"Short answer to your question is yes, it is unconstitutional and for that reason, I signed a pledge to repeal Obamacare four months ago. Carly Fiorina signed it the day after it passed and Tom Campbell still signed the pledge.
To go back to the previous question, though, I think it's very important what's going on in Afghanistan. It's very important that we understand that the Taliban and Al-qaida does not present a existential threat to the united states. They don't have an industrial base. They don't have armies. They're terrorists. Now, because of the fact that Afghanistan has no means of national support for a large army, where is the endgame? Are you proposing that we just stay in Afghanistan until they develop a modern economy and a modern democracy? For heaven's sakes, their constitution was drafted by the French as part of the NATO mission and it envisions a strong central government which is inimical like afghan culture and tradition. I'm an intelligence officer. I'm a lieutenant colonel. I've studied this issue. We need to kill our enemies. We don't need to build a modern nation state where one cannot exist for 100 years."
Believe me... it's much worse ... when you see the definition ... LOL ... From Merriam-Webster's dictionary ...
-- EXISTENTIAL -- Main Entry: ex·is·ten·tial Function: adjective Date: 1693 1 : of, relating to, or affirming existence [existential propositions] 2 a : grounded in existence or the experience of existence : empirical 2 b : having being in time and space
This guy doesn't think it's a threat related to "existence" -- not grounded in "time and space" ... not grounded in "experience" ...
This guy, Chuck DeVore, needs to stay in California where there are a lot of "non-existential types" there ... LOL ...