Skip to content

Leftists Don’t Care What the Constitution Says

December 22, 2009

Liberals have long viewed the Constitution as a quaint anachronism to be overcome. Now that they’re in power in Washington, they’re trying to do an end run around it.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, says the left-wing Big Government crowd in Washington doesn’t recognize the limitations on the government’s powers that are provided for in the Constitution.

They view this as a grant of the ability of the government to act not as government but rather as king and that’s not the way our constitutional republic is set up. The way it works in the United States is it’s a limited federal government. That’s what the Constitution outlines, very clearly.  And this idea that the federal government can come in and mandate acquisition of insurance or frankly this entire program violates a number of constitutional provisions, but, judge, it points to something else…[ObamaCare supporters in Congress] don’t care what the Constitution says in this regard. What they think is they’re the government and they know best.

When pressed, ObamaCare supporters on Capitol Hill can’t explain what part of the Constitution of the United States of America authorizes the federal government to force Americans to buy health insurance.

Glenn Beck’s substitute host Judge Andrew Napolitano played an audio recording of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ridiculing the questioner. When asked, “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?” she replied, “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

A requirement to purchase health insurance is plainly unconstitutional.

Legal thinkers David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey have also argued that “The Constitution assigns only limited, enumerated powers to Congress and none, including the power to regulate interstate commerce or to impose taxes, would support a federal mandate requiring anyone who is otherwise without health insurance to buy it.”

Such a requirement, which would give the IRS the power to go after people who refuse to purchase insurance, is also massively unpopular among the American people. Lawmakers know this. That’s one of the reasons they’ve been insisting on huge home state bribes in order to vote for it. They hope that the pork and special legislative favors they bring home to their states will help the public forgive them for supporting this monstrosity.

Horse-trading away America’s future, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), whose support for this measure could lead to his electoral defeat in his conservative home state in 2012, insisted on $100 million extra for Medicaid for Nebraska. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) cut a deal to exempt 800,000 seniors in Florida from possible benefit cuts by private Medicare Advantage plans.

Advertisements

Obama’s Fascist Healthcare Takeover Passes Senate

December 21, 2009

In the dead of night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who seems unaware that he is currently enjoying his final term in the U.S. Senate, mustered the 60 votes he needed to ram ObamaCare through his chamber. Approval of the cloture motion allows the legislation to move forward for a final debate and vote later this week.

The current iteration of ObamaCare is classic Mussolini-style Fascism (i.e. corporatism). It forces Americans at gunpoint to purchase health insurance, a requirement never before imposed on the American people. The big insurance companies and the federal government have combined to subject the public to this tyrannical mandate that Americans overwhelmingly oppose. This is the economic essence of Fascism.

Shame on them on all.

Nonetheless, William Kristol of the Weekly Standard offers some words of encouragement to the patriotic Americans who still believe in limited government.

Keep fighting on health care. Fight for the next few days in the Senate. Fight the conference report in January in the Senate and the House. Start trying to repeal the worst parts of the bill the moment it passes, if it does.

After all, never before has so unpopular a piece of major legislation been jammed through on a party-line vote. This week, Rasmussen showed 57% of voters nationwide saying that it would be better to pass no health care reform bill this year instead of passing the plan currently being considered by Congress, with only 34% favoring passing that bill. 54% of Americans now believe they will be worse off if reform passes, while just 25% believe they’ll be better off. Making the 2010 elections a referendum on health care should work–if Republicans don’t let up in the debate over the next year.

Indeed ObamaCare may be the Democrats’ undoing. They are betting everything on their healthcare plan, which won’t kick in for years to come. A public backlash before then could halt the program in its tracks and kill it, leading to a Bastille Day-like slaughter at the polls for the Democratic powers that be. Keep your fingers crossed.

Of course, it would be better to abort this statist monstrosity while in the womb, but the beauty of politics is that the fight is never really over. There will be more battles to come.

As Kristol writes, “Fight on with respect to health care. Fight on other fronts. And recruit new fighters. In a word: Fight. ”

Meanwhile, Rep. Pete DeFazio (D-Ore.), a socialist lawmaker who belongs to the radical Congressional Progressive Caucus, explained why he hates wealthy people.

From a report in The Hill:

He gives partial credit for his special brand of liberalism to having worked at a country club as a teenager. Each summer, his father ran a camp for troubled inner-city kids on Cape Cod, where they caddied for golfers at a country club. DeFazio would work alongside the kids.

“They were servants for the rich, as was I,” he said. “I shagged golf balls for rich people. I carried golf clubs for rich people, and I learned very early on, when I was pretty young, that this was a group of people that had nothing special to offer to me or to society.”

With DeFazio, it’s personal. It’s pure Marxist, class consciousness-based hatred.

Does this mean his values and personality are so malleable that if he’d a different job growing up he’d be a free market-loving libertarian?

Zinn’s Ahistorical Anti-American Movie Cheers On Community Organizers

December 14, 2009

Howard Zinn (left) with the very serious-looking actor Viggo Mortensen

The small-screen version of Marxist historian Howard Zinn‘s leftward-slanted history of America, The People Speak, aired Sunday night on the History Channel.

The film, based on Zinn’s influential book, A People’s History of the United States,  is chock full of useful idiot celebrities including Matt Damon, Marisa Tomei, Morgan Freeman, Viggo Mortensen, Sean Penn, Bruce Springsteen, and its executive producer Josh Brolin, all parroting the radical platitudes written for them.

One scene in the shlockumentary tells the story of an organizer-agitator who rallied tenants against landlords during the Great Depression. In the current recession, “We’ve seen examples of people rebelling,” said Zinn. “We’ve seen tenants rebelling against foreclosures. This is the kind of thing that happened in a much larger scale in the 1930s.”

Added Zinn, “If this spreads — the idea of fighting foreclosures, the idea of workers going on strike — it’s possible this can lead into a larger movement for economic justice.”

This is what the radical community organizers of ACORN do. ACORN is about causing upheaval that will ignite social change. The group cares little about abstractions about justice: it is focused on revolution.

Through its support for the financial affirmative action program known as the Community Reinvestment Act, ACORN has played a major role in the subprime mortgage mess that has undermined Americans’ support for free market problem-solving and set off a worldwide chain of financial troubles. It is also implicated in vote fraud schemes from coast to coast. ACORN aims to give America change that socialists can believe in – by any means necessary.

And now Congress is poised to begin funding the advocacy group-cum-organized crime syndicate again.

Last week the House Appropriations Committee rejected on a party line vote an amendment that would have blocked federal funding of the radical advocacy group. The amendment was needed because the Obama administration thumbed its nose at a provision in spending legislation that banned ACORN funding until Dec. 18.

In a ruling revealed late last month by the Justice Department the Obama administration invented a loophole allowing the government to continue funding the president’s friends at ACORN. Through the magic of legal interpretation, the language forbidding funding the group was transformed into a requirement not “to refuse payment on binding contractual obligations that predate” the original funding ban. U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon, a Bill Clinton appointee, helped ACORN out by offering the Obama administration political cover by issuing a temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN.

The bottom line is that the ACORN funding language –rendered useless by the Justice Department– remains in the massive fiscal 2010 spending measure now on its way to President Obama for his signature.

The Obama administration’s bailout of ACORN may help keep the financially distressed group that had been considering filing bankruptcy before Christmas open for business.

The bailout should be music to the ears of Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a huge fan of ACORN who has given thousands of dollars over the years to the ACORN network. Nadler urged ACORN’s lawyer to sue the government, arguing that a ban on funding constituted a “bill of attainder.” Within weeks, ACORN took his advice.

Palin, Polar Bears and Cheap-Shots: How the Left Ignores the Economy, Fraud and Facts in Persuit of Their Agenda-Driven Science

December 11, 2009

After Copenhagen, polar bears won't be the only ones on thin ice

In spite of Climate-gate that has, at the very least, brought reasonable doubt to the validity and motives behind the theory of global warming, more has been reported about Tiger Wood’s sex life than the impact the “success” of Copenhagen will have on the economy.

In an op-ed piece in The Washing Post written by Sarah Palin, the former Governor of Alaska, made the point:

“The agenda–driven policies being pushed in Copenhagen won’t change the weather, but they would change our economy for the worst.”

Chris Matthews host of MSNBC’s Hardball told his guests Chrystia Freeland, Financial Times and Eugene Robinson, of The Washington Post Palin’s concern for the economic impact was nothing more than a “cheap shot” and continued to ignore the facts.

Read more…

Is Climategate The Last Gasp of Global Warming Hysteria?

December 7, 2009

As the Climategate scandal continues to unfold, it appears the final chapter is being written in the great anthropogenic global warming swindle pushed so vigorously and for so long by the world’s leading climate change hoax-perpetrator, former Vice President Al Gore. The scandal is a case of “scientists cooking the books, changing the research, changing the numbers, changing the actual temperatures, discrediting people in e-mails, saying how do we discredit them, how do we make them go away, et cetera, et cetera,” said Glenn Beck.

The so-called scientific consensus that Gore and a generation of true believers promoted has been gradually disintegrating for years but news that the key scientists involved in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have been falsifying data has accelerated the process. Yet some in the media, even some of those journalists supposedly on the right, still don’t get it and continue to cling to their faith in the anthropogenic global warming religion. Shame on them.

The high water mark for Gore’s fantasy must have been 2007 when he and the now-disgraced IPCC were jointly awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for their commitment to saving the human race from itself. The award came on the heels of Gore’s surprise hit of a movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

“For years, anyone who criticized global warming was accused of being bought and paid for by the polluting industry and whatnot, while these enlightened, objective scientists, you know, were beyond reproach,” author Jonah Goldberg said on Glenn Beck’s TV show.

No wonder Al Gore’s been terrified of publicly debating the science of global warming and climate change. He’s got billions of dollars in potential personal worth on the line. Surely he knew long ago that the science wasn’t there.

NewsReal Looks at the World: This Week, Iran

December 7, 2009
Dr. Ramin Pourandarjani

Dr. Ramin Pourandarjani, murdered for speaking out against Iranian government brutality

When spontaneous street demonstrations broke out following the fraudulent Iranian presidential election last June, the Mullahs lost no time in unleashing the security forces and their allied militias upon the protesters. Scores were killed, and images of the carnage made the rounds of YouTube and other outlets.

The demonstrations were crushed. Hundreds of protesters and opposition activists were taken into custody in the brutal crackdown that followed, and the Western media soon lost interest in the story. For those (mostly young people) now in custody, however, their nightmare was just about to begin. Read more…

NewsReal Sunday: O’Reilly’s Attack on Atheists Doesn’t Do Jesus Any Favors

December 6, 2009

What is your favorite annual Christmas tradition?  I think Bill O’Reilly’s is battling it out with supposed Christmas haters in the secular battle ground of the holiday season. It’s that time of year again: War on Christmas time.

“Why believe in a god?  Just be good for goodness sake.” That is the message of the American Humanist Association’s (AHA) ad campaign on buses in some cities in America.  And those two questions really bother O’Reilly. Read more…