Posted on 08/19/2010 12:43:05 PM PDT by honestabe010
Democratic Congressman Pete Stark has become a YouTube sensation in past weeks. When confronted by tough questions from his constituents resorted to sarcasm and condescension. His pompous manner is utterly revolting to watch, but it was something he said at a Town Hall meeting in Wayward CA on 7/24/10 that was nothing short of frightening.
Mr. Stark was quoted as saying that “healthcare is now a right rather than a privilege” which prompted a woman at the meeting to bring up the following question. 'If the government can force healthcare upon the masses, and make it compulsory for physicians to treat any and all patients, then what can’t they do?'
The woman goes so far as to say that it infringes upon the 13th amendment, which banned slavery, because the government is in essence enslaving the doctor to treat whomever they tell him to. She proceeds to ask “if this legislation (healthcare) is constitutional, then what limitations are there on the Federal Government’s ability to tell us how to run our private lives”?
One would expect Mr. Stark to dodge the question with some crafty politically correct answer. However, his response was quite the opposite. “Yes, the Federal Government can do most anything in this country”, was Mr. Stark’s reply. This statement was met with a smattering of boos by those present and understandably so. But do people really understand how true Congressman Stark’s answer is turning out to be?
Forget healthcare for a minute, and let’s look at some other pieces of legislation that are flying a bit under the radar. The Obama administration is currently working on a piece of legislation to ban junk food in schools. The law would not only stop schools from serving certain foods at meals...
(Excerpt) Read more at thewoodwardreport.com ...
gnip
Correct answer is 100%. In California every incumbent Democrat in every congressional, state assembly, and state senate district has been re-elected for more than 10 years.
Occasionally an incumbent Republican will be defeated by a Democrat, but never the other way around.
Pretty much every time Pete Stark opens his pie hole there is a terrifying revelation.
Never underestimate the stupidity of voters in the Bay Area.
I don't think so. I think he's claiming that the Constitution is a dead letter, which unfortunately it is.
The only constitution that has practical effect is that formed by Supreme Court rulings, which can be quite arbitrary and differ substantially from the plain language of the Constitution as amended.
Even mainstream conservative jurists see it this way. Robert Bork famously likened the 9th Amendment to an inkblot. It's been this way for decades -- it didn't start with the Patient Protection and Health Care Affordability Act.
Hey, it is most definitely NOT slavery if our masters tell us otherwise.
And a duty to pay a state-prescribed insurance premium is a right if the State says so.
And income taxes are voluntary if our masters tell they are, too.
Standing ‘O’ to the questioner. My hero.
And why have republicans not SCREAMED this disgrace from the rooftops??? Because they are generally ALSO arrogant tyrants who agree with Stark!!!
He is right, we don’t.
Moonbat district. He’s owned it for almost 40 years.
Make the Left defend the outrageous findings of this barbarian.
The Framers intended impeachment to be a check on judicial overreach. If this jerk is not fired, not removed from office, the radicals will be further empowered and we can expect more judicial tyranny. It doesn't matter that the Senate would exonerate him. Force the rat senators to defend the pagan musings of an out of control tyrant. The media would have to cover it and defend him.
Impeaching Walker is low hanging fruit. It will consume the Beltway oxygen. The Journo media will not be able to avoid coverage. The ravings of the homo lunatic will be exposed, and we can tag the jerk to all things Obama.
Stark is stark raving mad...
Stark is stark raving mad...
His district is gerrymandered, such that it is virtually impossible to unseat him. I’ve neither seen nor heard of such behaviour from Stark in meetings with constituents in the northern end of his district (which adjoins Oakland). Hayward (not “Wayward”) is in the southern end of the district, where most of Fortney’s detractors are. The son-of-a-bitch was my congressman, for thirty-five years, until I retired and fled for the hills!
That is the current attitude of this Congress! They will do as they want and they aren't worried about what we think about it. They have no worries about upcoming elections. Why?? Either they are satisfied they have it sufficiently rigged for victory or they will find a reason to not have elections, either in 2010 or 2012.
Howdy Pete,
_That_ would have required a constitutional amendment. What was passed was a mere law, which contradicts the supreme law. There _are_ people willing to to fight to defend the supreme law of the land, if forced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.