Does this Reflect the View of Most Liberals?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Charles_Main, Aug 3, 2010.

  1. Charles_Main
    Offline

    Charles_Main AR15 Owner

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Messages:
    16,692
    Thanks Received:
    2,238
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Ratings:
    +2,251
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1-eBz8hyoE]YouTube - PETE STARK: - The Federal Government can do most anything in this country -[/ame]

    This peach of a politician is also famous for Goading the Minuet Men saying on TV to one of them. "How many Illegals are you going to go out and kill today" and more recently is on record saying the Border is Very Secure.

    But what I want to know is how many other liberals think the Federal Government can do "most anything"


    The Woman then said "you sir, and people like you are Destroying this country" Just an average American who gets it. IMO

    Read more: Congressman Stark: "The Federal Government Can Do Most Anything" - Page 2 - Technorati Politics


    The scary thing is he may be right. IMO if none of the Law suits against Obamacare succeed. Then the Government will be able to do ALMOST anything under the commerce clause. After all with Health care they are claiming they can Make you buy something simply because you are not buying it. Under that logic they could use the commerce clause to massively expand the scope and power of the Federal government.

    IMO if we lose these law suits against the unconstitutional Health care Bill. Federalism is Dead.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2010
  2. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,620
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,215
    Yes, that is the consensus of most on the Left. It is not a matter whether gov't has the power to do something. It is a matter of whether their actions will result in something good or bad. Thus limiting handguns in school zones sounds like a great exercise of federal power. Except the USSC declared they didnt have that power (Lopez).
     
  3. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    I swear we've seen this thread before...
     
  4. RDD_1210
    Offline

    RDD_1210 Forms his own opinions

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    14,699
    Thanks Received:
    1,298
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +2,018
    Yeah, we've been through this already. This woman is NOT an average american. Not if she thinks the healthcare bill equates to slavery. Give me a break.
     
  5. Charles_Main
    Offline

    Charles_Main AR15 Owner

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Messages:
    16,692
    Thanks Received:
    2,238
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Ratings:
    +2,251

    Like that changes anything about the Congressman's comments. Or liberals who believe it. Her question is completely legitimate, and one Average Americans would like to hear answered.

    I can even see her Argument about slavery, though I do think it is over the top. The point is the Government is claiming the power to mandate you Buy something, simply because you are not buying it. One can see how you might feel like a slave when not only do you have to pay taxes, but the government can FORCE you to buy things they want you to buy from Private companies using the Commerce clause. What is next buy a Hybrid car or pay a "Tax" justified under the Commerce clause. It saddens me that so many people have lost site of the single most important thing about American Republican Democracy. That Government should be limited in it's power, not omnipotent
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2010
  6. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    What was that argument? Health insurance = enslavement of providers? I'm not sure I can wrap my head around that.
     
  7. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    Basically, her argument is that the police and firefighters are slaves because they have to do their jobs
     
  8. daveman
    Offline

    daveman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    51,299
    Thanks Received:
    5,693
    Trophy Points:
    1,775
    Location:
    On the way to the Dark Tower.
    Ratings:
    +5,759
    Can you wrap your head around Stark's view that the Federal government can do anything it wants, Constitutional limitations be damned?

    That's the point of this thread.
     
  9. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,809
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,323
    I'm not sure how much stock I'd put into Constitutional opinions offered to a woman trying to bait him with one of the most absurdly idiotic comparisons ever made--she asked a Constitutional question predicated on the assertion that our medical system is run on the backs of slaves.

    Do we have Stark discussing this matter and elaborating on a similar answer in a real forum, with adults?
     
  10. Richard-H
    Offline

    Richard-H Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Thanks Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +510
    Congressman Stark answered this question extremely poorly. How the question was posed was equally poor, and absolutely leading - she drew the conclusion to her own answer before he even started to answer. I'm surprised he fell for it. He seems like a plant.

    The correct answer is:

    There is no definitive limit to which unalienable rights exist.

    Yet every right is a limited right.

    So that yes, the government may consider a right to healthcare, but only a limited right to healthcare. Defining that limit is a challenge for the legislature and supreme court.

    Acknowleding that everyone has a limited right to healthcare does not mean that anyone is a slave to anyone else.

    It is clear that there is no right to practice healthcare professions. It is a priviledge, not a right. The government has a responsibility to set the standards by which the healthcare professionals may and may not exercise that priviledge.

    It is entirely possible for the Government to both set the standard by which healthcare may operate while at the same time defining a limited right to healthcare services for everyone - without undue burden on the healthcare professionals.
     

Share This Page