« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Last Firewall

Why We Have A United States Supreme Court

Is the United States of America too gob-smacking ignorant as a nation and a people to deserve the benefits of a continued constitutional republic? Are we a people worthy of self-rule, or should we just get Benito in here to make the gosh-darn trains run on time? I’m afraid Representative Conyers’ continued tenure in the House of Representatives sheds far more light on the uglier side of that question than I would like. He describes why he believes Obamacare is constitutionally valid below.

Ah yes, it’s the Jolly Old Good and Welfare Clause. Like the Santa Claus, (which Congressman Conyers probably also believes is in the Constitution) it allows the beneficent and mighty Federal Government to give anything they want to anyone. But the Santa Claus doesn’t exist and everything government gives me it takes away from thee.

For every fashionable West Egg in the famous novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald there exists a Valley of Ashes. The government has to take all the money it spends to hand out freebies under ObamaCare from the people. It does so using the Individual Mandate.

To those who have objected mightily to these state-sponsored usurpations and brigandage, Nancy Pelosi asks an accidentally deep and relevant question. The exchange follows below.

CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

This is an important question to answer for reasons extending far beyond healthcare and insurance. When Senator Patrick Leahy was asked where he got the authority to enact The Individual Mandate, he replied that nobody questioned his authority*. Nobody questioned the authority of Nero either. What was it Dick Cheney famously said of the man?

Luckily several intelligent and capable people were very serious. They have brought every legal injunction they could grasp onto against the Leftist Legislative Leviathon. It is a blessing to live in a free society where we have recourse to the law athwart even the craven elected officials responsible for making it. We are truly fortunate to even have a Supreme Court that can stand as the last firewall between decency and the ignorance of the masses.

So we reach our final bulwark against triumphal and anti-republican equalitarianism. The legislative branch of government has grabbed powers that help make Robert Mugabe and Hugo Chavez the loveable and cuddly fellows that each man truly is. Their interpretation of the imaginary “Good and Welfare Clause” is now such that “nobody questions their authority.” The Supreme Court may well serve as the final barrier between liberty and tyranny. We’ll learn something very important this morning at 10AM. Is our pretence of being a Constitutional Republic still serious?

Update: Obamacare has survived pretty much unscathed. It’s a “tax”; not a “mandate.” This is a bad day for American Democracy and checks and balances. The Supreme Court has succeeded in overempowering the Legislative Branch of Government. This will become worse and more virulent in the future if we do not take back our government. The “Good and Welfare Clause” reigns supreme!

*-He, like Eric Cartman, demands that you respect his authorite’!

COMMENTS

  • jaykali

    What would really ‘split the baby’ would be to say, okay you can have your mandate as long as it comes to a vote to make it a tax, otherwise it cannot be enforced.

    If this is like the so-called nuanced ‘contraception compromise’ where all the SC has done is re-label the mandate a tax then this is pretty bad. I just can’t believe the court would allow the mandate to be upheld as is even though it obviously is not a tax. Oh well, I guess the silver lining has been for a while that this being upheld could put even more momentum in the opposition to get Obama out of office in 2012. That would be the last laugh I suppose.

    • jaykali

      The first time someone gets penalized for not paying the tax (out of opposition) can that make its way to the SC or would this decision say that basically the person is stuck with the tax.

      • Repair_Man_Jack

        It would be couragious and noble to not pay. However, you should expect treatment similar to that of St. Stephen The Martyr. They will make non-payers into brutal examples.

        • jaykali

          I am guessing not since individuals can’t sue bc they think a tax is unfair.

    • avgjo

      Not to mention that you can’t give waivers for federal taxes.

      But hey, even Chief ‘Justice’ Roberts made it clear today that that Constitution rag doesn’t mean a thing.

      • jaykali

        This whole thing has been such a frustrating experience. All of these barriers and it skates through every time, from the Louisiana kickback, to reconciliation on Christmas Eve with no chance to review to this.

  • kowalski

    Song of the Day

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_5kv8QeBBc