15 Responses to “Obama and Reid go completely berserk. Obama calls Republicans extortionists and Reid calls them anarchists, which is a good sign that Republicans finally grew some backbone and are doing something productive”

1. Torrance
   September 18th, 2013 @ 11:29 am

   Obama should just cave and repeal his own stupid legislation. He knows you are closing in on him and he shouldn’t be in Office to begin with.

   I pray that HORRIBLE health care mandate will be repealed. I do not go to doctors; they do not cure anybody and I will not pay a fine for refusing to purchasing something I have never ever used nor needed nor wanted.

2. steve
   September 18th, 2013 @ 12:55 pm

   Dr. Taitz – Let them go Berserk! Just keep attacking them. Even though you were born and raised in Russia, you are America’s version of Joan of Arc.

3. The Constitution
   September 18th, 2013 @ 1:51 pm

   I love it! It’s about time the House did something like this. How does it feel, obama, Reid, to have someone tell you to GO FLY A KITE?

   Once we start to defund all the GARBAGE, then, there’s plenty left to take care of necessities!

4. Veritas
   September 18th, 2013 @ 2:33 pm

   They are losing grip on reality, as they read the criticism of them emerging in the press.

   For example, yesterday Glenn Beck said OBAMA, McCAIN, and GRAHAM should be impeached for aiding the enemy (Al Qaeda).

   Now Judge Andrew Napolitano stated that Obama is AIDING and ABETTING the ENEMY and in doing is committing the “T” word: TREASON.

   In an interesting lesson on Constitutional Law, Napolitano explained that it is the ONLY CRIME defined IN THE CONSTITUTION.

   What Obama wants to do and what McCain supports, is AIDING and ABETTING the Enemy.

   Obama could be charged with a WAR CRIME, and he would never be able to travel out of the country again, as there is no STATUTE of LIMITATIONS.

   “This is a president CONTEMPTUOUS of the Constitution because, if followed, will limit him.” (NAPOLITANO)

5. elizbeth
   September 18th, 2013 @ 3:22 pm

   I agree with Torrance, that if this program
   which is unconstitutional, is implemented,
   and the impostor remains in our country
   free to continue his treachery,

   all of us Americans should and will say,
   “NO” to all the plan which is completely
   against our freedoms and liberties.

   Even if we had the monetary means to
   pay this extortion, we would not do it.

   And that is what it is.. criminal extortion
   under the guise of medical health insurance.

   Bah, humbug!!!

   I know these are the times that will try
   men’s and women’s souls.

   “As for me, and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

6. Rosemary
   September 18th, 2013 @ 4:11 pm

   I called Spker Boehrner to thank him for defunding Obamacare and then told him to get rid of the fraud in the WH.

7. The Constitution
   September 18th, 2013 @ 4:53 pm

   Torrance: yeah, the doctors (some of them) are pill pushers and those pills don’t cure anything! They just want to treat something!

   Elizabeth: Bah, Humbug? LOL!

8. Elizabeth
   September 18th, 2013 @ 6:28 pm

   Constitution, I think you are also Davey Crockett .. talk about split personalities.. ha ha.. I love it.

   I was so mad, I spelled my name wrong.. LOL

9. Torrance
   September 19th, 2013 @ 5:20 am

   I just think it’s preposterous to expect already cash-strapped American citizens to pay yet ANOTHER tax when we ALL live week-to-week as it is. I NEVER receive raises and cash in cans and bottles for extra money. It is the ONLY extra money I have and I have cut out everything to adjust for my inflated bills which I like to pay, choose to pay and choose to pay in order to keep my credit A-1. How dare The Democrats and worst of all, Obama, feel they can impose a FINE to those of us who lead holistic lifestyles? I NEVER have had alcoholic beverages, NEVER have smoked, NEVER have taken anything stronger than an aspirin. I walk (depending upon weather) 10-20 miles per week. Surprise! I don’t NEED to see doctors nor would I EVER go to them considering they are all quacks who do not diagnose properly and force, especially we women, untold amounts of Byzantine tests, procedures and exams upon us. I shudder to think if The Republicans cannot dismantle that horrible law, what the government will force us to endure next. Mandated physical exams or go to jail?

10. Elizabeth
    September 19th, 2013 @ 11:13 am

    Would it be feasible, if this bill is passed,
    for all Americans to rebel and reject any
    payments of either premiums or fines?

    You would have to be strong and not cave in.

    Take your money out of the bank, so they
    cannot get it illegally, print up researched information for the IRS, giving all the reasons why the government cannot mandate one’s life insurance nor fine one for refusing to submit to extortion; it is unconstitutional. State that there is no bank that has your account.

    If they persist, you are reporting them to the FBI for mafia-style blackmail and coercion. Tell them their agents may peruse your bills and creditors, so that the IRS may pay off your debts.

    If they come knocking at your door, greet them with a smile and a handful of your bills to be paid.

    What a scenario. 310,000 Americans united in a peaceful revolution.

11. Elizabeth
    September 19th, 2013 @ 11:17 am

    MJ Martin (2 Jan 2010)
    “Why the Health-Care Bills Are Unconstitutional”

    Why the Health-Care Bills Are Unconstitutional

    If the government can mandate the purchase of insurance, it can do anything.

    ORRIN G. HATCH, J. KENNETH BLACKWELL AND KENNETH A. KLUKOWSKI

    President Obama’s health-care bill is now moving toward final passage. The policy issues may be coming to an end, but the legal issues are certain to continue because key provisions of this dangerous legislation are unconstitutional. Legally speaking, this legislation creates a target-rich environment. We will focus on three of its more glaring constitutional defects.
    First, the Constitution does not give Congress the power to require that Americans purchase health insurance. Congress must be able to point to at least one of its powers listed in the Constitution as the basis of any legislation it passes. None of those powers justifies the individual insurance mandate. Congress’s powers to tax and spend do not apply because the mandate neither taxes nor spends. The only other option is Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.
    Congress has many times stretched this power to the breaking point, exceeding even the expanded version of the commerce power established by the Supreme Court since the Great Depression. It is one thing, however, for Congress to regulate economic activity in which individuals choose to engage; it is another to require that individuals engage in such activity. That is not a difference in degree, but instead a difference in kind. It is a line that Congress has never crossed and the courts have never sanctioned.
    In fact, the Supreme Court in United States v. Lopez (1995) rejected a version of the commerce power so expansive that it would leave virtually no activities by individuals that Congress could not regulate. By requiring Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service, Congress would be doing exactly what the court said it could not do.
    Some have argued that Congress may pass any legislation that it believes will serve the “general welfare.” Those words appear in Article I of the Constitution, but they do not create a free-floating power for Congress simply to go forth and legislate well. Rather, the general welfare clause identifies the purpose for which Congress may spend money. The individual mandate tells Americans how they must spend the money Congress has not taken from them and has nothing to do with congressional spending.
    A second constitutional defect of the Reid bill passed in the Senate involves the deals he cut to secure the votes of individual senators. Some of those deals do involve spending programs because they waive certain states’ obligation to contribute to the Medicaid program. This selective spending targeted at certain states runs afoul of the general welfare clause. The welfare it serves is instead very specific and has been dubbed “cash for cloture” because it secured the 60 votes the majority needed to end debate and pass this legislation.
    A third constitutional defect in this ObamaCare legislation is its command that states establish such things as benefit exchanges, which will require state legislation and regulations. This is not a condition for receiving federal funds, which would still leave some kind of choice to the states. No, this legislation requires states to establish these exchanges or says that the Secretary of Health and Human Services will step in and do it for them. It renders states little more than subdivisions of the federal government.
    This violates the letter, the spirit, and the interpretation of our federal-state form of government. Some may have come to consider federalism an archaic annoyance, perhaps an amusing topic for law-school seminars but certainly not a substantive rule for structuring government. But in New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court struck down two laws on the grounds that the Constitution forbids the federal government from commandeering any branch of state government to administer a federal program. That is, by drafting and by deliberate design, exactly what this legislation would do.
    The federal government may exercise only the powers granted to it or denied to the states. The states may do everything else. This is why, for example, states may have authority to require individuals to purchase health insurance but the federal government does not. It is also the reason states may require that individuals purchase car insurance before choosing to drive a car, but the federal government may not require all individuals to purchase health insurance.
    This hardly exhausts the list of constitutional problems with this legislation, which would take the federal government into uncharted political and legal territory. Analysts, scholars and litigators are just beginning to examine the issues we have raised and other issues that may well lead to future litigation.
    America’s founders intended the federal government to have limited powers and that the states have an independent sovereign place in our system of government. The Obama/Reid/Pelosi legislation to take control of the American health-care system is the most sweeping and intrusive federal program ever devised. If the federal government can do this, then it can do anything, and the limits on government power that our liberty requires will be more myth than reality.

12. Dodger Fan
    September 19th, 2013 @ 9:06 pm

    Hey, Liz: I’m not Davey Crockett…Davey is my twin bother! Wild, huh? And Davey has a lot of friends who post here!

    And please: try not to post so long, okay? Cause I had to scroll and scroll…till my beard grew out!!!!! LOLOL!

    I like your posts, though! So does Davey!

13. Elizabeth
    September 20th, 2013 @ 10:44 am

    Dodger,

    Sorry for the long-winded post but I felt that the Martin guy’s information was still timely, though 3 years later. A lot of water (stagnant water) has gone under the bridge, but the feelings remain…. this is not America’s way of treating its citizens, and if a government is going to go berserk, it needs to be brought down by the people, as nicely “ordered” in our Constitution.

    In those olden days, golden days of yesteryear, this impostor would have been
    put in the stocks out in the public square
    and then ceremoniously hanged.

    There are still people alive today, who
    would be willing and able to carry out that
    punishment.

    I like what js/js wrote as advice
    to the usurper, on another thread:

    Repent
    Resign

    RETURN TO SENDER….lol

14. Davey Crockett
    September 20th, 2013 @ 10:04 pm

    Thanks, Liz:…yeah, I know it’s hard not to post and post!

    Dodger is a life-long Fan of the Blue…and I love them, too! They could go all the way this year!

Leave a Reply