I don’t care about the constitution on this

This doesn’t come as a surprise to anyone I’m sure:

In his defense of supporting Obamacare, Congressman Phil Hare states very assuredly he doesn’t care about the Constitution on this issue. Mainly because we’re assured of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. But none of that really matters because people are going bankrupt paying for health care.

First of all, it’s possible to fix health care without trampling all over the Constitution.  Second, this is their cause celebre for trampling all over the Constitution, what if the next party in charge picks one Phil Hare doesn’t like?  That’s the POINT of respecting the US Constitution.  Once that respect is gone, it’s gone for EVERYONE.  People just don’t get that.  It protect everyone by keeping the government off their backs.  Rather than super-imposing federal government all over every single aspect of health care, if we had simply scaled back the federal involvement we probably could have gotten the cost down to provide a lot more services.  That makes a LOT of sense to someone like me.  It’s totally alien to someone like Phil Hare because in order to get the end result of everyone having health care, he would have to give up control.  Small minds can’t think that way.

Now this is where it gets real fun:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

That is what each Congressman swears to do when they become a member of Congress.  Now, if you don’t support the US Constitution, as Phil Hare states, then you are an enemy of the US Constitution.  It is now the obligation of Congress to defend the Constitution of the United States.  I won’t even take a poll on the chances Nancy Pelosi will do what she is obligated to do by the contract that defines her position.  However, from this point forward, Phil Hare stands in treason.  If I suggest he should be shot, then all the left wing nut jobs will have an orgasm.  So, I’ll just suggest he should be removed from office by the Attorney General.  That would be be, drum roll please, Eric Holder, rim shot.

Related Posts

  • March 16, 2010 -- Reforming health insurance without spending one cent: California (0)
    I've decided rather than bitching and moaning about Obamacare passing or not, which inevitably it won't, and if it does, won't do squat to fix anything, I'm gonna take the high road and fix it all ...
  • May 17, 2010 -- Obama and the commerce clause (0)
    Every so often a friend says something that says what I want to say so much better than I ever could.  In this case it's CMC Sand.  I've quoted her here before.  In essence, the Obama administratio...
  • June 7, 2011 -- Prejudice in the name of human rights (0)
    Every week opensecrets.org highlights some group.  This week, in honor of President Obama declaring this month "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month", opensecrets targeted the Human R...
  • March 7, 2012 -- Al Franken wants to decide what health benefits you can have (0)
    Al Franken has a problem: DEAR REPUBLICANS: My boss is not my doctor. My health care choices are none of my boss’s business -- and none of yours, either. Seriously -- what’s wrong with y...
  • April 1, 2010 -- Henry Waxman doesn’t understand (0)
    Here's the headline story: Last week, telecommunications giant AT&T, which employs more than 280,000 people, announced it would take a $1 billion, non-cash, first-quarter loss because the bill...

Tags: , , , , , , ,

  • Moonage

    Hare’s defense, as expected, is his words were taken out of context.

    I have the entire context there. It’s not a blurb, it’s an entire train of thought.

NAVIGATION