Elena's nanny state

Suppose that the federal government, in its infinite wisdom, decided that it would deal with the obesity crisis and improve the health and welfare of the American people -- by mandating that every American eat three helpings of vegetables and three helpings of fruit every day. Anyone caught failing to eat the required food would be subject to a fine or tax. Would such a law be constitutional?

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) put that question to Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan this week. Kagan, the US solicitor general, couldn't answer. In fact, she implied that under the court's "expansive" view of the Constitution's Commerce Clause, a fruit and vegetable mandate might be just fine.

Now, some may think that such a hypothetical question is silly, other than giving us a glimpse of Kagan's virtually unlimited view of government power. Congress would never pass such a "dumb" law, to use Kagan's term -- would it?

But Congress has just taken a very similar step, mandating that every American purchase a government-designed package of health-insurance benefits. The issue is now before the courts -- there's a hearing today.

The RINO Orrin Hatch has already said there will be no filibuster of Kagan’s appointment.

What a mess.

Thanks a lot 0bama voters for strapping us with this treacherous mohammedan, kenyan, alien communist for president.

And thanks a lot GOP for allowing a limp-wristed, RINO, DemoncRAT-loving McCain to become the party’s challenger to the kenyan kommunist.

And thanks a lot GOP for allowing a limp-wristed, RINO, DemoncRAT-loving McCain to become the party’s challenger to the kenyan kommunist

The behavior of many in Washington has already passed the label of treason. Fools like Hatch, Lyndsey Graham and John McCain are also joining the traitors in the destruction of America.

It's past time to take out the trash in Washington.

The analogy is not far-fetched.

Question: Under Gubmint doctors - if a patient refuses to follow medical dietetic, exercise, smoking & other guidelines - is there punishment, fines, refusal to treat or other sanctions???

Like high risk auto insurance for bad drivers????

I don’t put anything past these Marxist bustards;(

The RINO Orrin Hatch has already said there will be no filibuster of Kagan’s appointment.

During the Bush administration, many notable conservatives, including Mark Levin, Rush, and Sean Hannity, argued that the sixty-vote requirement to approve judicial nominees is unconstitutional, and that once the nominee emerges from committee, he or she is entitled to an up or down vote on the Senate floor. Some even advocated the nuclear option to remove the filibuster from the process. Hatch, himself, is on record as opposing the filibuster for judicial nominees (http://old.nationalreview.com/comment/hatch200501120729.asp).

Perhaps Hatch is just being intellectually honest -- if the Constitution requires an up or down vote for Republican nominees, then it also requires an up or down vote for RAT nominess.

For the record, I was against the nuclear option back then as I am now, because I had the foresight to realize that at some point in the future we would face an uber liberal nominee and might need the filibuster to protect the SCOTUS and the Constitution. What goes around, comes around, and if I were in charge of the GOP, I would do everything I legally can to block Kagan, even if that requires an around the clock reading from the Senate floor of Rev. Wright's sermons.

Thanks for your lucid insight.

Concerning this ...

> an around the clock reading from the Senate floor of Rev.
> Wright’s sermons.

... as delicious a prospect that is, there probably isn’t one Republican in the Senate with the spine to do it.

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.