— Or, “once a word can mean anything, it will mean everything.” David Harsanyi, writing in the Denver Post:
As a layman, I have little business wading into the intricacies of constitutional law — though, in my limited understanding of this nation’s founding tenets, forcing patriots to buy something in the private market seems to undermine the entire point of the project. Judging from the celebratory mood of the Democrats, who shrug off questions of constitutionality and individual rights, my reading of history is obviously way off the mark.
Surely it is inarguable that the debate over a national mandate epitomizes the central ideological divide in the country today.
In broad terms, there is one side that believes liberty can be subverted for the collective good because government often makes more efficient and more moral choices.
Then there is the other side, which believes that people who believe such twaddle are seditious pinkos.
And judging from nearly every poll, a majority disapprove of President Barack Obama and his defining legislation. Whether many of them understand the mugging of freedoms in legal terms or intellectual terms or only in intuitive ones, it doesn’t matter.
Richard M. Esenberg, professor of law at Marquette, explained the consequences of Obamacare like this: “If Congress can require you to buy health insurance because of the ways in which your uncovered existence effects interstate commerce or because it can tax you in an effort to force you to do any old thing it wants you to, it is hard to see what — save some other constitutional restriction — it cannot require you to do or prohibit you from doing.”
I remember arguing something similar when Scalia joined forces with the activist justices on the left and expanded the reach of the Commerce Clause in Raich (see also, Wickard); or when Kennedy, in Kelo, broadened “public use” to make it all but useless as a constraint on government reach. The lesson being that it is not just progressivism whose ideology can manifest itself in the law of unintended consequences. In fact, because conservative justices tend to value stare decisis, accretion of law — albeit a slow one — marks judicial conservatism over time.
Which, more Clarence Thomases, please.
In the case of Obamacare, without repeal, the assumptions intrinsic to the legislation will likely become settled law — using as legal precedent the reasoning behind previous expansions of the general welfare and commerce clauses. And once that happens, the government, by long legal road (aided by a few very dubious judicial rulings), will have won itself the “Constitutional right” to do just about anything it pleases. Justice as determined by a set of interpretations that veered away from original intent, and in so doing created a legal framework in which the law itself has become complicit in its own deconstruction.
At this point, the best thing to do as a society looking to reground itself would be to hold another Constitutional convention. But I just don’t see that happening, what with all the cool HD channels that people now get as part of their basic cable or satellite packages — and what with all the “free” stuff we’re now asking our children and grandchilden to pay for…
The road to serfdom is paved with good intentions…
And it’s always their good intentions with my money.
It appears we had only managed to delay the Thrugood Marshall school of thought, that welfare benefits were a Constitutional Right…
Jesus wept.
and what with all the “free” stuff we’re now asking our children and grandchildren to pay for…
Asking? I think we’re a long way past just asking.
“And it’s always their good intentions with my money.”
Bingo, give that man a Kewpie doll…
It’s been tried before. Roosevelt’s court justified diddling with personal decisions, i.e. growing food for personal use, as impacting interstate commerce. What goes around, comes around.
America doesn’t hold dick to be self-evident anymore.
Mike Church was advocating this very thing on his “Church Doctrine” this morning.
If Jeff Spicoli were a real person he would be a Democrat Congressman right now.
That’s one of those “when the times get stupid, the stupid get going” corollaries, I think.
Eating pizza, talking about the Constitution, dude.
Remember, everyone, America is not the government, and the government is not America. The people are America, and most of them were against this bill. The fact that we lost so many of them to the other side is quite horrible, but we may be able to enlighten them, if they haven’t already been enlightened.
On the other hand, if you want to give up, that’s your right. Plus, it’s what the progressives want you to do, so win-win for them.
Three words: mandatory microchip implants. You know, so the government can monitor medical and environmental information including trans-fat consumption and individual carbon production. The devices will also help locate missing persons — Think of the children! — and anyone attempting to evade the law.
At this point, the best thing to do as a society looking to reground itself would be to hold another Constitutional convention.
But “looking to reground itself” is exactly NOT what those in power (from either party) are looking to do right now. First, we need to convince them that that is the correct course of action. And with each passing day, I’m willing to go a little further in the means I am willing to use to “convince” them. Outlaw, indeed.
“General Welfare” used to mean exactly that, welfare of everyone equally. Think national defense. That was the original intent. Back then the federal government did very little and most authority was with the states, even buying the Lousiana Purchase stumped Jefferson for a bit (who while definitely recognizing what a good deal it was, doubted he could constitutionally purchase it) until he decided to go for it.
We have gone from that to “General Welfare” meaning taking property from some to help pay for health care of others. That sort of thing has been going on for a very long time, but the sheer scale of this expansion and legalized theft is frankly frightening. And the really ironic party, in their rush to do this they forget to even make kids’ preexisting conditioned covered. And all the principals that Obama used to justify this, lower premiums, more access, better health are almost certainly to be lies. We will be paying more for less. A few may benefit in the short term, but even they are probably not going to be net benefiting from the mess we are creating when you consider it will hurt the economy and stagnate job growth.
I would hate to see what a Constitutional Convention would look like in this day and age. Lets not think for a second that we can recapture lightening in a bottle. The old Constitution is fine, we just need to find Adults who will abide by it as elected representatives.
I haven’t read it, but my understanding of 1984 is that it is more dramatic than any reality we might inhabit.
I am guessing our soon to be post-literate society will just stop reading dictionaries. Authorities won’t have to bother with removing them. They’ll just incite the mob against those racist cranks who insist on finding their definition of ‘tolerance’ in some quaint 20th century artifact instead of accepting the modern, progressive concept as defined by society’s talking heads.
“The grand delusion of contemporary liberals is that they have both the right and the ability to move their fellow creatures around like blocks of wood–and that the end results will be no different than if people had voluntarily chosen the same actions.”
–Thomas Sowell
If only a document written by slave-owning aristocratic colonists could be followed in a way that I deem to be authentic and genuine then this country wouldn’t be having all these problems.
Yeah, that Ben Franklin was one vicious slave owning son of a bitch alright.
If only a document written by
slave-owning aristocratic colonistsdipshit blog trolls could be followed in a way that I deem to be authentic and genuine then this country wouldn’t be having all these problems.JoeEgo? already happening. Both my daughters went from k-12 without ever picking one up. Either they went on line or just took the word of their teacher. Not that there’s much vocab taugh anymore…
Now now sd, we all know old Bennie didn’t own slaves. What he was was a white male patriarch who used his power for the sexual exploitation of the wimmenfolk!! no better than a serial rapist, that one…
I feel like an idiot (as usual) for asking this? But how does a Constitutional Convention work?
If only we had…
chintz curtains
…then this country wouldn’t be having all these problems.
Well then, Blitz, surely he was an hereditary monied aristocrat blue-blood, right?
i’m thinking vegas would be the place: gambling and show girls.
AJB…that you deem? THAT YOU FUCKING DEEM?? Who the flying fuck are you that can “deem” into our society YOUR twisted ideas on how this Country was founded and should be run?
You can vote, you can run for office,you can even take up arms, but I’ll be damned if you can DEEM shit into existance.
http://minx.cc/?post=299791
What me worry?
Well Sd. as we all know, nah. He was one of the very few lucky folks back then that did nothing to advance his station in life as it was all handed to him by the government after he was hit by lightning in an early SEIU experiment.
Here you go Blitz, for one account of the undertaking of a convention. There are other accounts to be found interspersed throughout these papers. Since they thought themselves open to the charge that they had acted in disobedience to the letter of their charge, they spent a fair amount of time in justification of their act.
Thanks sd. I’ve read, and to my limited ability, comprehended the Federalist papers, although it was long ago and I should refresh the memory.
I guess the question is at fault(sorry) I meant how is one started and how does it continue? If that’s too vague, I’d like to know the steps to start one?
Sometimes Jeff and Ace remind me of these two.
I know Jeff has been leading the fight on this issue, but this is a funny bit by Ace:
I’m gonna quote from a link on Joe’s first #33 link. It’s delish.
I’m not certain that we have an explicit mechanism set out for the purpose of refashioning the Constitution entire Blitz. We might analogize the mechanism set out for calling for a convention to make amendments to the existing charter though:
Given the dominant level of political discourse (impoverished in the extreme) in the nation today, this would be, as OTT said above, one very scary prospect, I think.
39 individuals signed the Constitution. Of those “Eleven owned or managed slave-operated plantations or large farms: Bassett, Blair, Blount, Butler, Carroll, Jenifer, the two Pinckneys, Rutledge, Spaight, and Washington. Madison also owned slaves.”
One day, God willing, AJB will start caring enough about the world around him and those that inhabit it to find out what the hell is really going on. I find it unlikely, but there is always hope.
Source
More deliciousness:
Tunku Varadarajan is fast becoming my new crush.
Thanks Sd, that’s exactly what I was looking for.
I find it scary also, however, when you’ve reached my age and level of anger, you have two choices. Migrate or fight, and I’m not going anywhere.
COMMAS!! Commas!! We got commas here,Come and get your commas!!
Read that whole thing Di. He’s becoming mine too (NTTAWWT) since you won’t have me.
I thought you were going to Maine? Which do and get us all rid of the twisted Sisters, the only republican’s to have voted for the insane “stimulus” bill. They gotta go. Soonest.
If only a document written by slave-owning aristocratic colonists
That must explain why they resisted attempts by the South to outlaw slavery right then and there, and why they made sure that slaves counted only as 3/5 of a person to keep those awful Southern Abolitionists from having the high census counts that would lead to their getting enough power to outlaw slavery for all time.
Bastards.
Only if my daughter decides to go to UMO…she’s torn right now between there and Umiami.
We really don’t need another Constitution, we just need to make people read this one honestly.
Fla. or Oh.?
Florida. There I cannot go.
Bmoe, the problem is that most refuse to. The ones that do? read into it what they will. I’m no expert on this, but our host is.
Di? read a post today, can’t remember where, think it was one of the Bigs that said this was an equivelant of the Kansas-Nebraska act, and I’m not so sure I disagree.
Please switch the a and e there? I’m cooking too…
can we get a law directing scotus that the commerce clause is about commerce not coercion
Unfortunately? No. The commerce clause is the reason I want a Constitutiopnal convention though, Union be damned.
Hmmm, ain’t no “p” in the Constitution.
although what the progressives do to it? might as well be.
I hope you get to go to Maine I think. It would be an adventure.
Thank you Happy!! But just to let you know, I’ve been hunting fishing and vacationing in Maine since I was 8. Our family owns a bunch of property up there.
oh… to me it’s a mysterious faraway land
I was attacked by seagulls in Maine when I was a little kid. They wanted my fries. They won.
I hate Maine seagulls even more than Illinois Nazis.
If I do get there next year, hell, I’ll pay for your ticket. It’s a 3 bedroom cottage on top of a hill overlooking 2 lakes. Windy as all hell, but beautiful. Moose and deer and bear are regular visitors.
i don’t see why congress can’t make a law saying what the commerce clause means. scotus is going to do what? said law is unconstitutional? reading the law people they say that the individual mandate is constitutional by deference to congress by the scotus.
bh? in June? the mosquitos are bigger.
Ok New, and if they were to do that? who is to say that the next Progressive congress won’t pass a law stating that the 2nd amendment is Unconstitutional? There’s a reason they don’t do that. What it is? I don’t know, but I know it’s not done.
I might not like anything that flies in Maine.
Oh, and Happy? in front of the house you’re looking at the US. In back? Canada!!
bh? Nevere ever EVER go there in may then. black fly (noseeums) season. Those things get through window screens and leave you bloody. also? mooseflies. Nasty little critters, twice the size of a horsefly and their bite? feels like a beesting.
Other than that? Bald Eagleas all over the place, Ospreys are vermin and the ravens? you can talk to them.
Oh, and the grouse? good eating!!
Ben Franklin at one time owned two slaves, but he eventually freed them and supported the abolition of slavery and also the education of freed slaves (well before the Declaration of Independence).
I honestly didn’t know that Joe. Link please?
“Whether many of them understand the mugging of freedoms in legal terms or intellectual terms or only in intuitive ones, it doesn’t matter.”
Jeff,
My political views were based mainly on intuition before I started reading this blog. Sure I had seen anecdotal evidence (poor people in this country have cell phones) and historical support (lower taxes = economic growth) for conservative/ classically liberal/pro capitalistic policies but I couldn’t make a very convincing case for them.
I understood the threat from foreign enemies (the price for freedom being eternal vigilance and all), but now I’m certain that today the enemy within is a far greater threat and I know that time is running out.
My personnal growth may not offer you much satisfaction and it certainly won’t make up for the disapointments you have experienced while trying to be express an honest message. Hopefully ,it at least encourages you enough to continue to speak out.
I don’t intend to let the freedom this country enjoys (freedom obtained and preserved by heroic sacrifice) be lost to ruthless scoundrels enabled by indifferent citizens. I am certain that there are many more (in fact a large majority) that feel the same way. Most of them just need to be exposed to the evidence that compels them to act.
So send the volley’s downrange, Let the chips fall where they may.
Besides, Where ya gonna run?
OUTLAW!
Danger? Yup, what you said!! You just put it more succinctly than some are able to.
Thank you Jeff, for all you do.
that sounds kind of amazing really… I’m not sure I’ve ever seen Canada actually… probably from Minnesota I guess.
So do you wear a Purple Martin house for a hat or what?
that’s an unconstitutional law. but a law directing the courts that their interpretation circa 1940’s of the commerce clause is too broad is something that could be done. because the only reason we have the current interpretation of the commerce clause is originally from suits filed by laws made by congress. congress would just clarify it’s intent
LOL Bmoe…Purple Martins are quite common there, didn’t think to mention them. Nah, I smoke. and even when i didn’t? while fishing at night kept a lit cigar in my mouth. That keeps them away.
New? I think your interpretation of “law” may be different than mine. You cannot pass a LAW stating that the SCOTUS is misinterpreting. I don’t know what you can do, but that is a clear seperation of powers violation.
Maine needs more bats I think
Purple Martins are a lot majestic I think.
Happy? Maine IS having a problem with the bats. Back when the kids were like 7-8? there were thousands every night. Last year? we were luck to see hundreds.
If you’ve never seen a Purple Martin up close? I pity you. The most beautiful irradescent (misspelled) bird I’ve ever seen. And friendly!!! They’ll let you feed them if you have a feeder outsideyour window.
Bats that kill seagulls are what they need.
I meant a PM nest outside your window, sorry.
the scotus found that a farmer producing crops for his own use was engaging in interstate commerce. i would think that clarifying the law that resulted in this judgment would be useful except to the statists.
But how does a Constitutional Convention work?
1. Funny Hats.
2. Whoopee Cushions.
3.Bag of Frogs.
bh? There are none, however? IF you wish, I’m just crazy enough to gey into dna stuff. What do you need?
OH…you should see the…damn, can’t remember the name of the bird, but they look like whip-o-wills. THEY act like bats, and hunt the same things.
3. Bag of Frogs.
Ok, now I know where you’re coming from New. I was thinking a direct assault on SCOTUS from congress, while you were trying to change an existing law. sorry!!
Yes, that could be done. in 2013.
You cannot pass a LAW stating that the SCOTUS is misinterpreting.
Even if you could, it wouldn’t make any sense here.
You want congress to pass a law saying they can’t make more laws?
If they’d do that, they may as well just stop abusing the commerce clause in the first place.
I was surf fishing once and the sea gulls were being major pests trying to get at the cut bait and trimmings, when all of a sudden one of those quick little stiff legged birds comes running up, forget what they are called, look like little wind up toys. Any way, he starts chowing down on the little pile of heads and guts off the bait fish, and runs the sea gulls off. Then he sits in the shade under my folding chair and waits patiently for me to rebait. He then chows down, runs the sea gulls, who are at least twenty times his size, back down the beach.
Did that all damn day, was the funniest thing I have ever seen. I wanted to put him in my pocket and take him home with me, but I am pretty sure he like living on the beach a lot better.
I was actually thinking the other day a good budget cutting move would be to just do away with Congress. We don’t really need them, you know. We have enough laws now that the Court could just reinterpret the ones we got to cover any new needs that may arise.
Oh man Bmoe, could I tell you stories about surf fishing!!( My best one is me and little bro wandering onto a nude beach, but i digress)
Seagulls( no such thing, they’re just gulls) have been my nemesis AND friend as far as fishing goes. I have been sat on annd shat on, had my bait stolen and offered on a slow day, have followed the gulls up and down the Cape Cod canal to find the fish…
I wish you had a pic of that bird. I could probably ID it.
no i want congress to tell the courts that their original interpretation of the law was wrong. the congress could clarify the “meaning” of the original law. jeff g. is big on the meaning thing. under the current regime congress can require us to have both health insurance and possess mao’s/marx/hitler’s little book and wear funny hats on every third thursday.
You know Bmoe? I was just thinking the other day that we could do without the present congress AND POTUS. Sure, a little anarch would be bad? but that’s just until we pick like 600 names out of random phonebooks.
New? I’m sorry, but again I have to say that what you desire is not possible. Congress may not do anything that would sway the Court.
BUT? You live in the REAL world, and I’m a strict Constitutionalist, so what do I know?
Ha-ha, Mr. Moe.
Seagulls have feelings too, you know.
congress can’t repeal laws?
Oh fer…And to think I used to like you Mr. guinspen. Sheesh, take my bird and make it teh gay.
no i want congress to tell the courts that their original interpretation of the law was wrong. the congress could clarify the “meaning” of the original law.
But even if you assume they could do such a thing, why would they when they are the ones writing the laws begging the other interpretation to begin with?
And how in the hell could it bind them? They could, as soon as it pleased them to regulate whatever, pass another law ‘clarifying’ the interpretation back.
At best it would be nothing more then a lazy “Dear court, please strike down our old unwanted laws for us because we do not feel like repealing them”.
PS: We meant National Guard only by militia.
PPS: We meant establish Social Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, provide the general Welfare
Why even have a court?
PPPS: You’re fired.
Newrouter? you’re completely misunderstanding the workings of SCOTUS vis a vi Congress. It matters not a rats hair on a newts ASS what ongress does regarding SCOTUS. 2 seperate branches, both make their own decisions.
The makeup (Con/Lib)of the Court matters, not what congress says/does.
I am NOT the person to get into a debate about this with, as I cannot supply specifics. I know what I know if you Know what I mean.
Bonus points….what band sang that song and who was the lead singer married to?
I just did some googling and I think and the type we narrowed it down to some manner of sandpiper. Was really small, really quick, and really, really fearless.
More sandpipers for Maine!
600 names out of random phone books picked out by blind people sitting on concrete blocks previously soaked in liquid nitrogen….
The last person sitting? PRESIDENT
Well, as I don’t know where you live /fish Bmoe, I can’t exactly say. around here? yeah, Sandpipers are pretty bold, but Terns are viscous.
Blitz,
What was it that William F Buckley said, that the first 400 names in the Boston phone book could do no worse than Congress?
Move like cold molasses do they Blitz? ;-)
take my bird and make it teh gay
Any port in a storm, as they say.
Spiny, yes. BUT he said he’d rather the first (some number) out of the phone book than the Harvard faculty.
More Clarence Thomases, yes, and fewer of this kind of political freak.
Good gawd, the 9th Circus. How appropriate.
Oh c’mon SD. that was not only funny, but prescient and other words I have no idea the meaning of!!!
Ah! I was close.
Well no, not really… :^(
guinspen? you owe me a beer and a keyboard
seems to me the process goes: congress pass law courts and scotus interpret law. congress pass new law courts and scotus interpret NEW law.
Hell Spiny, I only know that ‘cus I’m a resident of Mass and hate Buckley and his evil spawn. and Harvard. oh, and MIT. well, throw Umass in there. wtf, might as well say BU…Hmmm…Framingham state? Useless….BC is ok though.
the courts feed off the laws congress makes.
I’ve discovered the source of the troll inundation
http://acephalous.typepad.com/acephalous/2010/03/what-do-you-do-in-the-wake-of-a-crushing-political-defeat.html
Did anyone wonder?
New? I’m still not understanding how you get to your last post from your first. Farbeit for me, the least of lights here to criticize, but you need to make your question/argument more clear, ok?
A little Bird.?
Nah, we knew that
Microcephalic, what?
Hey, with red meat like that maybe SEK will finally break the 20 comment barrier.
I believe “microcephalic web-footed cretin” was Jeff’s coinage.
Spiny? THAT would explain the Kennedy BIG HEAD syndrome, as woul incest explain Patrick Kennedy(Duh RI)
You know that there’smore hope-n-change coming down the pike don’t you? Now that this step has been taken, and November may be Waterloo anyway, what’s to stop the liberal Democrats from driving us over the cliff’s edge?
We gotta pay attention and keep burning up the phone lines in the hope that some will get squemish and try to save their phony-baloney jobs.
That and talk to your neighbors
I will say this about Scott. He was once with us. Then he got a big head and decided that the way to get Tenure was to go against us. Who US are? I don’t friggin’ know. HE knows though.
Jesus Christ, SEK has gone completely fucking insane.
Bob? I would HOPE they wouldn’t dare, but I know they’re not going to CHANGE. Let’s face it, the ONE won, anf the Progressives are on a suicide mission.
How is it that Happy says it? I fear for our little country. the Dems are making it their slave bitch, dressed in a maid uniform.
Must be another one of those “deeming” things, Blitz.
And why does everybody keep calling Darleen’s cartoon a depiction of a “gang rape”? Is the One now his own Apostles, too? How many of them are there, and why am I always the last to know?
The good news, you might be covered for this under Obamacare!
Because they’re idiots. Full stop.
Hadn’t seen that Bmoe, refuse to give the asswipe the traffic.
DEEMING? Don’t make me go there Spiny, this place would be rated down to Ace level with the invectives.
The only thing I agreed with SEK on is the Mets cap. I bet it is not the old blue and orange though, but one of those new ones.
i don’t see why congress can’t make a law saying what the commerce clause means
And restrict all that delicious power? Get out of here!
Joe, you weren’t here a long time ago, SEK used to be fairly normal but leaning left.
Obviously this Darleen dude must hate women.
I can draw no other conclusion.
QED. Process of elimination. Thuglicans = PWND.
Di? They can’t for many reasons. I know what some of them are, but am not qualified to say. Scroll up, and rethink the whole living together thing ok?
So I’m sitting here watching O’Reilly with the wife, and I know that many here dislike him, but there was just a surreal exchange with the congress-weiner Anthony Wiener reagrding Obamacare and the IRS collection of fines for not having “the correct” kind of approved healthcare.
He spent 5 minutes insisting that there were no “fines” for not having coverage; it was just a fee like any other, you know, like if you littered and were fined…
Regarless of how Billo asked the question, Wiener wouldn’t admit that the IRS was the enforcement arm. I mean, the boldface lying was breathtaking.
Joe, do you remember the Mets back in the mid -late 60’s? With Willie? I have baseball cards that date back to then.
O’Reilly is on the side of the statists.
Yes Bob, saw it, shut the TV off.
No SD, he’s not. I can’t figure him out though. He’s not left,but not right in all 3 meanings of the word.
Sorry to disagree Blitz, but yes, he is.
He is what SD? you know I value your opinion
O’Reilly picks political sides at random, apparently. Gotta maintain his “independent” bona fides…
NO, not a Statist
Yup, gonna go with Spiny here. Ratings RULE
YES, a Statist! heh
Today, perhaps. Tomorrow? Depends on who the guest is, I’d wager.
OT, but have any of you EVER heard of a windows OS that DIDN’T come with the drivers? I’m dealing with a Dell laptop that I just cleaned and reinstalled the OS. NO drivers are available for the ethernet card, the soft modem, the pci bus, the cd drive……
No, really Sd….I think he’s in it to keep his ratings higher than Beck.
ohnoes. If we’ve reached a point where it is of consequence whether the O’Reilly person is a statist or not we’s in big trouble.
Which, we is.
If I were to constantly complain about Big Government getting involved in affairs government has no business in, and turn around the next day, seeing some event or circumstance which offends my sensibilities and immediately demand “There should be a law!!!”; repeat this same pattern day after day for year on end, this, I say is the behavior of a statist and not an anti-statist. O’Reilly wants the government to seize the oil producing companies “windfall” profits for crying out loud. The man is a menace.
Ok, your nightly NSFW post from yours truly…
Ok, O’rielly DID do a blow job with Obama, BUT
He ripped Barney Franks asshole like John Holmes on a virgin. I swear that if Bill got any angrier? Barny would have been gagging on an Irish……
Gonna go with Spiny here, it depends on the guest, not his political leanings.
Haps? we’re fucked. Things will get better though.
SD? Normally, I’d agree. but he’s a pitchman. He’s ENTERTAINMENT. Do you honestly think Beck believes everything he says? (Caveat, yes he does, but exxagerates)
It depends on the guest. Do you watch him every night? I didn’t think so (nor do I)
I remember that about the oil profits…
I think we’ve peaked for a time. Like oil except it’s America. If the little president man is set upon doing as much damage with the rest of his term as he’s done so far, we’ve fallen and there’s no getting up on the horizon what I can see, and I’d be cautious of people what promised such a thing.
you owe me a beer
Thanks for the remembo.
But how does a Constitutional Convention work?
4. Blue Ribbon Committees.
Haps? with the recent land grab of even MORE oil bearing land by Presidential fiat? again, we’re fucked.
There IS a way out of this though. My preference? guns. Most folks won’t like that though, so education is the next best bet. someone upthread sais id best. talk to a neighbor.
I don’t watch O’Reilly. He also believes in global warming. Him I don’t need.
is the scotus still doing cases for the 18th amendment?
Guins? Pabst Blue ribbons? hell, haven’t seen that in years
which land grab? I missed another one? After he took the outer continental shelf?
congress describes scotus decides
New? please quote me fully or not at all. I stated that i was not qualified to discuss the specifics(that’s a paraphrase)
I have no idea if they are or not, nor can I pull the 18’th out of my ass in a heartbeat. But thank you, I’m now going to look that up.
Yes Haps, He’s taking oil shale lands now, AND Natural gas. The States affected are(but not in total, I’m a little confused about the borders) Nevada, Arizona,Colorado, New Mexico,Well hell….The WEST
New, re your 161? EXACTLY……But you are talking LAW
i’m just thinking out intertube. not really about you.
look at Wickard v. Filburn
you can’t grow your own food without the feds
i think most of the progg’s law is a house of cards. just pull the right one.
That is SO old…FDR. Or was it Wilson? No, FDR.
You know what’s friggin’ scary? there’s actually a proposal to bring that back. Means my garden (50×50 in a GOOD year) will be taxed. Fuck that.
And the folks around here wonder why I quit the shop…..
But how does a Constitutional Convention work?
5. Open *hic*
OH…Under captain trade, My garden would be taxed. That is all
Bob Reed – you efforts were noble, but futile. The Rich RACISTS Puchalsky’s of that cesspool would not know honesty and good faith if it stood up and smacked the smegma off their chins.
“refuse to give the asswipe the traffic. “
Use the cache Blitz.
TOO FUNNY Random!!!…I was born under a Kennedy, and I thought I’d die under one….May he rot in hell.
Wait wait wait JD….I’m not rich like you are, but can I be a racist too? Please?
[…] on | March 24, 2010 | No Commentsby SmittyJeff over at Protein Wisdom writes a post called “Unlimited Semiosis and the crisis of interpretation“. He quotes David Harsanyi in the Denver Post:As a layman, I have little business wading into […]
TY Geoff!!
the glenn beck show
No, History class in HS, but OK
Honors American history 2 to be exact. I like Beck? but he’s never brought up that particular case.
Not rich, Blitz. Just comfortable. Barcky is doing his best to see that we are not though.
After HS? I went on to become useful.
Thanks JD. I try to disagree without being disagreeable. Rich was very unkind, and read all kinds of bad intent into my opinion that Obamacare was redistribution. I don’t understand the bitterness and hate; especially when Obeyme just got achieved the first step in hopeless change!
Sorry about stirring up a controvery too gang; I won’t mention Billo’s name anymore. But, you know, be aware that I’m hearing his propaganda!
I hope you’ll trust me to be of my own mind :)
To me? you are JD. I spent everything on mom’s house and the shop. Property? gone downhill, although curiosly? our Maine property has not devalued at the rate this one in MA has. Regardless, we OWN them. No banks, no BS.
The shop? My little bro is running it now, I’m retired and taking in a small income,but DO work there when he needs me. So, compared to me? yeah, you probably are.
No need to not mention him Bob. I wouldn’t expect that nor desire it. But in light of your mention that some of us don’t like him, I thought it best to be clear that you were right, at least for my part, and why.
I mean, we mention Barack Obama all the time and very few of us like him either.
Bob?
“I don’t understand the bitterness and hate;”
Get used to it and hang on. I’m not an intellectual, but I know normal people. Just as an anecdote? Since I’m working for the Salvation Army now, I’m seeing the alleged “poor”
Now, I’m not saying that most aren’t, in fact? I’d say 90% are BUT..
Hummers pull up to get dinner at the “Miracle Kitchen”…I’ve actually been hit by a person when I said NO the the breadroom…
I’m not good at the story thingy, but trust me, I live this every effin’ day, and MOST? can do on their own. I’d say 10% are our real needy.
Bob – surprised he did not call you a racist, or that Karl Call Me Doctor Steel did not pile on. That had a Don Quixote feel to it, Senor Reed ;-)
Blitz – I am rich with the love of a good lady, wonderful children, great families and friends, and jobs we usually enjoy.
# 185
RACIST
that’s the spring board from a progg point of view. “we will tell you what to plant”
My goodness JD….Then we are equal. My family comes first, THEN the stupid money….and I’m doing something that even though I’m not religious? Helps the community. Yes my friend, VERY even.
“we will tell you what to ………”
I don’t know,Jeff. I think the panniers on the dromedery are neasrly full and the poor animals knees are shaking.
I’m a little pissed off as well
Y’all have seen the Dingell thing, right? Where he (Fruedian slip?) says “control the people”?
Rusty? If you don’t know your dromedary’s from your drapes? Kickk the stupid animals knees…it’ll sit.
Yeah, we’re all pissed.
JD? I raised my kids alone from the ages of 2 month and 2 years through High school. NEVER had a girlfriend during that tme….IF I ever meet AJB????
Blitz. Feel free to e-mail me with details of your computer probs. rtoDOTtainerATgmailDOTcom
I’m drafting an amendment proposal that will solve ALL the problems. Then we just have to get a Congresscritter to propose it. Or 38 states to ask for it.
TtainerAT
ain’t there an r in there?
There should be.
Here it is: r
I hope you’ll trust me to be of my own mind :)
Roger. Over and out of it ;
gavagai
4-3 (3-0) la dee doo dah
Do you honestly think Beck believes everything he says? (Caveat, yes he does, but exagerates)
He only exagerates in the sense that he’s a Drama Queen and plays one on TV. The exageration is born of actual sentiment—he is that freaked out by what the Oministration is doing, and he is that worried about violence and stuff.
Typical of many recovering alcoholics, the stripping-down process he had to do to uncover all the lies he was telling himself left him without any desire to pretend. He’s let it all hang out since he began talk radio in 1999.
I like Beck, but he’s never brought up that particular case.
Yes he has. He was jazzed awhile ago about a challenge to a Montana gun law that would undo it.
I do recall SEK’s sad decline. That is what happens when a man’s balls stop producing testosterone. I was referring specifically to disagreeing with his latest article on Jeff.
Scroll up, and rethink the whole living together thing ok?
So solly. Cohabitation is agin my religion.