Shocking, isn’t it?
The man who is President Obama’s newly minted urban czar pocketed thousands of dollars in campaign cash from city developers whose projects he approved or funded with taxpayers’ money, a Daily News probe found.
Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion often received contributions just before or after he sponsored money for projects or approved important zoning changes, records show.
Most donations were organized and well-timed.
Sounds like his community is well-organized
Read the whole thing.
And you all thought ‘pay to play’ was just us here in Illinois, eh?
Every politician
Has a best beloved
After all they’re only
Human, honey-buns. It’s
Odd though, that so many
Fall for the burly builderman.
How did he miss out on a cabinet position? Must have paid his taxes-fool!
Don’t worry, Capt. Spock is on the case, or something.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/opinion/01dowd.html?_r=1
We’re saved from the evil dullard by our pointy-eared (!?!) cold-blooded logical half-blooded (?!?!?!?!?) alien second-in-command.
Why read the NYTimes when I can find better writing on the HuffPo?
Alicea insisted all Boricua donations came from “individuals,” not the college. “We’re very careful about anything that could be construed as a tradeoff or a quid pro quo.”
It must be nice to have a constituency that stupid.
We are living Mencken’s dictum that “Democracy is the idea that the people know what kind of governance they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
Meet the new boss, worse than the old boss!
If this individual proves NOT to have a tax problem, then I submit the Obama administration has reneged on their past practice.
Shameful.
I wonder if it’s going to get more expensive to buy Adolfo now that he’s moved to DC?
I think we need to send MoDo a pair of knee pads, Techie. Also, Joe Klein:
The good news is that Time mistakenly informed me how to (finally) cancel my subscription. Any week now, that peice of shit magazine will no longer appear in my mailbox.
I guess Obammy’s hope is that Adolpho can replicate the cesspool that is the Bronx across the country. I thought he was fully wedded to the Southside Chicago model, but the Bronx is more or less the same.
Obama carnival float
It’s all about making government more efficient.
Before, corrupt political machines were fragmented — leading to much waste and duplicated effort.
Now, under the strong hand of Obama, the graft can be centralized.
It will help make America competitive in the new “flat world” 21st Century economic system.
On corporate extravagance: “Those days are over.†On the public anger over the bailouts: “I promise you — I get it.â€
Dude’s a fucking poet.
B Moe, if I were slighlty more motivated this morning, I could prolly find criticism of Bush for being simplistic.
When O! does it … it’s a symphony of percussion. The short sentences are “commanding.”
Heh, Mark Stein at NRO:
My favorite part is the “We’ve moved beyond cartoon threats and simplistic views” IMMEDIATELY followed by “Bush as a discarded Dauphin (?? Dowd must have thought that looked pretty) watching as Professor Obama erases his work from the blackboard”.
That takes a solid commitment to cognitive dissonance.
What the hell is an “Urban Czar” supposed to do?
nice catch
“That takes a solid commitment to cognitive dissonance.”
Oh they’re committed. I was just thinking the other day about how Michael Moore is apparently making a “film” attacking Wall Street when not long after 9/11 he was suggesting that Bin Laden’s mistake was attacking the WTC because Wall Street is inhabited by blue state people and his enemies are in the red states. I don’t even know how these people do it without their heads spontaneously combusting out of embarassment.
How does thor propose to profit from this economic bullshit? Whatever it is, go the other way. Buy farmable acreage, with water on it. Tough times ahead.
Keep the “community organizing” footsoldiers in line, like making sure they meet their shakedown quotas, and so on…
They taken Newspeak and Doublethink to heart. They love Big Brother, Abe.
*They’ve*
dagnabbit
Hugo leads the way, showing Baracky how it’s done.
Comment by nikkolai on 3/1 @ 11:31 am #
How does thor propose to profit from this economic bullshit? Whatever it is, go the other way. Buy farmable acreage, with water on it. Tough times ahead.
When congress is printing money, go long on gold and silver. Silver 16.50 ish by June.
The government pursuit of Alchemy is well underway. Soon, they’ll be able to print gold and silver as well.
Step away from the MoDo, folks. She’s somehow convinced herself that she’s a gifted writer, which naturally means that she can rest on her laurels.
I think that interpretation explains a lot, actually.
Sdferr,
At least until the food riots caused by far worse shortages now that Emperor THugo and his goons have seized the production facilities.
My guess, Spiny, would have been until the people of V. kill him outright. Or maybe never, if his son inherits the throne.
“Comment by Techie on 3/1 @ 11:23 am #
What the hell is an “Urban Czar†supposed to do?”
Build Potemkin villages.
BECASUE OF THE PEASANTS!!!!!
i’d prefer a czarina-with nice toned triceps
oh..
and big feet to stamp out fires
but-eh-that’s just me
President Hugo Chavez on Saturday ordered troops to temporarily seize control of all Venezuelan rice processing plants to ensure they produce at full capacity amid soaring inflation and persisting reports of food shortages.
This is that moment in “Atlas Shrugged” when John Galt is forced to outline his economic plan on national TV, only to step deftly to the side, revealing the man with the gun behind him before saying, “Get the hell out of my way.”
One of the real highlights of the Obama admin to date is the high quality of the ethics maintained by his nominees.
Card check is a pernicious evil and it is likely coming. Insty linked Kaus who linked this podcast from a Federalist Society debate. Listen to Richard Epstein dismantle this piece of shit. Epstein is the second speaker beginning his talk about a quarter of the way in (no clock), the first speaker is Anthony Segalla, Labor lawyer.
Cripes, this is a farce.
Carrion? No author could create a character with that name and be taken seriously.
Crony Capitalism! Catch The Fever!!!!!!!!!!
He did not say what the takeover would involve or how long it would last.
Everything and forever.
everything and forever
sounds like a Chicago [the band]song
my steel panties are rust
I can’t wait until Chavez’s goons do to rice processing what they’ve done to their oil industry. Production is down, what – 20%?
Which dovetails just wonderfully with Obama’s thoughts that government can provide services more efficiently and cheaper than private industry.
We’re all fucked.
There are some things the government can do more effectively than private industry, Carin. Things like coordinate a national defense, or build a nationwide highway system, or coordinate and standardize a redesigned power grid.
I happen to think that decision-making power should reside at the national level, and implementation issues should be relegated to the states, with federal oversight. If the fed can figure out how to improve healthcare AND make it more cost-effective, let ’em have at it.
Again: we already have a national healthcare system. It’s called the emergency room. Go to the ER on a Friday evening, sometime, and see if it’s what you’d design, if you were designing a healthcare system. Sometimes nature pops out with something by accident, when you’re not doing things on purpose.
Of course, if you’re really into Ayn Rand, you’d just let all the helpless bastards and their offspring suffer and die, but the ER docs don’t work that way.
if you’re really into Ayn Rand, you’d just let all the helpless bastards and their offspring suffer and die
You’ve never really read Rand, have you? Otherwise, you’d be smelling what you just shoveled.
You want to compare notes? We could compare number of trips through Atlas Shrugged, if you want; I first read at age 13 or so, and have read it quite a few times since then. Ditto The Fountainhead and We The Living.
Her nonfiction I haven’t spent much time with. Most of it is dead-obvious stuff; I didn’t see much there worth remembering.
Rand didn’t hold much truck with incompetence, or even habitual failure.
Perhaps that needs a bit of unpacking. Rand wrote a lot of things that were specifically intended to counter other narratives; ones that I have little use for, and so little use for the observation that things exist independently of our perception.
People who disagree with that, you see, wind up being figments of my imagination.
here are some things the government can do more effectively than private industry, Carin. Things like coordinate a national defense, or build a nationwide highway system, or coordinate and standardize a redesigned power grid.
And nationalizing rice processing or the oil industry have nothing to do with that. Production though? Not a chance. I honestly want them to keep their hands off as much as possible.
I happen to think that decision-making power should reside at the national level, and implementation issues should be relegated to the states, with federal oversight. If the fed can figure out how to improve healthcare AND make it more cost-effective, let ‘em have at it.
Decision-making power for what? And, I seriously doubt the Fed can improve healthcare and make it more cost effective. They can do one or the other. Not both.
Again: we already have a national healthcare system. It’s called the emergency room. Go to the ER on a Friday evening, sometime, and see if it’s what you’d design, if you were designing a healthcare system. Sometimes nature pops out with something by accident, when you’re not doing things on purpose.
I am well aware of our national healthcare system. I have a sil who has racked up easily over a million dollars on our dime. We’ve bought her all new teeth (twice!) and have covered countless extended stays in the hospital.
Of course, if you’re really into Ayn Rand, you’d just let all the helpless bastards and their offspring suffer and die, but the ER docs don’t work that way.
I don’t get the anger, here. I’m against socialism and suddenly I want the poor to die in the streets? I don’t think so.
I do know that despite all our efforts to help the poor and eliminate poverty … for some reason, it hasn’t gone away!! I guess we just haven’t tried hard enough.
Rand didn’t hold much truck with incompetence, or even habitual failure.
Neither do I. To be honest.
Me, too. I’m just willing to consider that some things the government is uniquely suited to put their hand in. Some limited set of things.
Oh, wait. Where did I say that? And where did I express anger?
I don’t think we can get rid of poverty. I guess I’m kind of like Jesus, that way. I’m not advocating that we try harder, I’m advocating that maybe we try smarter.
See, we have about three alternatives: we can do healthcare by accident, which is very expensive, or we can maybe design something more cost-effective. The third is that we just cut off all services for folks who can’t pay.
Slart
I’m 54. I read The Fountainhead when I was 12, Atlas Shrugged when I was 13 … wore out the paperback and still have the hard cover edition my parents gave to me for Christmas in 1970.
Personally, Rand had a lot of her own demons out of her own background, but her writings are clear enough that the facile comment you offer that she wants poor people to crawl away and die is not much different than Howard Dean stating that Republicans want to starve children and kill the elderly.
Go back and read the story of 20th Century Motors as related by the “hobo” to Dagney, THEN tell me how without a nationalized healthcare that enslaves doctors and nurses we are just nothing but a bunch of meanies who want people to die.
Back to Darleen’s objections, Rand’s views on charity are a matter of public record. She doesn’t necessarily think it’s an evil, provided that the recipient is of adequate moral character, etc. but it’s very clear that she’d just as soon not think of it at all. Maybe if we don’t think about bad stuff, it will all just go away.
Which is kind of counter to the whole Objectivist way of thought, I think. Things are there, regardless of whether you choose to consider them. Poor people get run over by cars or struck by illness, and you either treat them charitably, or they suffer and die. It’s utter denial to think as if your actions, or lack thereof, have no effect.
So, we’ve got this system in place that has such people get treatment, only it’s wired to treat them in the most expensive way possible. Choosing to keep it that way is smart in what way, exactly?
dammit, I’m now totally pissed.
Back later.
Hopefully your reading comprehension is better when you’re reading Rand, because this point you’ve made up all by yourself.
Oh, I’ve read that passage in excess of a dozen times, Darleen. Don’t fucking lecture me about Rand; I’ve possibly read her more times in the 35+ years since I first picked up one of her books than you have. Possibly understood more, too.
But maybe not. I’ll spot you a couple, if you think that’s important.
Slart, I’ve been to an ER on a friday night, and seen it filled with folks who have kids running fevers. Nothing’s wrong with them, but – you know – they don’t have a doctor. So, they go to the most expensive joint in town to get an advil for little Timmy.
You know how many teens show up in the ER complaining of stomach aches, ’cause they don’t want to fork over their own $12 for the EPT? They KNOW they are pregnant.
Personally, I’ve super-glued my kids cuts together** ’cause I didn’t want to have to pay my co-pay. If you don’t have to pay that (cause it’s free!) … off to the doctor you go!
*** not all of them, but I have done it for a few of them.
Look, I’ve gotten slammed w/o insurance. I had a miscarriage when I was uninsured. You know what they did? They sent me home. Had the whole thing at home. I survived. You think a city doctor would dare to that to someone from Detroit?
hands-across america
‘member that song
we are the world…
spot you a ramone
and see your bee-gee
I did that for myself once, when the X-Acto knife I was using slipped and made a deep slash in my thumb. I was quite surprised to later learn that super glue’s been used in surgery, and that hemophiliacs carry around super-glue for emergencies.
Slart — the problem came when you said this: “Of course, if you’re really into Ayn Rand, you’d just let all the helpless bastards and their offspring suffer and die, but the ER docs don’t work that way.” You not only imputed that attitude towards others here, you’ve since defended the imputation and in the process slung further insults towards Carin and Darleen.
In short, you’re outta line.
The thing about Rand is that even though she herself might not believe charity should be engaged in, she most definitely wouldn’t keep anyone from engaging in it.
“The thing about Rand is that even though she herself might not believe charity should be engaged in, she most definitely wouldn’t keep anyone from engaging in it.”
But she might disapprove, which would be a bad thing if you were an Objectivist in her life and time. Rand ruled her clique with an iron fist, IIRC.
I wrote a fairly lengthy reply to Rob, but the blog ate it. To summarize quickly, lest more words go down the drain:
1) No offense was intended
2) I didn’t point that comment at either Darleen or Carin
3) I don’t assume that either Darleen or Carin are really into Rand.
4) I don’t assume that anyone who reads Rand is into her 100%, because that would be very wierd.
Ah, the blog missed that one. By item 4, I mean that I wouldn’t for example impute Rand’s characterizations of women and sexuality in her books on Carin or Darleen, because that would be wrong and inappropriate.
I’d be glad to discuss Darleen’s and Carin’s actual views on things with them, but I wouldn’t dream of pasting Rand’s entire worldview on either of them.
If that’s not clear, I’m not sure I can make it more so.
I’m not a Randian, but I think “Atlas Shrugged” is particularly relevant to our current situation. Uncanny, it is, and I’m glad I finally finished it before Teh One ascended.
here’s my movie jokes- feel free to abuse them
talking to co-worker
me/ did u c free willy? don’t tell me how it ends
yawn- i’m tired- i rented the never-ending story last nite but =-yawn/ i fell asleep
titanic? does a boat sink in that movie?
cuz i like nazi sub-boat sinking movies
hands-across america was the one that sounded most like a cheesy commercial I think. Thems people what stood in the phony line and held hands, I bet today you’d have a hard time finding one what would admit it. Maybe Craigslist.
i’d like to teach the world to sing
after sucking on this coke bottle
70’s commercials
i prefer the cryin’ injun
casino ownin’ injun
how much toilet waste comes outta foxwoods?
mo/do?
cry 4 me argentina
Slarti! Brother! Breaking away from the bobblehead wolf-pack! All this time! Where you been! Man Hug?
I had a hunch that someone who knows the difference in A-major and A-minor scales couldn’t keep up the Wush-Bimbo Wayn-Wand facade forever.
You’ll never get anywhere with the ignorants here, Slart, because to them the world is a simplified-to-the-extreme good/bad binary. Tah One he da bad man, tah bush he da good, no wait, now tah Bush not teh good, he da bad, now Wush tah good.
Enjoy explaining macro economic applications and cost structure management with clueless fuckin’ Randian eggheads.
Except she’s dead, and I don’t think anyone here has stated they’re Objectivists.
And, man, you did a piss-poor job of expressing points 1-3. Maybe if you’d said that to begin with? Or maybe make it clear you were talking about the more cultish followers, rather than simply “if you’re really into Ayn Rand”?
You must have missed the “in her life and time” part, Rob. I think it’s a safe bet that she wasn’t dead when she was alive.
Ok, I expressed myself badly, for which I am genuinely sorry. But you know the saying “don’t borrow trouble”? I don’t like to lend it.
thor, I don’t think I’m ready for your man-crush yet. Maybe not ever. I at least attempt to talk straight, whereas your approach is to color randomly around your point, when you have one.
But she might disapprove, which would be a bad thing if you were an Objectivist in her life and time. Rand ruled her clique with an iron fist, IIRC.
I’ll have to whip out my Leonard Piekoff, but I don’t think Rand ever used force or the threat of same to prevent charity (or anything else, for that matter). So she disapproves? Fuck her.
Slart
You keep slipping over that voluntary thing that was Rand’s touchstone. She didn’t disapprove of charity if it was something one wanted to do and it made one feel good. It is the same view of charity that Heinlein takes … examine what your motives are, be able to articulate them to YOURSELF, make sure it is YOUR choice and if you still want to do it, have a great time.
Did Dagney toss the “hobo” off the train when he talked about how when someone had a baby everyone took it as a celebration … chipped in to help the young family, or helped out if someone else was sick? Then later on babies were looked at as a plague because each baby meant YOU were sentenced to extra hours without any compensation.
How about the young mother Dagney meets in Galt’s Gulch, the one that talks about what motherhood is really about?
The woman herself was flawed … a Russian Jew who barely got out under Stalin and whose family disappeared after Stalin closed his Utopia to outside eyes (save for the occasional Western dupe or useful idiot). She made a some great missteps in her own life and some of her worldview is, indeed, warped by what she lived, but she had a fierce Romantic view of Man – Man as exceptional – and she wanted to describe a kind of society where morality was based on seeing individuals as ends in themselves, not the means for others.
There is no such thing as a “right” to healthcare, no more than there is a “right” to a flatscreen TV. What Obama has done is convince enough people that they can have their flatscreens and “affordable” healthcare, too — that it only a wretched, evil conspiracy by “the rich” that keeps ’em from that healthcare and by golly THE RICH WILL PAY!!!!111!!1! Eleventy!
Gratitude is a rare emotion and Obama and the Left want to make it extinct.
Shorter Obama: FUCK “CHARITY”, GOVERNMENT will provide!
I’ve only done cursory reads of Rand, but I did go to an Objectivist meeting once in college.
Once was enough.
Shorter Darleen: Dauuuuuh.
Know-nothing insulting simpleton with union healthcare blabbering down from a mount of corrupt largess and lies, you ain’t rich, Duuuuh-Dar, so don’t worry your big fat empty head about paying.
Enjoy explaining macro economic applications and cost structure management with clueless fuckin’ Randian eggheads.
Enjoy explaining to us in an increasingly shrill voice how Blowbama is “stimulating” the economy, and how all the smart guys on Wall Street have unlimited confidence in him.
Your boy is a congenital incompetent with no discernible talent for anything but running his mouth. Just like you.
See thor that’s not how it works. I’m not rich at all but I will pay for sure cause of Baracky’s class warfare budget cause he will suck up monies for his schemes what California and Los Angeles really need cause they are as bad at the running things thing as Baracky. So someone is gonna mug me at some point cause of what Baracky is doing. 10% sales tax. Fuck you, Arnold piece of shit no talent dirty socialist cocksucker. Yes Arnold, I’m calling you a homosexual. Little bitch. Anyway, I’m sort of slowly taking steps and getting things in order to where I could be out of this state on a week’s notice. They don’t have my best interest at heart is why.
duh
simple simon sez
haiku for thor
once upon a crime
wish i had ham -sandwich
sickle my trickle
Accept that humanity is nothing more than a endless chain of assholes knotted together by hunger. You enter life, it chews you up and then it shits you into the ground. I think Celine explains it better than most.
You have no idea what Wall Street is, you’re of the non-participatory class, of the no-money broke dick irrelevant sub-set.
fuck off, Walthor
I do NOT have “union healthcare”, dipshit parental parasite. Like most responsible people, we weighed all our options and purchase outside what I’m offered through work so we can cover the college student, too.
you’ve been a parasite so long you have no clue about morality and family.
So you’re in a group policy, participating in a theoretically socialist grouping of costs and benefits.
You ain’t got the hard cash to pay for all your womanly woes. Your wallet is the only thing thin about ya.
Anyway you slice your logic, Duuuuuh-Dar, it results in a deli meat made of air. Obama’s plan is to create a large group policy for those who want to opt-in, meaning those who want to pay the required premium, you fat coward. If you don’t want it that group then just shut your fat piehole and pay the premium to be in another group. It’s theoretically all the same, nutter.
it = in
only in a libtard world.
Me, too. I’m just willing to consider that some things the government is uniquely suited to put their hand in. Some limited set of things.
Interesting concept. Perhaps somebody should, you know, flesh it out. Maybe create some sort of document that, you know, defines the limits of what government should and should not do.
Of course nobody would ever read, much less abide by the fucking thing. So what’s the point? Free health care for all – let somebody else deal with scarcity!
kids
crayons at rest
it is sticky
in a gadda da vida
it hurts!
in god we trust
it’s crooked
in protien
there is hair
silly wabbit
Walthor, the parental parasite, deliberately tries to obfuscate the primary differences between voluntary participation in market-offered insurance and nationalized healthcare where doctors are slaves and care is rationed …
“oh, Mr. Smith, you’re 68 y/o and you smoked in your 20’s? Sorry, no bypass for you.”
“Well, Ms. York, we know you have a cancerous lump in your breast, but you live in a …well, Republican district so the best we can do is put you on a 18 month waiting list for treatment”
Provided the recipient was of suitable moral character, that is.
I’m not saying Rand made specific recommendations about charity, mind you. She just didn’t think about it all that much. Out of sight, out of mind.
Rand didn’t care for violence; you should know that.
Which has to do with what, exactly? Rand recognized that propagation of the species was important, but it’s not exactly a centerpiece, or even an tangential point, in any of her books.
I agree with that 100% Darleen. Really not sure who you’re arguing with, here, but it isn’t me.
Testify, Slart! I know naught about Rand and her ideas, but I realize we are on the antlers of a dilemma here.
Maybe create some sort of document that, you know, defines the limits of what government should and should not do.
Already done. The Constitution specifically forbids a number of things, universal healthcare not one of them.
I actually don’t know what the government could possibly cook up in that arena that wouldn’t suck, but it ain’t forbidden.
Rand’s really a non-factor in the current debate, cynn. Dunno why I brought her up, actually.
Now I know next to nothing about Ayn Rand or her ideas other than what I come by second hand (which I don’t value very much), but that statement there sounds to me like someone on the eternal lookout for freeriders. Am I wrong about that? That is, she was suspicious of being taken for a patsy?
I happen to think that decision-making power should reside at the national level, and implementation issues should be relegated to the states, with federal oversight. If the fed can figure out how to improve healthcare AND make it more cost-effective, let ‘em have at it.
Would you apply this principle to any other public need or want?
If not then where do you draw the limits of the Federal government?
i think the government should regulate “The Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community”. people shouldn’t be allowed to state that that is what they are without government approval.
/sarc tag
You have no idea what Wall Street is
Keep screeching while Daddy’s trust fund craters, little boy.
Your Presentdent is flying the economy right into the ground. Everyone knows it. The Wall Street guys know it. And you know it.
You voted for a LOSER, loser. Get used to it.
No, I didn’t miss it. I was emphasizing the fact — she’s dead, so how she acted in life is meaningless.
Cautiously. Of course we could go hard-over libertarian, and have everyone own and operate their own personal stretch of roads, etc, and the national defense thingie might be really fun to watch, for a while.
Obviously some ideas don’t work all that well on large scales, but whatever satisfies your sense of revulsion against government.
Hitler is dead, so how he acted in life is meaningless.
Really, Rob, this is not one of your better counterarguments.
You gonna keep tossing up that extreme libertarian strawman as an all purpose deflector, or maybe get serious?
Eh? WTF are you talking about? Get serious about what?
I’m off to exercise. Back later, maybe, to find out where I’ve shirked my obligations.
Shorter Deranged Duuuuh-Dar: Duh.
You’re such a flag-pin ignorant. How would a voluntary participation government organized HMO be any different than any other voluntary participation corporate HMO?
Here you can buy wind (hurricane) and flood insurance from any provider you want, and there’s no more complaints against the Fed. gov’t.’s policies than there are of Allstate and State Farm, Missy Welfare Windbag who lives in her daughter’s basement. Ha! You’re just so full of shit, Duuuuh-Dar. Ya think postal employees will be hired as doctors? You are that stupid, though, in honesty. Haven’t a clue as to what’s being proposed but blaaaaaah, blaaaah comes right out your ass.
Moreover you didn’t even have a clue that they talk about how much college coaches make everyday on ESPN, it’s all public info and a fair and worthy debate as to how a jackass with a coach’s whistle hanging around his neck is paid ten times more than the leading research scientist employed by the state. “But my Mammy said it wasn’t nice to ask what someone makes!” How does one read your comments and not conclude that you speak first and think second.
WTF to you to. What’s with this ‘sense of revulsion’ tripe. Don’t put words in my mouth and don’t tilt at arguments I didn’t make.
I asked you about the limits of the Federal government. Your only reply was that you’d expand them ‘cautiously’ with no mention of any specific limits. Then you tossed off the usual canards about private toll roads and privatization of national defense.
None of which anyone is proposing.
But, by all means keep thinking that you are somehow dodging the crux of this issue.
only a libtard would spew such nonsense.
Tenth Fucking Amendment, Slart: “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.” The Constitution does not grant the feds power to confiscate our wealth to care for the health of others, so that power goes to the states or the people. If the states want to try
rationedsocialized medicine, they can go for it.(Then there are the Fourth, Eighth, Ninth, Thirteenth, and if all those are ignored, the Second. Enough of my life is spent working for the benefit of others; I want some of that time back, not sucked down the never-ending pit known as “free health care”. If you want to donate to organizations to run the type of health care system you would like, go for it, just don’t use the force of government to make everyone else go along.)
Slart is running in the territory of what are typically called pragmatists – people who will accept any form of government intervention or activity so long as they perceive it as ‘a good thing.’
The key always being who gets to decide what is ‘a good thing.’
like socialized med “worked” in mass..
yo how about we run 50 or 57 little state experiments before we run the mother of all experiments?
I was unaware that Rand ever argued for the mass extermination of lesser breeds.
That she may have been a bitch in person is immaterial to her arguments. On the other hand, Hitler’s behavior was precisely in line with his arguments.
Really, Slart, this is a rather weak line of argument for you. I don’t have a lot of respect for the Objectivists or the Randian personality cult, either, but I’m not going around painting them as folks who would love to see people die in the streets.
It ain’t about “revulsion against government”. It’s about wanting to live (and die) free.
Free people take responsibility for themselves. They do not demand that others provide for them, no matter how necessary the need.
Of course pragmatically speaking, when the government is the answer to everything then pragmatism becomes totalitarianism.
So the question remains, where do you define the limits of government?
Is your wife still working the street corner to pay your light bills, you parasitic lech?
But that’s par for course for you kooky wingered fantasists, thor’s daddy!, twust fwunds!, Mommy’s attic! You just make shit up and Goebbel your frothy fantasies until you don’t what’s real and what’s not.
Isn’t about time you grew up, little boy? I don’t own shares of CEM, and I know how desperate you are to do a chicken dance while singing lies to the contrary; good God, hasn’t everywhere here had enough of your little act in that regard, but read the chronology of events that’s lead to CEM (that’s a stock symbol, and I’m not sure if you know what that is) not being able to meet it’s July bond payment. Cough, cough, not making a bond payment is cause for bankruptcy, yeah, that’s how that happens.
The narrative is symbolic of the current economic crises. None of it has anything to do with politics, you foul-smelling mud bunker dirt fuck. Try a dose of here-and-now reality sans teh Wush gas.
go butt fuck bwarney frank, chris dodd and maxine waters you libtard.
while you’re at it kiss the penis of your messiah. do tell circumcised or no?
But that wouldn’t be pragmatic, so the pragmatist is perpetually in search of the value for n in “(totalitarianism) – n“. That others may disagree with the pragmatists choice for n, and that their chosen value may preclude liberties the pragmatist wishes to protect, well… too bad.
The obvious solution is to make n as large as possible. There are certainly limits — national defense, enforcing free trade and free movement within our own borders, defining citizenship — but those tend to be settled matters.
And, Slart, if you don’t trust the feds to design a healthcare system, why even consider giving them the power? Design your own, see if the market will buy into your ideas.
Jaysus, Slart, when did you start on a diet of straw?
Why is healthcare more of a positive right than having a flatscreen? Isn’t food more important? Should the Federal government nationalize all farms, grocery stores and means of transportation and processing of food between ’em to ensure the “right” to food? How about shelter? Does everyone have the “right” to a house paid for by their neighbor?
of the approx 44 million without “healthcare” (really insurance) that nattering nabobs like O make crocodile tears over, more than half choose NOT to buy insurance. They take a gamble that they would rather spend their dollars on that flatscreen than pay for insurance.
a busdriver owes $800,000 on a house and she wants all the rest of us to pay for her bad judgement because she has a “right” to housing and DAMN THE RICH if she doesn’t get her right.
None of it has anything to do with politics
Sure it doesn’t. That’s why the market shits itself every time Blowbama opens his pig-ignorant mouth.
Starting to sink in just how bad you fucked up, pussboi?
Screech away. It’s too late to take it back now.
I’d start using a little caution about telling people in real life you voted for Blowbama. Things are going to get real ugly, real fast, and your jabberjaw might just wind up wired shut.
Assuming that Blowbama’s “health plan” will even pay for that.
Router, please ignore ‘hor.
BTW, everyone: I’m getting close to the point of ‘hammering anyone who spends too much time responding to ‘hor’s filth, because I don’t even want to see his crap second hand. He adds nothing, subtracts much, and I’m sick of it.
But that wouldn’t be pragmatic
Oh no, to the believer – those who accept that what the government is doing is improved and cost effective – it all seems entirely pragmatic. Positively simple, actually.
Totalitarianism only got it’s bad name from the later excesses of Stalinism and German Nazism, prior to them the concept was just peachy to much of the intelligentsia.
Slart
When you get back I suggest you think long and hard on postive and negative rights and why the American experiment has been singular and unique in her history.
Roads have been built, schools, too, long before Washington D.C. turned a gimlet eye across the land and said “that should be me.”
O goody:
“GORDON BROWN hopes to forge a partnership with President Barack Obama in Washington this week, to call for a “global new deal†to lift the world out of recession…
…The prime minister will borrow from the rhetoric of Franklin Roosevelt, who introduced the government-financed New Deal to tackle the US Depression of the 1930s. He will argue that his 21st century “global new deal†will also require public spending on a huge world-wide scale.”*
Well we are headed for global default, might as well get there sooner rather than later.
“Karel Lanoo, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels, said that “the lack of leadership in Europe is becoming dramatic,” and we all know what happens when Europe has power vacuums?
Whatever you say, Walter.
Remember he made millions on Wall St.
We defer to your superior intellect.
One in ten Californians is unemployed… and between Obama’s eat the rich taxes plus a castrated Gov Arnold and an indecent Democrat legislature they will crush what few businesses struggle to hang on.
One of the largest accounts of my husband’s employer is moving out of state within a month or two … and wearily expect more will follow suit. CA will fast become 3rd world, or like NY City — a place where only the very very rich and the very very poor live.
“BTW, everyone: I’m getting close to the point of ‘hammering anyone who spends too much time responding to ‘hor’s filth, because I don’t even want to see his crap second hand. He adds nothing, subtracts much, and I’m sick of it.”
As long as the emotionally-troubled little boy is here spewing his thoughtvomit I really don’t see how you can expect it to be ignored. He’s not exactly comic relief or a distraction, I’d venture to say that most people here would take a baseball bat to his skull given the opportunity.
I have no obligation whatever to be more specific with you. Sorry if that doesn’t satisfy.
Ah. So we’re back at some compromise between idealism and that which actually works. You’re completely free to chime regarding where you draw the line where government stops.
Fine: you offer a weak argument; I give it maybe 5 seconds of thought, which was more than it merited.
Great. Aristotle is dead; who really gives a shit what he thought?
Oh, I see I spoke too soon. Who said Rand argued for the mass extinction of lesser breeds? You as much as said people’s thoughts don’t matter after the light goes out, so we might as well toss out our entire philosophy library, as well as most of written history.
Darleen, where in the fuck are you getting this crap? You do realize that I’ve said nothing of the kind, yes?
Kind of ironic, you accusing me of making strawman arguments while addressing arguments I haven’t even come near. The entire rest of the comment I excerpted above is composed of things I haven’t even mentioned, and don’t belong in the same discussion.
Philosopher, fix your own thinking.
So we’re back at some compromise between idealism and that which actually works
No, we are back at what are LEGITIMATE governmental functions…something that even “charity isn’t a priority” Rand readily admited. IE the securing of negative rights.
“The true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest and best, that the states are independent as to everything within themselves, and united as to everything respecting foreign affairs.†– Thomas Jefferson
Slart
You advanced that the government had has much legitimacy engaging in nationalized healthcare as in fielding national defense.
No it doesn’t. National defense is a legitimate function of government, enslaving doctors is not.
Somehow, Darleen, you seem to have acquired the misconception that I think there’s some right to healthcare. You’re not impressing me with your reading comprehension, if that’s what you think.
I’m going to bed. If you think this resembles in any way something I said, you’re too stupid to breathe, and are certainly not worth much more of my time.
Go away if you can’t tolerate thor. Chances are, your opinon is less interesting, and less lucrative, than his.
You are a god Slart. Good night sir! Godspeed your balls, for they are manifest!!
Comment by Slartibartfast on 3/1 @ 3:05 pm #
There are some things the government can do more effectively than private industry, Carin. Things like coordinate a national defense, or build a nationwide highway system, or coordinate and standardize a redesigned power grid.
I happen to think that decision-making power should reside at the national level, and implementation issues should be relegated to the states, with federal oversight. If the fed can figure out how to improve healthcare AND make it more cost-effective, let ‘em have at it.
The Fed has NO BUSINESS any where near “healthcare”…what meddling they have already done it is amazing it is still the best medicine in the world.
cynn
still drunk? sad.
I think people are just grumpy cause of there’s a dipshit in our white house pitching our little country into a socialistic and squalid oppression. Me included. Ok. You know what to do. oh. Here, too. That one’s industrial strength cheery uppy I think.
God. So everyone’s Deputy Dawg or somesuch. Droopy jowls all around.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 3/1 @ 8:31 pm #
Maybe create some sort of document that, you know, defines the limits of what government should and should not do.
Already done. The Constitution specifically forbids a number of things, universal healthcare not one of them.
I actually don’t know what the government could possibly cook up in that arena that wouldn’t suck, but it ain’t forbidden.
Please get reacquainted with the Constitution. It is a document that LIMITS the government, not one in which anything unmentioned is permitted it.
Or Chicago.
This is the end state desired by Obama and others on the Left. They of course see themselves as the very rich and privileged ones. That isn’t how it generally works when the end comes. The smartest dirtiest thug gets the good seat. Saddam, Mao, Stalin, Castro et al.
You have been duly spanked, Slartblastocist. Give it the go be gone.
There goes our insufferable little home team imbecile speaking in absolutist terms again. She’s a slave, as you know, since she works for the government. Her relatives were all slaves too, their being of Irish decent.
At one time I was a victim by choice. I was subjekkkted to the Swedish medical system. The Swedes provided the best healthcare at the lowest price in Moscow (Best in the World!, if one dissolves into such propaganda). I of capitalist breeding had no choice but to throw myself into the hands of Swedish physician’s care (a female one, mmm, mmm) lest I violate Sam Walton’s save-more-live-better creed. Ana, my doctor, who gave me permission to call her by her first name, refused to touch my funnies while I turned my head and coughed. She seemed preoccupied by serious questions of medicine even while shackled by Duuuuh-Dar’s government-doctor leg irons, as was I, I guess, if reality is nothing more than an imaginary funhouse of mirrors all reflecting images of shackles and leg irons that is.
When was the last time you had your head examined, Dar-dar?
Bring on the Swedish medical model I say. High quality, efficient and affordable should be the American way!
These “thou art a dumbass” kind of statements aren’t particularly devastating arguments. We could go to straight namecalling, if that floats your boat. I’m not particularly skilled at that kind of thing, but it still might be more satisfying than the everpresent insinuations that I don’t know what I’m talking about.
I agree with the first part, but the second part is completely irrelevant. You can’t read the Constitution as: anything not mandatory is forbidden. I’m not saying the Constitution makes government involvement in healthcare a must, I’m saying that it doesn’t forbid it, in the same way that it doesn’t forbid the government’s part in constructing a national interstate highway system.
You yourself stated that the Constitution is a limiting document. If it doesn’t specifically forbid government involvement in healthcare, or even in general healthcare-like activities, then you CAN’T justify that government involvement in public healthcare is unconstitutional.
Or maybe you can. I’m all ears.
Now, if you think the Constitution ought to be limiting government involvement in certain matters, that might be an interesting conversation. But so far you’ve managed only to suggest that the public-healthcare kind of government involvement runs counter to the Constitution, without actually mentioning where that’s worded.
Also, you seem to have some notion of what that involvement certainly must look like, without me having mentioned any particular implementation details at all. I’m not sure how you possibly could have done that without either a) having really awesome mindreading skills, or b) having really awesome strawman-manufacturing powers.
I retract my “too stupid to breathe” comment above, though. That was not meant literally; it was just meant to be an attention-getter. You’re clearly not stupid; you just seem to be hell-bent on arguing counter to things I’m not saying in a way that’s practically designed to annoy me. If you’re not doing it on purpose, I’d ask that you try and take care not to be doing it by accident.
Affordable healthcare is un-Consteetootshunal, says the one who stares into her constitutional decoder ring.
COBRA is a snake, it’s not a the name of a law signed by Ronald Reagan that mandates a group plan be made available to former employees who wish to participate and, of course, pay the premium. In the Obama stimulus package the newly involuntarily unemployed will see a 65% reduction of the price in their premiums for up to 9-months if I recall, meaning a $550 premium for a family would be reduced to a little over $200.
I know, I know, why in the fuck should anyone care if those recent millions who have been laid off and who have children and if their children have quality health insurance they can afford, OUTLAW!, those fuckers should die, they failed!
$200 premiums a month for a family? Sign me up! Sign everyone up! Why pay more for employee offered health insurance, if the government only charges $200 … I’m sure all my husband’s employees would prefer to pay 65% less on health insurance.
This is going to work great. What could possibly go wrong?
It’s a market based price bid out from a pool of insurers, stupid, meaning I was just throwing numbers out to make an example, stupid. It only applies for nine-months, stupid, and the actual HMO providing the policy would be a company such as Blue Cross, stupid, not some gaggle of doctors chained to a wall by well-armed dark-suited government minions. The savings to the consumer come from $25-billion of govt funds, stupid.
Nothing could go wrong, stupid. $25-billion is less than on round of AIG bailouts, stupid. Go back to playing on your Stairmaster.
The savings to the consumer come from $25-billion of govt funds, stupid.
giggle.
I mean, I can’t WAIT until they get that credit card bill from the federal government.
Wittle giggeegiggler, go make a mud pie and leave the adults alone. Admitted business failures such as you and your husband will be making out like bandits with Obama’s lower tax rates so shut your hole.
I’m glad teh r-wingery ‘toooopid have no more influence in Washington nowadays. If you wanted a good giggle you should have heard Robert Gates on Meet The Press cleverly implying that Bush was stupid compared to Barack Obama, and Gates was appointed by Bush, hahaha! Now that was teh funny.
Don’t take my word for it, wingers, listen to your own Sec of Defense.
Certified Financial Jeeenius whore thinks that government money = free money.
Typical.
How are those Euro currencies and stock markets doing this morning, whore?
Oh, right.
Couldn’t have anything to do with them talking about adopting the Blowbama plan over there… nope, politics has nothing to do with it. WHORE HAS SPOKEN! I SAY THEE NAY!
Giggle.
Wrong, again. Apparently the only advantage to me and mine under Obama is that some bridge to my husband’s business is going to be built. Don’t Mess With Joe! Oh, and that extra $65 a month!
Hey, did you hear how we’re paying for SCHIP here in Michigan? The price of loose tobacco is going is going to be raised from $17 bucks a bag to $70! That Jenny is a genius. Teh Children are SAVED!
What could possibly go wrong?
We’re going to need a bigger boatload of “rich” people is all.
I’m plugged into the market everyday, broke-dick slut-boy. You worry about how to pay your wittle light bill and I’ll take care of my monies in the market, w’il welfare-handout GE’nius.
This is a great time to buy, not that you would have any money.
I’m plugged into the market everyday
More like the market is plugged into you, whore. With no lube.
Giggle.
More like your tummy is full of Obama jizzy. And lube.
Snicker.
I’m not the big shot forex trader, whore.
That’s you, remember?
Giggle.
I stated it above, Slart. You’ve refused to see it, for some reason. I’ll repeat it:
Tenth Fucking Amendment, Slart: “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.†The Constitution does not grant the feds power to confiscate our wealth to care for the health of others, so that power goes to the states or the people. If the states want to try
rationedsocialized medicine, they can go for it.And with that, I’m through with you.
I dunno, maybe I missed a chapter somewhere but why so much bitterness towards PJM ? I think their business model is ridiculous and I don’t spend much time reading their commentators- and I can’t say I’ve ever watched an episode of PJMTV (cept for that one about sex with Dr. Helen- rowrrr). However, the freaking movement needs everybody, outlaws and non outlaws to get rid of the dirty socialists who are trying to take over this country and trying to polarize the conservs with sticks up their asses is counter productive. I’m not saying you should be in lockstep either- McCain is a prime example of conservative stupidity. But I think the major problem is Washington “conservatives” and if nothing else, conservative and semi conservative blogs are our best bet for pointing out how non-conservative our republican leaders are.
Which power was delegated to the United States to form an interstate highway system, Rob? And don’t give me that national-defense hogwash; that was a pretext.
Oh. Sorry. You’re done with me. And before you’d even started, properly.
You yourself stated that the Constitution is a limiting document. If it doesn’t specifically forbid government involvement in healthcare, or even in general healthcare-like activities, then you CAN’T justify that government involvement in public healthcare is unconstitutional.
The Constitution is not a list of things forbidden to the federal government, it’s a list of things that the federal government is allowed to do. Your view is an inversion of what the Constitution is meant to be, Slart.
Rob, I agree that the Tenth Amendment certainly seals the deal, but it’s instructive to note that the Federalists opposed the addition of the Bill of Rights to the Constitution because they believed it to be redundant. In other words, it was unnecessary to tell the federal government it could not regulate the press because there was no power conferred on it within the body of the Constitution to do so. Indeed, Hamilton argued it was dangerous to do so insofar as a BoR would seemingly invert the meaning of the Constitution by providing the assumption that the federal government had the power to, say, regulate the press before the addition of the BoR.
Except for the federal income tax and Federal Reserve and little things like the interstate highway system and a whole jesusload of things done in the name of regulation of commerce?
Perhaps we should all examine Slart’s question here with a view to sorting it out? I think it’s a good question myself. And possibly one of the best places to begin to come to terms with the limits we seek to define? (By the way Slart, I’m not sure pretext is all that there is to it, if we were to take national defense in a larger, softer bounded context than “moving heavy equipment (tanks) and personnel rapidly and efficiently in times of crisis”, to say, a context of “keeping up with the other nationstatejoneses” in a matter of sensible and profound economic import.)
Who had the good (brilliant?) idea to build the autobahn? Indeed. And they did build it. And it works terribly well. Now can a nation afford to forgo the possession of such a thing and still hope to prosper, let alone remain in the forefront of industrial power?
What else is like this? As it turns out, quite a few things are like that. Nuclear weapons are like that (though in this case the US led the way, we understood that every competitor would follow eagerly). Most every space system we have is like that. ICBM’s, remember? But of course along with ICBM’s we also get dazzling communication systems, Landsats, Keyholes, Hubble and Spitzer telescopes, Global positioning systems and so on.
How far does the theoretical justification for such vast systems rely on the proof of concept though? If it happens that designing high order human systems is beyond our reach……….
Um, actually no, I made a point of pointing out I’m not a big shot forex trader, slut-boy.
Your just doing your masturbatory fantasy thing again because you’re a needy witt’l stroker.
Snicker.
I own mostly muni bonds, witt’l girly boy. Do the math on why.
Granted. But I think it was at least partly pretext. A marriage of convenience, possibly.
I like the image of forming-and-letting-go, though. It’s actually kind of what I was thinking, that the government MIGHT have a legitimate role in the formation of a national healthcare structure, and then let ‘er loose and have the states run the whole thing. Less power than spec-writing.
Now, this might be something completely different from what Obama is proposing, but I’m not here to hawk Obama’s proposal. It doesn’t take an overly careful reading of my comments here to see that’s true.
Inherited Muni bonds? At least your heirs were smart. Intellegence often skips a generation.
I made a point of pointing out I’m not a big shot forex trader
That wasn’t the song you were singing a few months ago, liebot.
You were buying Euros, so you said. Then they tanked.
whore earlier this morning: This is a great time to buy
Sure thing, whore.
I’m wondering if this market could find its bottom with both hands.
Except for the federal income tax and Federal Reserve and little things like the interstate highway system and a whole jesusload of things done in the name of regulation of commerce?
The federal income tax was codified by the Sixteenth Amendment, Slart (though there is some debate as to whether it was just a codification of a pre-existing power. I’m agnostic on that one). And yes, the interstate highway system was authorized under a national defense justification, though it was probably a bit of a stretch.
As for the rest of the violations, yes they are indeed violations of the original understanding of the Constitution. It would seem that you are arguing that each violation provides support for the next. Is that your point?
(I well know you are not on about Obama.)
That, I guess, is the nub of it in this thread’s running blowout. I too can – tentatively, at the least for the purposes of argument or even mere consideration — suppose that government might have etc. But I’d point back to my poorly composed previous conclusary remark, meant, I think to aim at the vast gulf between our understanding of physical systems (and our human interaction with them) and systems resting on our grasp of human psychology itself, which, on the whole, seems to me rather lacking in detail. Most of the folks on this thread (and likely you too) look at governments across the world and historical time and see plenty of positive examples of failure, dreadful failure on every hand, when potentially far-reaching central authorities attempt to design human systems of control.
We see that, beginning modestly, these systems seek to control some thing, some aspect of human behavior, and thereupon discover that in order to control this little thing here (x) they must then reach out to control this associated next thing (y) and before they know it, they’re off to the races, for they find again, if (y) then (z), and if (z) then (a) and so on. (Enough of that, I imagine you know the Hayekian drill.) That, it seems to me, is what gives a lot of people the willies.
This politics business quickly devolves into a contest of ontological disagreement over what is and what is not a permanent feature of human psychology, and sometimes worse, teleology. [shudder] Little I can think of is more complex or fraught with danger than people and their business. Smiling and shaking your hand one minute and clubbing you in the back of the head the next.
Ah. Stepped on my dick, I have. Point to you, sir.
Ah. Stepped on my dick, I have. Point to you, sir.
Please, I want to be dispassionate about this. I’m not looking for points. I respect you and your opinions. I honestly used to think exactly as you do…until I started to read about the Constitution and its formation. Let’s talk about this and learn from each other.
Let’s try these gedankenexperimenten:
1) Was slavery interstate commerce?
2) Was alcohol production, sales and consumption interstate commerce?
I recommend thor invest highly in Euros.
[The leaders of the European Union gathered Sunday in Brussels for an emergency summit meeting designed to tamp down the centrifugal forces unleashed by the global economic crisis that threaten to spin the bloc – and its single currency – apart.]
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/01/europe/union.php?page=1
Oh, I think it was certainly foreign commerce. Whether it was interstate commerce becomes irrelevant, if it’s foreign commerce. Unless I’ve badly misread.
But I think that was just a pretext for using the hammer. Slavery violated parts of the Constitution that the Framers didn’t think they even needed to include. I’m guessing that the problem the Framers didn’t anticipate is that leaving so much power to the States left the States completely free to fuck with individual liberty, even to the point of allowing ownership of one human being by another.
Either that, or they didn’t think that was such a bad thing, back then.
It could be, but it didn’t have to be. I’m not familiar with what led up to the Prohibition; was it that the Commerce clause wasn’t effective, so they had to amend?
Oh, I think it was certainly foreign commerce. Whether it was interstate commerce becomes irrelevant, if it’s foreign commerce. Unless I’ve badly misread.
Actually, by 1860, it hadn’t been foreign commerce for well over 50 years, the importation of slaves having been barred constitutionally as of 1808. If it had been solely foreign commerce, Congressional authority to ban it would have been unquestioned as it already had the power to regulate foreign commerce. All of the buying and selling of slaves was, as of 1860, done within the political area of the United States, and often between states.
The same was true of alcohol, though obviously importation was widespread.
Now, if Congress had the ability to regulate interstate commerce, why did we have Constitutional amendments to ban both of these activities, but today we do the same (with drugs, “assault weapons,” etc) via statute. Does it not seem that something has changed?
Furthermore, where does Congress get the authority to tell someone what he or she must do to buy a health insurance policy from a company within his or her ow state?
Yes. I have a feeling you’re going to tell me.
Nowhere, probably. Fortunately, I haven’t suggested any such thing.
I sense that a discussion of the Minimum Wage may be in the offing, though.
I appreciate your patience in this, Jeffersonian. I know I haven’t said that, but it’s much easier to have discussions of this kind if one or both participants isn’t about to stroke out.
Yes. I have a feeling you’re going to tell me.
What happened was a Supreme Court case called Wickard v Filburn (among others), which was the result of a New Deal agricultural program that controlled how much acreage farmers could plant of certain crops. Filburn planted 12 acres over his quota, then used the wheat to feed his own livestock. For that, he was fined and he took the case all the way to the USSC, where he lost. Let’s be clear here: Filburn’s wheat never left his property, much less crossed state or international borders. Yet the USSC allowed the federal government to reach into Filburn’s farm with the fig leaf of “regulating interstate commerce.”
Twenty-five years prior, it would have taken a Constitutional amendment to grant such power to the central state. We see that with the Thirteenth (prohibiting slavery) and Eighteenth (prohibition) amendments. Congress used to respect the Constitution. The USSC, essentially, inverted the Constitution with its decision.
Nowhere, probably. Fortunately, I haven’t suggested any such thing.
Unless Congress was granted that power, it’s not supposed to have it. Yet Obama’s about to do it, and few will raise the principled objection of Congress slipping its Constitutional leash.
This is very important to me. It’s too important to alienate someone willing to listen, frankly.
Gah…I hit “Say It!” too soon.
You might want to read Federalist 41, especially the last four paragraphs. And remember, these were the “big government” guys of the time. And the author of this Federalist ought to know what he’s talking about…he was the author of the Section in question.
I’m certainly willing to listen, Jeffersonian.
I like the signature at the bottom: Publius. There’s a Publius at Obsidianwings, but I’d bet good money that he’s not a limited-government kind of guy.
I totally love you, slartibartfast. That is all.
Publius was the nom de plume of John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. In F41, it was James Madison, Father of the Constitution. He ought to know what was in it.
Yes, I’m aware of that, Jeffersonian. It was the disconnect between Publius the Federalist and publius the blogger that amused.
[…] (H/T, H/T) […]
[…] (H/T, H/T) […]
[…] Carrion ultimately approved the project and sponsored millions in taxpayer funds for it. (H/T, H/T) At issue now, however, is more than just campaign cash: it