does anybody have a plan to actually reduce our medical obligations to seniors? Will we reduce benefits or simply cut off all ties to the program? I would love to hear ideas because I haven’t heard a good one from either side so far. Dems created this mess, we all need to find a way out of it.

weilbourbaki on September 5, 2009 at 5:26 PM

Death Panel.

Chris_Balsz on September 5, 2009 at 5:44 PM

Article I, section 8 grants Congress the authority to levy taxes for the promotion of the general welfare.

Universal health care is in the interest of the general welfare.

Have a nice day.

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

You just exhibited your incredible stupidity.

The general population already has coverage and access to care and insurance.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 6:18 PM

bschmalfeldt on September 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM

I forgot to mention that much like most libs your post showed your pompousness. As long as the likes of you are around the politicians surely will be free to sell any b.s.

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 6:20 PM

What part of the Constitution says you get to have an Air Force?

Great, are we done with stupid questions now?

Next.

Proud Rino on September 5, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Telephones? Is that all he could come up with? The constitution does in fact allow everyone a telephone. At least everyone who can pay for one. It does this by protecting private business who in turn offer telephone service to the public. To say that the constitution doesn’t give anyone the right to a telephone is idiotic. It is supposed to protect people like us from people like this clown and in turn allows me to purchase any service from any private company so long as I’m not violating anyone else’s rights.

boomer on September 5, 2009 at 7:12 PM

But has the ship already sailed? Warner would have you think so, but his argument that Medicare/Medicaid is in place and therefore this national healthcare scheme is okay too is a bit of rhetorical trickery. In fact his argument carries little weight. It is illogical. That one program, even a related one, is in place does not by any means justify this next one. We have Medicare/Medicaid, so we can have Obama`s plan is not a logical statement. In any event, the above programs ARE in place but can be completely divorced from Obama`s attempt to get his healthcare “plan” approved. They can be put aside and stripped from the argument all together. This argument is one of whether the Constitution allows Obama`s plan or not. It is hard to base a convincing argument on the Constitution on this matter specifically due to the phrase “provide for the general welfare . . . .” Generally speaking however, I submit the Constitution as a whole must be taken into account. The Founding Fathers would find such a healthcare plan in violation of the spirit of the Constitution and would by no means support it. They would not have supported many of the things that have come with our bloated government. Therefore, the spirit, and in almost all cases excepting the above welfare clause, the letter of the Constitution does not like a national healthcare plan that infringes on Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Many things have been allowed to get passed the Constitution in the past. But it is time to put our feet down. America was never meant to be a socialist nation. And I am confident it will NOT become one.
Of course I have put aside the fact that a survey of nations with such healthcare plans in place shows they feature INFERIOR healthcare. This FACT is one that cannot be overcome by whatever spin the illiberal brigands put on this unhealthycare plan.
Back to Warner and logic and rhetoric. Note that he controls even a hostile audience better than most of the libs we have seen get toasted. And he does it by quieting the audience by repetition. Clever. Nor does he shout. Nor does he become as caustic as his fellows have. HOWEVER, his argument remains illogical. A red herring. AND his comment about the Constitution not specifically describing a “right to have a phone” is inane. Moreover, no one has the right to have a phone, Warner! Ya got to make some money to pay for one. And they are not forced on you by the government, are they now? I wish someone had pointed that out to him at his meeting. I am sure many were thinking it.
Obama and his ilk are no more than brigands intent on damaging and pillaging America. His is a most motley crewe and even Captain Henry Morgan (later Sir Henry Morgan) would not countenance their behavior. We cannot punish these fools the way he would, but we can vote them out of office in record numbers, so let us do so.

Sherman1864 on September 5, 2009 at 7:18 PM

When you get away from strictly construing the Constitution and adopt a “living, breathing” blah, blah, blah approach to the Constitution, the document can mean anything you want it to. So, if the current whim says the Constitutuion’s emanations and penumbra’s allow Government control of healthcare, then who are we commoners and vassels to complain? Don’t be surprised if somewhere down the road, liberals say the Constitution allows banning Christianity because it discriminates against homosexuals (as well as pedophiles, necrophiliacs, practicioners of beastiality, etc…)

olesparkie on September 5, 2009 at 7:31 PM

I honestly was surprised I could log in today.

I simply so disagree with this blog and its position on this issue.

I figured I would be booted.

Healthcare is not either a right or out of the limits of the constitution.

It is like other program, up for debate.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 2:23 PM

Ann: you won’t get booted if you merely disagree… But, you SHOULD be prepared to answer direct questions with FACTS and reasonable dialogue… Especially since we call The Golden State our home of record… BTW: How’s that overspending in Sacramento working out for YOU? for me, not so good… Same same in DC…

Khun Joe on September 5, 2009 at 7:49 PM

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 2:23 PM

But, you SHOULD be prepared to answer direct questions with FACTS and reasonable dialogue

Now that is going to be a problem

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 9:07 PM

What part of the Constitution says you get to have an Air Force?

Great, are we done with stupid questions now?

Next.

Proud Rino on September 5, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Wow you think with such great complexity. /Sarc

I do get a kick out of your childish game playing. Age?

Thomas Jefferson said, “Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”

You really need a class in the Constitution.

http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2009/02/11/the_hell_with_our_constitution

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/drc/opinion/columns/stories/DRC_Williams_Column_0730.8f07e10e.html

In lieu of a class may I suggest:

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 9:12 PM

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

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;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Quite right; no Air Force, just the Air National Guard.

Chris_Balsz on September 5, 2009 at 9:20 PM

The constitutional issue is just code for far-right thinker, hate every tax and dispute every program that supports people

Moderates aren’t interested.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 10:46 PM

BTW: How’s that overspending in Sacramento working out for YOU? for me, not so good… Same same in DC…

I understand the worries over the House bill. I’m concerned, too.

But it’s not an issue constitutionality. It is an issue of what we decide goes into the federal coffers for what.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 10:50 PM

That first video was incredibility embarrassing to watch…Mr. Warner…you should be ashamed of yourself… That has got to be one of the weakest analogies I have ever heard …and you repeated yourself so many times…could it be you didn’t have a clue…duh!!!!!!!!

Second video…ah yes… passion personified.
.

jerrytbg on September 5, 2009 at 10:57 PM

I guess we know what side Allahp is on.
.
First he puts on a video of Schakowsky which has 3 seconds of people booing Ted Kennedy and 5 minutes of her lecturing about the need for single payer
.
Next we have this lecture from Warner.
.
For the palate cleanser, he puts on a woman who makes good arguments but many would call a hysterical rabble rouser.
.
Yes siree, Allahp is sure showing us the Conservative point of view.

FactsofLife on September 5, 2009 at 11:09 PM

FactsofLife on September 5, 2009 at 11:09 PM

That’s not his job… Allah is a provocateur… keep up…

jerrytbg on September 5, 2009 at 11:25 PM

I honestly was surprised I could log in today.

I simply so disagree with this blog and its position on this issue.

I figured I would be booted.

Healthcare is not either a right or out of the limits of the constitution.

It is like other program, up for debate.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 2:23 PM

Well, I am not sure about your problems? logging in, but you certainly like the phrase, “get booted”. If you way totally disagree with a whole blog, then it looks like you would have something rather more substantive to write about.
I find Politico to be a blog I almost completely disagree with because it puts a positive spin on even the most damning statistics concerning the Obama administration. It is what it is but to Politico and other blogs and media in the tank for Obama, it is what it is but it is what it is isn`t. But there I am posting comments without mentioning something about getting blocked. I don`t want to get blocked by Politico, I would rather debate and point our their daily fallacies than get blocked.
I mean it almost totally way sounds like you want to be totally way blocked out, actually.
Something like a . . . uh . . . victim, perhaps?

Sherman1864 on September 5, 2009 at 11:31 PM

good one Sherman…I wonder if she understands…
Such is the progressive mind…

jerrytbg on September 5, 2009 at 11:36 PM

But it’s not an issue constitutionality. It is an issue of what we decide goes into the federal coffers for what.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 10:50 PM

Try this on for size, Ann:

If the constitution doesn’t say it can be done by the federasl government, then it can’t.

If the contitution doesn’t say it can’t be done by the states, then it can.

That is the essence of constitutional law. Essence, get it? As in, “essential?”

Anything can be justified under general welfare, so how come we bother enumerating federal powers at all?

gryphon202 on September 6, 2009 at 12:07 AM

But it’s not an issue constitutionality. It is an issue of what we decide goes into the federal coffers for what.

AnninCA on September 5, 2009 at 10:50 PM

We DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY as the coffers are empty….see the deficit and the debt

Also, ask the CBO

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/16/AR2009071602242.html

http://www.gooznews.com/node/3013

And brush up on your constitutional law .

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 12:14 AM

FactsofLife on September 5, 2009 at 11:09 PM

.
That’s not his job… Allah is a provocateur… keep up…
.
jerrytbg on September 5, 2009 at 11:25 PM

.
This is supposed to be a Conservative blog. Why is it his job to support the provocateurs? There’s abundant provocation from the Left without his input.

FactsofLife on September 6, 2009 at 12:14 AM

To Senator Warner: WHAT THE CONSTITUTION DOESN’T MANDATE, IS LEFT TO THE STATES TO DECIDE MORON!

hopefloats on September 6, 2009 at 12:52 AM

woodythesingingcowboy on September 5, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Actually, that is how it is already run. That is how the Feds get around the ‘pesky’ constitution.

If you are on Medicaid it doesn’t come from DC it comes from your state. (I.E. that is why Medicaid recipients are given State of CA BIC cards here in CA and not given a card form the Feds)

So Warner’s smarmy assed answer is completely foolish as he knows damn well they ALWAYS do things like that to get around any court challenges. The Feds tell the states yeah we’ll give you X amount of dollars if you have ‘Medicaid’ in your state you issue it as you see fit but they all basically follow the Fed guidelines which makes it a de facto Federal program.

Further to the question of axing Medicare. I’m all for axing it. Though I know it couldn’t be done cold turkey as there are two generations of people who’d be screwed because their paychecks have been raped by taxes their whole working life to pay for this junk and haven’t been able to save/invest for their futures sufficiently to fund their retirements.

So yes, a process of weening ourselves off of the Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid system is very much needed in addition to about 50 other things in this health care debate before we even get to suggestions of Obama’s Commie Crew.

P.S. am I hearing him wrong or does Warner call owning a telephone a ‘right’? Since when is owning an f’ing phone a right? AFAIK it is a LUXURY you pay for if you have the extra money. GD I am SICK of people claiming everything as a right to get it for ‘free’ somehow, someway.

MannyT-vA on September 6, 2009 at 7:13 AM

As to the first video, I say we start weaning people of Medicare today. Ask senior you know which they would prefer – contributing over a lifetime to a pool that does not provide or having the power and freedom to provide for themselves. You might be surprised by the answer. And challenge others with this – don’t be bowled over by the “you’d leave all the old people to die in the streets” rhetoric. And then, let’s tackle fed oversight of education – the last time the fed did anything good for our schools was Brown vs. Board… – and that was not legislation! And if a phone is a gov perk, why are my taxes on service so high?

About the second video – I love that woman. She’s my hero for today. I hope she gets out to speak at a 9/12 event next weekend.

The tide is turning. Our points are getting through. We must remain vigilant. They have something up their sleeves – you know it.

gopmom on September 6, 2009 at 7:53 AM

There is a difference between Medicare and a single payer Government run health care program. Medicare provides relief to individual elderly in terms of health care costs. A single payer Government run health care program is not providing relief to individuals, but is running thew show. The Founding Fathers would have recognized legislation to provide individual relief; probably they would have the States could do it, but not the federal government. I think they would have said words to the effect of “no way ever” to a single payer Government run health care program on consitutional grounds.

Phil Byler on September 6, 2009 at 8:03 AM

Here’s an eloquent critique of “the Obama Doctrine”
(as shared – unfortunately – by too many in government and elsewhere):

http://www.voncampe.com/monthlyarticles/socialists_within.html

Lockstein13 on September 6, 2009 at 8:06 AM

CWforFreedom on September 5, 2009 at 9:12 PM

That’s great but that doesn’t answer my question. Constitution doesn’t authorize an Air Force. Which part of the Constitution says you get to have an air force?

Proud Rino on September 6, 2009 at 8:18 AM

As to the first video, I say we start weaning people of Medicare today. Ask senior you know which they would prefer – contributing over a lifetime to a pool that does not provide or having the power and freedom to provide for themselves. You might be surprised by the answer.

gopmom:
First off, thank you. I think something needs to be done to reduce our entitlement costs. I would propose that we raise the retirement age to 72 and then subsidize heath care for the those now stuck in the divide between 65 and 72. What I don’t know can be done is that a bill to change the terms of retirement would be able to pass due to obvious senior resistance. Seniors feel ENTITLED to money ALREADY SPENT. From this point, money is being forcefully redistributed from the young to the old, by kicking the can down the road. IS THERE ANY WAY OUT OF THIS?

weilbourbaki on September 6, 2009 at 9:12 AM

WWJD?

bschmalfeldt on September 6, 2009 at 9:48 AM

bschmalfeldt on September 6, 2009 at 9:48 AM

The Healthcare REform Bill has nothing to do with charity. It is about a Marxist Government taking total control of our lives from cradle to grave. How dare you try to assume that Christ would support the plans of this Administration who refused to participate in the National Day of Prayer, but, instread threw a celebratory dinner for the Islamic Holiday of Ramadan. Christ himself told us that we will alway have the poor with us. In Christ’s teachings and in both the Old and New Testaments, charity is indeed stressed. But, it is the individual’s responsibility. Christ did not call for a Government Program.

kingsjester on September 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM

People are just fed up with the unbelievable arrogance of Government and its employees. This has been coming for years and has culminated in this administration. Government has bullied the middle class and small business for years.

elclynn on September 6, 2009 at 10:11 AM

Which part of the Constitution says you get to have an air force?

Proud Rino on September 6, 2009 at 8:18 AM

The part that says the fed is to defend this country.

It has nothing to do with this argument anyway. Nothing at all. Your argument actually is quite immature and based on ignorance.

The defense of the country benefits all while these govt. insurance programs benefit the few . Read the constitution it speaks of the general welfare.

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM

But, it is the individual’s responsibility. Christ did not call for a Government Program.

kingsjester on September 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Of course, and if the individuals didn’t provide for their fellow man, Jesus Christ would prefer that people not have health care, because He is an ardent believer in the free market.

Or…

Maybe we could all leave religion out of it, since “Trying to figure out what Jesus would want us to do” is kind of irrelevant in terms of making good or bad policy.

Proud Rino on September 6, 2009 at 10:23 AM

WWJD?

bschmalfeldt on September 6, 2009 at 9:48 AM

So jesus by the force of numbers would force people to take care of their brothers? I think not

Are you simplesimon? Seriously.

Bet yo think you had us there. Lol

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:23 AM

Of course, and if the individuals didn’t provide for their fellow man, Jesus Christ would prefer that people not have health care, because He is an ardent believer in the free market.

We should leave religion out of it that is true.

It is quite clear in the Bible that free will was important and therefore, all of this forced charity would not fly with Him. There is little doubt that Jesus understood that people by their own actions could become successful. Read the parable of talents.

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:27 AM

“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
–James Madison

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM

The part that says the fed is to defend this country.

Doesn’t say anything about an Air Force.

It has nothing to do with this argument anyway. Nothing at all. Your argument actually is quite immature and based on ignorance.

Yes it does. Someone said that there’s nothing in the Constitution that says you can take over health care, and that’s true. There’s also nothing about the air force either.

Read the constitution it speaks of the general welfare.

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:20 AM

I just read it. It didn’t mention an air force either.

Proud Rino on September 6, 2009 at 10:31 AM

“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
–James Madison

CWforFreedom on September 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM

I agree. We need a private air force, which would be more efficient than an inefficient government one which is just stealing your money via taxes.

Proud Rino on September 6, 2009 at 10:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4