Posted on 11/13/2009 7:57:18 PM PST by sickoflibs
Question : “Madam Speaker, Do you feel like it’s fair to send people to jail for not buying health insurance?” Pelosi : “ The point is we want to make sure that everyone has access to health care. For a long time those that haven’t had health care were provided it ( ??? ) have placed the burden on others. Everybody is paying the price for uncompensated care in a hospital. This is to say we all have to do our part (except those getting it for free) and that is the point of the bill.” Question: “But Madam Speaker I am trying to understand. If you don’t buy health insurance you are going to jail?” Pelosi :”I think the legislation is very clear in this respect…”
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
The most stupid part of this proposal is she is talking about it at a time when everyone is losing their jobs. The last thing anyone is thinking of buying is health care when they are trying to stay in their homes and keep food on the table.
what a bloviating bee-otch.
...Time to wrap this whole thread together, “Question: The right to choose, Pelosi care, or, Pelosi gets jail time for the Un-Constitutionality of this bill...
...Take your time, don’t jump to a conclusion, think this through, you have 72 hours to read this wrap up...
...Uppp, sorry, a typo, 7.2 seconds to respond...
...Times up. No more debate on this...
I know quite a few extremely liberal Dems, but not a single one who claims to like Pelosi. They all hate her because she makes them look stupid...a thousand times more so than the Socialist Bush made us look less than brilliant.
Is the health care plan consitutional? More specifically, where in the constitution does the Congress get the power to mandate citizens buy health care or be fined or go to jail?
The answer you get to this question:
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?”
Reporter: “Yes, I am.”
Pelosi: “Next question.”
You hit it on the mark! That is why I love Nancy Pelosi.
Back the last four years when no one know who she was, she successfully kept the attention on GWB who was as popular as a child molester. This included 2007-08 when she was speaker. Low polls on congress were STILL against republicans when she was Speaker those two years as she was focusing on Bush-Cheney with the MSM.
But now with GWB gone and McCain lost there are few places for the spotlight to shine on the R side. The MSM loves BoB (aka Zero) too much to report on him, but Nancy Pelosi is too tempting of a target even for them to ignore. So keep her on TV, keep the limelight on her and we may just enjoy this ride a bit, while democrats suffer (like we did.) In fact I am thinking we may want to keep her as Speaker in 2011 as a continued target with a tiny ungovernable majority lets say 1 or 2 seats.
Ironically Pelosi who made her (impressive) success using GWB/Cheney, has taken his place being seen as the 'incompetent demon running Washington'.
This is something Obama ran against in the primary with Hillary because it's very unpopular. Ask Pelosi this, “Are the uninsured victims of those greedy insurance companies who need help as you claim or are they really the victimizer deadbeats that deserve jail time as you claim? “ ....(I love it.)
As to the constitutional question, that Pandoras box was opened when the federal government mandated hospitals provide uncompensated care (including to illegals) with the same legal liability protections we get when we pay our bills. They can sue for malpractice for free care.
That is in fact the point she makes. You will notice that republicans would not go near this issue under Bush. One blind spot many elected republicans have is... see my tagline.
FOX NEWS' JUDGE ANDREW NAPOLITANO SAID IT BEST Free people enjoy the right to use nullification as a protective measure...... to have state legislatures act to prevent federal domination.
WORKS LIKE THIS To get your support, the candidate must take a stand to use state govt to nullify the federal govt's unconstitutional overreaching into our lives. Demand candidates nullify ObamaCare.
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE A legacy of USSC Justice Taney's Dred Scott judicial activism, was that the ruling would lay the groundwork for the rights of states to nullify----to make null; to invalidate; to counteract the force or effectiveness of unconstitutional laws.
Nullification in U.S. history, is a doctrine expounded by the advocates of states' rights. It held that states have the right to declare null and void any federal law that they deem unconstitutional.
Nullification is also a fundamental state right to prevent federal domination. States enjoyed the right to use nullification as a protective measure against unconstitutional federal laws by making them ineffective against their citizens.
For example, Montana nullified federal gun laws.
After Dred Scott, nullification had become a states' right tradition, and both the North and the South exercised it prior to 1861
SOURCE http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ COPYRIGHT 2009 American Opinion Publishing, Inc.
El-Bump-O
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.