As is well known, there are as many as thirteen states that have filed lawsuits claiming that the healthcare reform bill is unconstitutional. Virginia is one of those states. Virginia recently passed a law that would exempt residents from purchasing healthcare coverage as is required under the healthcare reform bill, stating that the federal government overstepped its bounds according to the tenth amendment of the constitution.
Kathleen Sebelius filed a motion challenging Virginia’s law that would void the federal law, and in this argument she probably has a case. But she goes on to say that even if Virginia’s law was upheld, congress still had the right to force Americans to purchase a product against their will under the commerce clause in the constitution.
Even if Virginia could surmount this jurisdictional barrier, its claim still would fail because Congress, in adopting the minimum coverage provision, acted well within its authority under the Commerce Clause
The theory goes like this; an uninsured person still receives benefits from hospitals, and the cost of those benefits are passed on to the federal government and the people, therefor they affect interstate commerce. I am not buying it, the commerce clause was written with narrow interpretations in mind. The regulating of commerce between the states, such as eliminating tariffs placed on states for importing products into other states, as well as devising a national money system to replace the individual currency of the individual states.
Over the years the commerce clause has become one of the most abused clauses in the constitution, right up there with the general welfare clause. This is another case of the abuse of the commerce clause and this motion should be struck down.
It remains to be seen how all of this will play out, but it is going to be very interesting to watch. The fight has just begun.
A Massachusetts politician, Representative Moran, was injured in a car accident over the weekend. Thankfully it sounds as if he is going to be okay, but a passenger in the car of the suspect is in serious condition with life threatening injuries. My thoughts are with the injured passenger, I hope that he/she recovers fully and is able to live life to the fullest.
But there is much more to this story. Massachusetts is a “sanctuary state,” they welcome illegal aliens with open arms. The Boston city council recently voted to boycott Arizona— a move that must have Arizona shaking in its boots, NOT!– because of Arizona’s new controversial immigration law. The man who rear ended Representative Moran while doing 60 mph on a back road in Boston is a suspected illegal alien. He was drunk, and had no license. Under Arizona law, this would give the officer at the scene “probable cause” to ask this man for his documents. Not so in Massachusetts; three years ago the governor of Massachusetts, Deval Patrick, reversed a Mitt Romney law that would have given the state police the right to investigate the suspect’s legal status.
But because of action taken by Gov. Deval Patrick, state police were unable to notify immigration authorities that Naranjo might be illegal.
When the suspect was informed that he was in serious trouble, he actually laughed at the arresting officer stating,”I am going to go back to my country, Mexico….Nothing is going to happen to me, man.”
And that is the problem that arises from coddling these criminals; they have a total lack of respect for the law because they know that in states like Massachusetts nothing will happen to them. They are actually laughing at the notion that action will be taken against them; they do not respect the laws of the land, and that is dangerous. Luckily it appears as if Rep. Moran will be fine, but it is actions that he has taken that allowed illegal immigrants such as the man who rear ended him to remain in the country in the first place.
In an interesting twist, Representative Moran helped to defeat the Perry amendment in Massachusetts that would have prohibited illegal immigrants from receiving public assistance. Maybe this incident will help to change the minds of those politicians in Massachusetts, including Rep. Moran’s mind, and this will lead to a serious discussion over the policies of these “sanctuary states.” I wouldn’t hold my breath though, these people are supposed to protect the citizens but they are more interested in protecting the rights of the people who broke the law to get here. It is criminal.
It has been more than one month since the BP oil rig exploded (or was blown up by North Korea) and still the federal government has not had the response to this crisis that you would have expected, oil continues to pour into the ocean while the administration appears to have no idea what to do about it.
In contrast to this administration’s claims that they have been on the case since day one, the lack of federal action while the Gulf Coast is being threatened by the biggest oil spill in history is baffling.
At least, that is, until you consider who the man is that has received the most money in campaign donations from BP in the last twenty years— Barack Obama. He is in bed with BP and big oil and there is the real possibility that because of this the federal response has been less than adequate. Consider if you will what the reaction from the left would have been if the “big oil” administration of Bush/Cheney would have been so lacking. What is the difference here? Barack Obama received more money from BP than George Bush or Dick Cheney ever did. Yet Bush and Cheney were considered the “oil men” in the White House while Barack Obama is getting a pass.
Finally today someone called into question Barack Obama’s association with BP and correlated it with his lack of leadership on this issue. That person was Sarah Palin. Here is what she had to say:
I don’t know why the question isn’t asked by the mainstream media and by others if there’s any connection with the contributions made to president Obama and his administration and the support by the oil companies to the administration
Palin suggested this close relationship explained why Obama was, “taking so doggone long to get in there, to dive in there, and grasp the complexity and the potential tragedy that we are seeing here in the Gulf of Mexico.”
Barack Obama has received more money from BP than any other candidate in the last twenty years, but yet he has gone on record as saying that the cozy relationship between the federal government and the oil industry had to end, apparently he was not talking about himself when he made that statement. Again with the doublespeak from this man.
I think that it is time he looked into the mirror for once. Barack Obama’s reaction to this crisis was slow at best– and remains woefully inept– and we are left to wonder if this is because of all the money he has accepted from BP in the past.
Even after Joe Sestack defeated Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania primary he is still claiming that he was offered a high level position in the Obama administration to drop out of the race.
If what Joe Sestak is claiming it true– and of yet he has still refused to offer more details, or any proof– than the person who offered him the job committed a federal crime, and should be prosecuted.
These charges are not going to go away now that Joe Sestak has defeated Arlen Specter and there needs to be a special investigator named to investigate these charges. If Joe Sestak is lying he needs to face charges of libel against the administration, but if he is telling the truth the American people deserve to know the truth– and the offending person needs to be brought up on federal charges.
As of right now, the Democrats have no intention of naming a special investigator, so one is left to wonder why. Joe Sestak might not be offering any proof, but the Democrats’ lack of enthusiasm to name a special prosecutor leads me to believe that they are fearful– or perhaps they know– the truth about this story. If there was nothing to this story wouldn’t Democrats be eager to clear the names of the people who may have been involved?
The only two reasons– other than the fact that Joe Sestak might be telling the truth and thus implicating a member of the Obama administration– that the Democrats might be leery of investigating the claims, are the possibility that if the claims are true the Democrats might be in greater danger of losing this seat, or Joe Sestak is lying and Democrats are trying to protect one of their own before the election.
Either the Democrats are afraid that an Obama administration official is guilty, they are trying desperately to hold onto this seat, even if it means letting a federal crime go unpunished, or they are afraid that Joe Sestak is lying and they are unwilling to admit that a Democrat lied for personal political gain. None of these scenarios paint the Democrats in a good light, so they are hoping that if they ignore these allegations they will go away.
There are only two possible reasons that I can come up with for Joe Sestak to lie about being offered a high ranking position in the Obama administration and turning it down before making the offer public. The first reason is that this is an attempt by a Democrat to distance himself from the administration during what seems like a strong anti-incumbant election. But would Joe Sestak risk his freedom for political gain? I find it hard to believe that anyone would do so. The second possible reason is that Joe Sestak was just too stupid to understand how serious these charges are, and threw them out there in an attempt to unseat Arlen Specter without fully understanding the repercussions that could follow if these charges were followed up on. I find it hard to believe that Joe Sestak was that stupid.
All of this leads me to believe that these charges are true and that someone in the Obama administration has committed a federal crime. But I also believe that Joe Sestak cannot back up these claims, which makes his unwillingness to let the claims disappear baffling.
The bottom line here is, these charges are not going away any time soon and we need to get to the bottom of this. Someone is lying and the American people deserve to know who it is. It is time to open up a special investigation into these charges.
Republican wins special election in Hawaii
It looks like Hawaii has given us the latest proof that people are rejecting Barack Obama’s radical agenda. Republican Charles Djou has won a special election in Hawaii and will serve the remainder of this term in the House.
In his speech after winning, Djou struck a tune that was reminiscent of Scott Brown:
This is a momentous day. We have sent a message to the United States Congress. We have sent a message to the national Democrats. We have sent a message to the machine,” Djou said. “The congressional seat is not owned by one political party. This congressional seat is owned by the people
This is a seat that has been held for 20 by a Democrat and this is also the seat from the district (allegedly) in which Barack Obama was born. Democrats had hoped to hold onto this seat and probably felt as if this would have been an easy seat to hold. But that was not to be.
Republicans have an immediate pickup in the House and while this is still not enough to stop Barack Obama, it may make passing his agenda just a touch harder. We have seen how much trouble Obama has had passing his agenda even with the House controlled by Democrats, so taking away that one seat may pose more problems for him than you would think.
Democrats are confident that they can beat Djou in November. This election featured more than one Democrat on the ballot, which split the vote and handed Djou the victory. I would have to agree that when the regular election is held, and there is only one Democrat and one Republican on the ticket, that this seat will probably fall back into the hands of the Democrats. After all, Hawaii is almost as “blue” of a state as Massachusetts, so in all likelihood this victory will be short-lived.
But that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy it while it lasts, and let’s not forget, nobody thought Scott Brown had a chance against the Massachusetts machine. If it can happen in Massachusetts, in can happen in Hawaii in November.
I am proud to be a “teabagger”
Back in January I wrote a post entitled “Barack Obama, you’ve been teabagged!” In that post I suggested that because the left was trying to insult us by calling us “teabaggers” it was time to turn the tables on the left by embracing the term.
See, the left uses the derogatory meaning of that term to marginalize the Tea Party movement; instead of fighting the term, and as a result, taking the focus off of the issues that we should be concentrating on, I proposed that we instead neutralize this attack by embracing the term. If we are the “teabaggers” there has to be “teabagees.” Hence, those incumbents who have fallen victim to the anti-incumbant (teabagger) wave that has swept the nation can be said to have been “teabagged.”
I went so far as to create my own second definition of the term “teabagging” which reads:
demonstrating against and throwing out of office all of those who do not live up to their promise to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America; Fighting against what Scott Brown calls the “machine;” Voting out of office all of those who are unwilling to listen to the voice of the people they are supposed to be representing.
Since I wrote that post there have been many politicians who have been “teabagged,” the latest example is Arlen Specter.
The Tea Party movement has been sweeping across the nation and that means that politicians have been “teabagged” according to my definition of the term. But we are not done, we will continue to “teabag” all of those who do not live up to their responsibility to protect and defend the constitution of the United States of America.
While checking out all of the blogs tonight, I came across a video at Conservative Hideout that inspired me to revisit my original “teabagging” post, and I have posted it below. It looks like my idea is beginning to take off, although I doubt that I can take to much credit for it. Credit is not what is important here, what is important is taking back our country.
I am proud to be a “teabagger,” after all we have been doing it since 1773.
What could be the one thing that is more outrageous and despicable than members of the United States congress giving Felipe Calderon a standing ovation for bashing Arizona’s immigration law? I am glad you asked, learning that Eric Holder is the man who led that ovation– that is what is more outrageous and despicable. But that is what happened according to Representative Steve King in the video posted below. A hat tip is in order for Texas Fred for finding the video.
This man is the attorney general of the United States of America, he is in charge of prosecuting federal crimes, he is the head of the Justice Department, and he stood up and led the standing ovation for the head of a foreign nation who stood in front of congress and bashed the laws that Eric Holder is supposed to uphold!?
As in the case of John Morton– assistance secretary of the Homeland Security’s Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Department, who stated that laws like Arizona’s are not the answer (this would include the federal law) and that his department would not process illegals sent from Arizona– we can only assume that Eric Holder disagrees with federal immigration laws. Why else would he stand and cheer a foreign leader for bashing Arizona’s law– which mirrors the federal law?
It is not Eric Holder’s job to write laws, it is his job to enforce the laws. But how can we trust him to prosecute the laws when he is so willing to show the American people that he doesn’t give a damn about certain laws?
Again, I return to John Morton. If John Morton does not agree with the immigration laws that his department was charged with enforcing than he should resign. It is not up to him to ignore these laws because he disagrees with them. While Eric Holder is not in charge of directly enforcing immigration laws, it is disconcerting to say the least that he would show this type of disdain to a law of the United States.
Eric Holder should resign, he disgraced himself, but more importantly he disgraced the United States of America.
Elena Kagan’s Clinton era documents may not be released in time for her confirmation hearing
The Senate Judiciary Committee has asked the Clinton Presidential Library to turn over the documents that they have on Elena Kagan. This is a perfectly logical and justifiable request, but it is a request that Terri Garner, director of the Clinton Presidential Library– claims she might not be able to meet.
Lacking both judicial and courtroom experience, Elena Kagan’s written documents provide the Senate Judiciary Committee and the American people the only insight into what she believes and where she stands on various issues. If the Clinton Presidential Library cannot turn over the Elena Kagan documents– and these documents are basically all the committee has to go on– it would seem that the right thing to do would be to delay the confirmation hearing until these documents have been turned over and the committee has had time to read them.
Jeff Sessions, the ranking Republican in the committee, has stated that a postponement might be in order if these documents cannot be released in time. But committee chairman, Patrick Leahy, says the confirmation hearing will not be postponed. He claims that, “there is no reason to unduly delay consideration of this nomination.” Apparently he thinks that giving the committee enough time to read the documents would constitute an “unduly delay” in the confirmation hearing.
There are many people out there– I am one of them– who think that Barack Obama chose Elena Kagan precisely because she did not have much of a paper trail. I believe that Barack Obama considered both her lack of experience and lack of written positions as a plus; Barack Obama hoped that her blank slate would make it harder for anyone to oppose her. A trojan horse, if you will. But there are some documents out there from her years in the Clinton administration and it appears as if these documents will not be released in time for her confirmation hearing, and the hearing will not be delayed to give the committee adequate time to read these documents once they are released.
This leads me to ask the question, what are they trying to hide? These documents may provide the only insight into Elena Kagan’s policy and constitutional positions, yet Patrick believes that the confirmation hearing should not be delayed?
Up until this point, most of the concerns that have been raised about Elena Kagan’s nomination have come from the left, but I am beginning to think more and more that this is nothing more than a smokescreen designed by the left to easy the worries of the right in order to secure her confirmation. How many times has it been written by conservatives that we could have done quite a bit worse than Elena Kagan? I have mentioned that myself on this blog. Perhaps that is what the left wants us to think.
What is in those documents? We need to know!
According to the official White house schedule the president of the United States and Mexican President Felipe Calderon were scheduled to hold a joint press conference yesterday afternoon, but when both men had finished speaking they walked away without taking any questions from the press. This hardly constitutes a press conference.
This is becoming the norm as of late with Barack Obama, he has not taken questions from the press in I don’t even know how long. The press is finally beginning to get tired of Barack Obama’s slights, after all Barack Obama owes the press for his becoming president. If the press had done their job in the first place and had reported on all of Barack Obama’s radical associations this man would never have been elected. But they ignored all of the questions of his past, thusly ensuring his election. They obviously thought that Barack Obama owed them and that he would be the open and honest president that he promised he would be, they have nobody to blame for themselves for their naivety.
Barack Obama was friendly with the press when he needed them, but now that he feels as if he doesn’t need them he suddenly does not care about them. The press thought that Barack Obama really liked them, but in reality he was only using them as a pawn in his game. This has to be humbling for the media.
Many of us have been wondering how long it would take the press to turn on Barack Obama and we may be seeing the first signs that this is about to happen. An upset reporter from CBS sarcastically yelled to the president as he and Felipe Calderon walked away, “any plans for a real press conference?”
This may just be a small crack in the relationship between Barack Obama and the media, but it is a crack and if Barack Obama doesn’t do something to appease the media, it could turn into a fissure that will grow over time. Barack Obama may be falling out of favor with the very people who are responsible for his election.
John Morton, the assistant secretary of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has stated publicly that his department will not necessarily process illegal immigrants that are sent to his agency from Arizona because he does not agree with Arizona’s controversial immigration law.
I don’t think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution
He goes on to say that the answer to the illegal immigration problem lies within a comprehensive federal immigration approach, and not with a “patchwork of state laws.” I find this very interesting because the federal government already has an immigration policy in place– and it is virtually the same law that Arizona recently passed.
John Morton said that Arizona’s law and laws like it are not the answer, yet the federal law is a law like Arizona’s, we can only come to the conclusion that he does not agree with the federal law either. Considering that he is the assistant secretary of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement department, we can only assume that agency has no intention whatsoever of enforcing the immigration laws that they have been charged with enforcing.
He prefers a comprehensive federal approach which we all know means that he favors granting amnesty for illegal immigrants. When we have people in high places who are unwilling to enforce the laws of the country we have no laws. He wasn’t put in this position to ignore the laws of the country while he waited anxiously for congress to pass laws that he agrees with. If John Morton does not agree with these laws he should not have accepted the post that would put him in a position to enforce these laws.
It is one thing for people who do not have a role to play in enforcing immigration laws to speak out against these laws; but it an entirely different thing for people who were given the responsibility of enforcing those laws to speak out against them. It is becoming more that obvious that the Department of Homeland Security is nothing more than a shadow agency that is not serious about solving or enforcing the laws of this nation.
America's Watchtower 