Pelosi Says 'Are You Serious?' When Asked Constitutional Basis for Health Insurance M

There are NO CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS TO FORCE ANY AMERICAN TO PAY HEALTH INSURANCE.

Moreover, Federal and State Taxes are ILLEGAL.

Let's NOT PAY THEM, and see where these idiots land - straight to hell and back groveling for water to quench their thirst.


It isn't LAW yet, and the FED has NOT the authority to do this except by AMENDMENT, since it will strain the Economy in the present form, much as they had to do an Amendment to INCLUDE Income Taxes as per the 16th Amendment.

There's a method to your madness.
 
There are NO CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS TO FORCE ANY AMERICAN TO PAY HEALTH INSURANCE.

Moreover, Federal and State Taxes are ILLEGAL.

Let's NOT PAY THEM, and see where these idiots land - straight to hell and back groveling for water to quench their thirst.

I choose to live in this country and therefore must abide by its laws. Although, I would prefer not to have to pay any taxes at all, that is neither feasible nor currently legal as long as the courts uphold the Constitutionality of taxes. Therefore, I'll live with the fact that there are two things that are inevitable in this life: death and taxes. Oh wait there actually is a third thing that is inevitable... political corruption.

Immie

The Congress has NOT the Authority to take over this part of the Economy.
 
There are NO CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS TO FORCE ANY AMERICAN TO PAY HEALTH INSURANCE.

Moreover, Federal and State Taxes are ILLEGAL.

Let's NOT PAY THEM, and see where these idiots land - straight to hell and back groveling for water to quench their thirst.

I choose to live in this country and therefore must abide by its laws. Although, I would prefer not to have to pay any taxes at all, that is neither feasible nor currently legal as long as the courts uphold the Constitutionality of taxes. Therefore, I'll live with the fact that there are two things that are inevitable in this life: death and taxes. Oh wait there actually is a third thing that is inevitable... political corruption.

Immie

The Congress has NOT the Authority to take over this part of the Economy.

Hehe,

Yeah, don't tell me... tell them.

Immie
 
I choose to live in this country and therefore must abide by its laws. Although, I would prefer not to have to pay any taxes at all, that is neither feasible nor currently legal as long as the courts uphold the Constitutionality of taxes. Therefore, I'll live with the fact that there are two things that are inevitable in this life: death and taxes. Oh wait there actually is a third thing that is inevitable... political corruption.

Immie

The Congress has NOT the Authority to take over this part of the Economy.

Hehe,

Yeah, don't tell me... tell them.

Immie

They KNOW this...*I* Shouldn't have to tell them Remember Immie? They took an OATH of office that meant ZERO to them. It's on daily Display. We've told them NO...and it was hit home again yesterday...

Thus the ROADBLOCK they face, and a vote will NOT come this weekend. They know their jobs are in Jeapordy.
 
The Congress has NOT the Authority to take over this part of the Economy.

Hehe,

Yeah, don't tell me... tell them.

Immie

They KNOW this...*I* Shouldn't have to tell them Remember Immie? They took an OATH of office that meant ZERO to them. It's on daily Display. We've told them NO...and it was hit home again yesterday...

Thus the ROADBLOCK they face, and a vote will NOT come this weekend. They know their jobs are in Jeapordy.

Even if 80% of the people literally despised the plans that they are forcing down our throats, few of their jobs are in jeopardy. Americans wont boot their asses out in the streets as they should. Once an incumbent... nearly always an incumbent until the day you decide to retire and they know this.

Immie
 
What uneducated fool believes that health insurance reform is not constitutional? Such idjits better go study their Alexander Hamilton and the bills that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agreed with in the beginning. The federal government has the implied power to regulate without the doofi whining and squirming in the gravel.

It's not in the constitution. Hence the outcry regarding Pelosi's ignorance. She either deliberately tried to lie to the people about the contents of the constitution, or she just never reads it herself.
 
What uneducated fool believes that health insurance reform is not constitutional? Such idjits better go study their Alexander Hamilton and the bills that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agreed with in the beginning. The federal government has the implied power to regulate without the doofi whining and squirming in the gravel.

It's not in the constitution. Hence the outcry regarding Pelosi's ignorance. She either deliberately tried to lie to the people about the contents of the constitution, or she just never reads it herself.


She, as Obama, had taken an OATH but *IGNORE* it. It's time we call them upon it AND bring them up on charges.
 
T has it wrong as usual. Go find where Jefferson told Madison, his leader in Congress, to give the vote to Hamilton's programs in return for the national capitol being located in the South.

T, get being a tool for the far right wind bags.

Man Jake, I see you are continuing your spin artist agenda by misrepresenting our Founders as usual? You are seriously mentally ill bro. ~BH
 
T has it wrong as usual. Go find where Jefferson told Madison, his leader in Congress, to give the vote to Hamilton's programs in return for the national capitol being located in the South.

T, get being a tool for the far right wind bags.


Jake? *I* Stand with the Founders of this nation that *YOU* have no regard of, and consider THEM dead with their ideals of Individual Liberty.

*I* stand in rather good company...and you? *YOU stand with the Bolsheviks, Communists, Liberals, Statists that don't care a WIT of you, or your LIBERTY.

Put that in your pipe and try to get high, 'Bro...Hopefully you'll get sick sooner or later.
 
Pelosi Says 'Are You Serious?' When Asked Constitutional Basis for Health Insurance Mandate

Yep, she sure did. The question is more is she serious? Does she not really know, or was it another moment of arrogance for her?

I heard Neal Boortz speak briefly of this this morning while driving to a job and decided to look into what Neal stated. And yep...she did ask the question.

Astounding, don't you think?

(Click on the link above).

Since when did Congress and Democrats in particular give a shit what the Constitution says? They have been claiming all sorts of nonexistent powers for years. Any idea how many times I've heard a Democrat say that because the Constitution doesn't forbid it Congress can claim any power it wants? Democrats and liberals have been bastardizing the Constitution for years. Do you really expect them to stop now? The Constitution doesn't forbid Congress from providing all citizens with rotating sex partners, free beer and a free movie on Saturday nights -but they don't do that, do they? But Pelosi thinks the power of Congress to ORDER people to buy a certain product or suffer financial penalties or even imprisonment exists in the Constitution now? Pure fascism.

Liberals LOVE fascism -using the power and force of the state to deprive citizens of their freedoms and to FORCE them to do what government has decided is in their best interests. Liberalism cannot exist without the fascist state. The exact opposite of our founding principles. NO ONE is a better judge of what is in my best interests -than myself. Those who believe otherwise about themselves not only despise their own freedoms and are willing to forfeit them -but are living in the wrong country. But they have no right to sell off MY freedoms.
 
Pelosi Says 'Are You Serious?' When Asked Constitutional Basis for Health Insurance Mandate

Yep, she sure did. The question is more is she serious? Does she not really know, or was it another moment of arrogance for her?

I heard Neal Boortz speak briefly of this this morning while driving to a job and decided to look into what Neal stated. And yep...she did ask the question.

Astounding, don't you think?

(Click on the link above).

Taking on these For Profits is exactly what government exists for. Going after corporate corruption and greed is not socialism.

Does the constitution say bankers/lobbyists should run our government? They do. If you don't care about that stuff, I don't think you really care about the constitutionality of healthcare reform. You're just protecting robber barons and rich ceo's. The people who want to keep the status quo on healthcare are the ones that are crying unconstitutionality. The same people who defended the oil companies at $4 a gallon. That had a lot to do with the recession we went into. Lots of jobs lost when gas went that high. Now people don't have enough disposable income because of healthcare. Blablabla. Bottom line, this is exactly what government exists for.

Is tort reform constitutional?

Why is healthcare reform unconstitutional. Please explain the unconstitutionality of it.

Are lobbyists unconstitutional?
 
What uneducated fool believes that health insurance reform is not constitutional? Such idjits better go study their Alexander Hamilton and the bills that Thomas Jefferson and James Madison agreed with in the beginning. The federal government has the implied power to regulate without the doofi whining and squirming in the gravel.

Give us a quote that establishes the constitution establishes health care for all.

Fucking retard.
 
Let me see, where to begin with this one, well first of all this legislation has several problems when it comes to the constitution. among them the 14th, 10th, and 16th Amendments when it comes to mandates. If for example, mandates are constitutional and congress has unilmited powers under the constitution to mandate that people purchase healthcare coverage therefor taking away that choice then that sets up a conflict with Roe v. Wade in the 14th Amendment. If a women under Roe and the 14th right to choose is protected then ALL forms of choice when it comes to matters of health are as a matter of constitutional doctrine protected including the choice to purchase healthcare insurance. Unless the court is willing to overturn Roe and thats not likely that is one issue. One other issues with these mandates is this, the 16th Amendment states that the Govt. has basically unlimited power to lay and collect power on INCOME!!!. As the choice itself to purchase a good or service is NOT INCOME and cannot be considered as such and only will be when the good or service is purchased it again fails.

US Tax Court Penn Mutual Case

In dealing with the scope of the taxing power the question has sometimes been framed in terms of whether something can be taxed as income under the Sixteenth Amendment. This is an inaccurate formulation [ . . . ] and has led to much loose thinking on the subject. The source of the taxing power is not the Sixteenth Amendment; it is Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution

Article 1 sec. 8
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

excise- A tax imposed on the performance of an act, the engaging in an occupation, or the enjoyment of a privilege. A tax on the manufacture, sale, or use of goods or on the carrying on of an occupation or activity, or a tax on the transfer of property. In current usage the term has been extended to include various license fees and practically every internal revenue tax except the Income Tax (e.g., federal alcohol and tobacco excise taxes

Facts are even in Article 1, this power to tax on the actual purchase itself is constitutional, the actual mandating of making that choice does not exist in the article. So given that , then you would refer to to the 10th Amendment.

10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

As Mass. and one other state do have mandates upon it's citizens rightly passed by their citizens for healthcare it becomes a state matter and a federal requirement would violate the 10th Amendment.

As you can see there are many many issue with this mandate in this healthcare bill and the CBO has as far back as 1992 said as much. The current healthcare bill advocates know that without these mandates the entire healthcare bill collapses , so it should prove an interesting fight.
 
Pelosi Says 'Are You Serious?' When Asked Constitutional Basis for Health Insurance Mandate

Yep, she sure did. The question is more is she serious? Does she not really know, or was it another moment of arrogance for her?

I heard Neal Boortz speak briefly of this this morning while driving to a job and decided to look into what Neal stated. And yep...she did ask the question.

Astounding, don't you think?

(Click on the link above).

Taking on these For Profits is exactly what government exists for. Going after corporate corruption and greed is not socialism.

Does the constitution say bankers/lobbyists should run our government? They do. If you don't care about that stuff, I don't think you really care about the constitutionality of healthcare reform. You're just protecting robber barons and rich ceo's. The people who want to keep the status quo on healthcare are the ones that are crying unconstitutionality. The same people who defended the oil companies at $4 a gallon. That had a lot to do with the recession we went into. Lots of jobs lost when gas went that high. Now people don't have enough disposable income because of healthcare. Blablabla. Bottom line, this is exactly what government exists for.

Is tort reform constitutional?

Why is healthcare reform unconstitutional. Please explain the unconstitutionality of it.

Are lobbyists unconstitutional?

Answer the question then dumb bo. Is requiring people to purchase health insurance constitutional or not?

If you are on the other hand advocating that the constitution should be violated because of some warped notion of corporate greed well then you obviously can't be helped. Do you even know how 'profitable' insurance companies were on average last year?
 
Last edited:
Pelosi Says 'Are You Serious?' When Asked Constitutional Basis for Health Insurance Mandate

Yep, she sure did. The question is more is she serious? Does she not really know, or was it another moment of arrogance for her?

I heard Neal Boortz speak briefly of this this morning while driving to a job and decided to look into what Neal stated. And yep...she did ask the question.

Astounding, don't you think?

(Click on the link above).

Taking on these For Profits is exactly what government exists for. Going after corporate corruption and greed is not socialism.

Does the constitution say bankers/lobbyists should run our government? They do. If you don't care about that stuff, I don't think you really care about the constitutionality of healthcare reform. You're just protecting robber barons and rich ceo's. The people who want to keep the status quo on healthcare are the ones that are crying unconstitutionality. The same people who defended the oil companies at $4 a gallon. That had a lot to do with the recession we went into. Lots of jobs lost when gas went that high. Now people don't have enough disposable income because of healthcare. Blablabla. Bottom line, this is exactly what government exists for.

Is tort reform constitutional?

Why is healthcare reform unconstitutional. Please explain the unconstitutionality of it.

Are lobbyists unconstitutional?

Answer the question then dumb bo. Is requiring people to purchase health insurance constitutional or not?

If you are on the other hand advocating that the constitution should be violated because of some warped notion of corporate greed well then you obviously can't be helped. Do you even know how 'profitable' insurance companies were on average last year?

Is requiring people to pay social security constitutional? I'm sure there are many many many good things liberals have done that you righties argued were unconstitutional. Medicare, labor laws, unions, tariffs, certain taxes.

My hunch is that this argument is a very weak one. Yes, I'm sure if you disected the constitution, you could make an argument that providing all of us with healthcare is constitutional.

If Fox News thought you had a good argument, they'd be arguing it. Maybe Glen Beck agrees with you. I'm sure he does.
 
Let me see, where to begin with this one, well first of all this legislation has several problems when it comes to the constitution. among them the 14th, 10th, and 16th Amendments when it comes to mandates. If for example, mandates are constitutional and congress has unilmited powers under the constitution to mandate that people purchase healthcare coverage therefor taking away that choice then that sets up a conflict with Roe v. Wade in the 14th Amendment. If a women under Roe and the 14th right to choose is protected then ALL forms of choice when it comes to matters of health are as a matter of constitutional doctrine protected including the choice to purchase healthcare insurance. Unless the court is willing to overturn Roe and thats not likely that is one issue. One other issues with these mandates is this, the 16th Amendment states that the Govt. has basically unlimited power to lay and collect power on INCOME!!!. As the choice itself to purchase a good or service is NOT INCOME and cannot be considered as such and only will be when the good or service is purchased it again fails.

US Tax Court Penn Mutual Case

In dealing with the scope of the taxing power the question has sometimes been framed in terms of whether something can be taxed as income under the Sixteenth Amendment. This is an inaccurate formulation [ . . . ] and has led to much loose thinking on the subject. The source of the taxing power is not the Sixteenth Amendment; it is Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution

Article 1 sec. 8
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

excise- A tax imposed on the performance of an act, the engaging in an occupation, or the enjoyment of a privilege. A tax on the manufacture, sale, or use of goods or on the carrying on of an occupation or activity, or a tax on the transfer of property. In current usage the term has been extended to include various license fees and practically every internal revenue tax except the Income Tax (e.g., federal alcohol and tobacco excise taxes

Facts are even in Article 1, this power to tax on the actual purchase itself is constitutional, the actual mandating of making that choice does not exist in the article. So given that , then you would refer to to the 10th Amendment.

10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

As Mass. and one other state do have mandates upon it's citizens rightly passed by their citizens for healthcare it becomes a state matter and a federal requirement would violate the 10th Amendment.

As you can see there are many many issue with this mandate in this healthcare bill and the CBO has as far back as 1992 said as much. The current healthcare bill advocates know that without these mandates the entire healthcare bill collapses , so it should prove an interesting fight.

Exactly. If the Income Tax is constitutional, then so is this.
 
Let me see, where to begin with this one, well first of all this legislation has several problems when it comes to the constitution. among them the 14th, 10th, and 16th Amendments when it comes to mandates. If for example, mandates are constitutional and congress has unilmited powers under the constitution to mandate that people purchase healthcare coverage therefor taking away that choice then that sets up a conflict with Roe v. Wade in the 14th Amendment. If a women under Roe and the 14th right to choose is protected then ALL forms of choice when it comes to matters of health are as a matter of constitutional doctrine protected including the choice to purchase healthcare insurance. Unless the court is willing to overturn Roe and thats not likely that is one issue. One other issues with these mandates is this, the 16th Amendment states that the Govt. has basically unlimited power to lay and collect power on INCOME!!!. As the choice itself to purchase a good or service is NOT INCOME and cannot be considered as such and only will be when the good or service is purchased it again fails.

US Tax Court Penn Mutual Case

In dealing with the scope of the taxing power the question has sometimes been framed in terms of whether something can be taxed as income under the Sixteenth Amendment. This is an inaccurate formulation [ . . . ] and has led to much loose thinking on the subject. The source of the taxing power is not the Sixteenth Amendment; it is Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution

Article 1 sec. 8
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

excise- A tax imposed on the performance of an act, the engaging in an occupation, or the enjoyment of a privilege. A tax on the manufacture, sale, or use of goods or on the carrying on of an occupation or activity, or a tax on the transfer of property. In current usage the term has been extended to include various license fees and practically every internal revenue tax except the Income Tax (e.g., federal alcohol and tobacco excise taxes

Facts are even in Article 1, this power to tax on the actual purchase itself is constitutional, the actual mandating of making that choice does not exist in the article. So given that , then you would refer to to the 10th Amendment.

10th Amendment
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

As Mass. and one other state do have mandates upon it's citizens rightly passed by their citizens for healthcare it becomes a state matter and a federal requirement would violate the 10th Amendment.

As you can see there are many many issue with this mandate in this healthcare bill and the CBO has as far back as 1992 said as much. The current healthcare bill advocates know that without these mandates the entire healthcare bill collapses , so it should prove an interesting fight.

Exactly. If the Income Tax is constitutional, then so is this.

Sealy, I don't think you read that right, the 16th Amendment and Article1 give congress the power to tax income,

Income Legal Definition;
The gain derived from capital, from labor or effort, or both combined, including profit or gain through sale or conversion of capital. Income is not a gain accruing to capital or a growth in the value of the investment, but is a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property and being received or drawn by the recipient for separate use, benefit, and disposal. That which comes in or is received from any business, or investment of capital, without reference to outgoing expenditures.

While congress does have the power to tax the purchase of insurance itself as long as that tax is the same for everyone, and as long as that transaction can be seen as interstate commerce. However congress does not have the power to tax when the CHOICE to make that purchase has not been made or to use that tax in order to coerce and individual into making that purchase.

Legal Definition of Choice;
CHOICE. Preference either of a person or thing, to one of several other persons or things

Again Sealy, making this portion of the legislation unconstitutional. I do understand why the mandates are there though and that is because they have to be there as offsets for the number of people brought into the system that will raise the cost of care. If these mandates are found to be unconstitutional and many say they will, then the concept of the current legislation will collapse.
 
Taking on these For Profits is exactly what government exists for. Going after corporate corruption and greed is not socialism.

Does the constitution say bankers/lobbyists should run our government? They do. If you don't care about that stuff, I don't think you really care about the constitutionality of healthcare reform. You're just protecting robber barons and rich ceo's. The people who want to keep the status quo on healthcare are the ones that are crying unconstitutionality. The same people who defended the oil companies at $4 a gallon. That had a lot to do with the recession we went into. Lots of jobs lost when gas went that high. Now people don't have enough disposable income because of healthcare. Blablabla. Bottom line, this is exactly what government exists for.

Is tort reform constitutional?

Why is healthcare reform unconstitutional. Please explain the unconstitutionality of it.

Are lobbyists unconstitutional?

Answer the question then dumb bo. Is requiring people to purchase health insurance constitutional or not?

If you are on the other hand advocating that the constitution should be violated because of some warped notion of corporate greed well then you obviously can't be helped. Do you even know how 'profitable' insurance companies were on average last year?

Is requiring people to pay social security constitutional? I'm sure there are many many many good things liberals have done that you righties argued were unconstitutional. Medicare, labor laws, unions, tariffs, certain taxes.

My hunch is that this argument is a very weak one. Yes, I'm sure if you disected the constitution, you could make an argument that providing all of us with healthcare is constitutional.

If Fox News thought you had a good argument, they'd be arguing it. Maybe Glen Beck agrees with you. I'm sure he does.

Social Security is a tax Sealy that comes our of your wages when YOU make the decision to have a job. However it is a tax that meets the criteria I set down above. Not to mention that Social Security itself's constitutionality was called into question by FDR and it took the USSC to make that decision and did so on the Hamilton Federalist view of Govt. rather than the traditional one of the Father of the constitution Madison. Social Security taxes are not mandates, let me ask you this, if you get laid off and don't have a job are you still mandated to pay into Social Security? answer no! See the difference. So yes these mandates in healthcare are way beyond what scope of congressional power(s). Here is what the CBO said about them..

"Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or service,” Congressional Research Service

“The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States,” CBO

“An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.” CBO

You comparison to Social Security is completely off the mark.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top