As part of the Senate HC “Gang Of Sicks” (formerly 7, but Hatch left and that didn’t have the fun play on words lol). PERIOD! If he is willing to help piece together a WIN FOR OBAMACARE to put another piece of LIBERAL INCREMENTAL-ISM TOWARD A COMPLETE HC TAKEOVER in place – he is NOT helping the right side/process. THE BILL MUST BE KILLED!

Grassley must have gotten a LOT of heat back in Iowa. I never really thought he’d ever support a public option, but he at least seemed intent on hammering out some kind of deal. Not anymore. His public comments at the Iowa townhalls combined with this fundraising letter essentially ensures that the bipartisan Finance committee deal is done.

I don’t buy the reconciliation argument, frankly. If the Dems were to employ that tactic, the bill would be destroyed through parliamentary procedures and they would suffer enormously in the world of public opinion. Furthermore, reconciliation is only good for 5 or 10 years, thus any health care bill would automatically sunset after that time – similar to the Bush tax cuts.

It will be interesting what happens from here on out.

I’m going to order some copies of the US Constitution from the Heritage Foundation and FedEx them to these GOP idiots. While I admire their opposition, it isn’t rooted in Conservative principles. Hell, Grassley was just recently trying to negotiate with these damnable Marxists!

Stop fighting this on the details and fight it on Constitutional grounds. The Democrats can’t possibly claim Obamacare or any manifestation thereof is Constitutional. If they claim otherwise publicly challenge them on it. Go on offense!

If we can’t or won’t draw a Constitutional line in the sand here and now then ultimately we are finished. Progressivism will resume its inexorable march forward. It may have been stalled for a decade or more but it won’t stop until we kill it by demanding ultimate fealty to the Constitution starting with passage of the Enumerated Powers Act which the Democrats won’t even allow to come to the floor for a vote.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare,
and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare,
they may take the care of religion into their own hands;
they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish
and pay them out of their public treasury;
they may take into their own hands the education of children,
establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union;
they may assume the provision of the poor;
they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads;
in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation
down to the most minute object of police,
would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power
of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for,
it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature
of the limited Government established by the people of America.”

I don’t like to refer to a person as “Stupid” (well, at least not in front of my kids), but as you can see I’ve found another word that fits. I think we should demand, whenever discussing with a liberal or RINO the desirability of passing any proposed legislation, that the starting point for the discussion be whether Art. I, Section 8 provides any authority to the Congress for the subject matter of the proposed legislation in the first instance.

I agree wholeheartedly with DerKrieger — we do not demand enough that the congresscritters abide by their oath to support the Constitution and to pass only laws “in Pursuance thereof” and according to the strictures of Art. I, Section 8. We can change the debate by changing its starting point. If we do not, all we end up arguing about is whether passing or not passing the legislation is “fair” to whatever special interest (the poor, the children, the elderly, the homeless, the uneducated, the “disenfranchised”) wants the goodies (or, more accurately, the political constituency that wants the government jobs and power and government contracts and graft that goes along with servicing the “special interest”).

You probably have already seen this video but it makes the point:

More here:

http://www.redstate.com/ljmiller96/2009/07/30/we-scare-because-we-care-an-obamascare-roundup/

Thank you.

ColdWarrior

Are reacquainting themselves, or reading in depth for the first time, the US Constitution and it;s a great thing. For far too long we’ve assumed our representatives were actually working in our best interest when in fact they’ve, both parties, been undermining our Constitutional government by exercising extra-constitutional powers.

If this does pass I hope and pray that it starts numerous 10th Amendment challenges.

And if the Arizona Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act passes, which I expect it to do, they may be the first to go to the SCOTUS. And they will win.

http://www.azhealthcarefreedomact.com/

Anyone on RS from AZ who can give on the ground feedback about this initiative?

and that is DO NOTHING EXCEPT RESIST AND EVEN “FILIBUSTER.”

All they just do is:

SIT and SHOUT “NO!” “NO!” “NO!”

to any socialist/fascist/corrupt agenda of the Obama White House and Minions.

Nuff said.

It is sad to see people cut off their noses to spite their faces. Obama may not be the president you wanted but to fight against his and congress’ efforts to reduce the future cost of health care on the deficit and make insurance executives use our premiums to pay for the treatment we need instead of lining their pockets is just wrong. Let’s vote for lower deficits and more money in our own pockets. Let’s reform health care!

I bet wwjd will provide us with no quotes from eitherr the Bible or the Constitution.

Thank you.

ColdWarrior

I don’t believe you want quotes. You want an argument but I don’t have one for you. I’ll just let you find the versus you need.

As you probably know the constitution does not mention medicare or social security but we don’t deny them to our citizens and most of us wouldn’t consider taking them away.

The bible does not mention medical care; however, Christ was the original universal care giver. He healed anytime any place even on the Sabbath. He could not turn from others suffering when he had the ability to offer healing. He has left us to carry on his work and I don’t believe he would want us to turn from the challenges that face our brothers and sisters today.

Isn’t there a chance he would filibuster?

and I think there is a chance more than one Democratic Senator would filibuster.

There are 16 Democratic Senators who are up for re-election in 2010. Lieberman is not one of them.