Congressman brags: Feds 'can do most anything'

Congressman says 'very few constitutional limits' to prevent intrusion into private lives

Rep. Pete Stark takes questions at a town hall meeting.

reply to post by zzombie


Healthcare is not a right because its slavery and it forces people to pay for somebody else's healthcare right? So your fine with making that arguement and removing medicaid and medicare while your at it? I wonder how this woman would go with that idea? In anycase the argument she made is very blurred. By here accounts:

I am being forced to pay for the service of protection over somebody else. Why should I have to pay for somebody else to have police? Why cant I simply go to a private company and remove any obligation of me paying towards the police force? I dont want the police to protect me. Iv go an AR-15 under the bed to protect myself, Im sorted, so why should I have to pay for somebody elses?

Why should I have to pay for a veterans healthcare? Your forcing me to pay for somebody else right?

Why should I have to pay towards the post office? After all the founding d fathers made it so that I had to forced to pay towards the post office right? Surely the founding fathers are clueless and clearly for slavery if they would have me pay for the service of postage?

How about roads? Technically I am being forced to pay for somebody elses roads.

There are just so many ways I could just turn around and say I am a slave or being forced to pay for something to suit my argument. I'd bet my bottom dollar atleast half those people sitting at town hall cheering this women on supported the war in Iraq. Why did I have to be forced to pay for a war in a country that had nothing to do with my life?

Shall I go on? Im sure you get my point.

As for what the congressman said, his got a point to a large extent. The constitution leaves out the ability of congress to add in rules or laws or to ammend. This healthcare bill is so washed off from the original public option that would have done this country good but I disagree with the woman in the video. She clearly doesnt know or understand.

I look forward to your response.

Another video from this jackass.


I can wait untill the people vote him out.

I think he's been in office since 1974.

If this is the first video youve seen of Stark. Please watch the others. He's not someone I would want to represent me. Why has he been in office so long?

What in 36 year havent you done that you still need to do?

GET OUT, YOU"RE FIRED!!

reply to post by cosmo740


He's the representative of California's 13th district, that's right on the San Francisco bay. If you don't know that's one of the most liberal sections of the country you may not know why he keeps getting re-elected. The closest Rep. Stark has come to losing was in 1972 when he only recieved 52.9% of the vote. He's very popular in his district.

Once you understand that the people clapping and cheering at these townhall meetings are in the minority, you'll understand why he keeps winning.

reply to post by zzombie


Too right there are no laws for the watchers.

If you are a serial killer type person, join the police or gov and you can get your dreams to come true, they are some some sick people in these things just living there dreams of destroying.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Read up on apportioned taxes. This issue was dealt with in 1787.
Hint: Its in the constitution.

The Federal Government has only 20 limited enumerated powers, not 20 billion, as they like to think.

Medicare and Medicate is socialism.

Edit:

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them” –Thomas Jefferson

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have." - Gerald Ford in an address to a joint session of Congress on August 12, 1974



[edit on 4-8-2010 by zzombie]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


You are not being forced to do business with a private police force. You are not being forced to pay for a city run police force, you are taxed. You are only taxed on what you are liable for. Taxes go to pay for a number of things that government does. Public roads, which then belong to the public, police forces, which then serve the public and are accountable to the public. Postal service which is accountable to the public.

Your fallacious argument ignores the fact that this horrid legislation regarding health insurance thinks it can force people to do business with private insurance companies. This is unconstitutional. It is just that simple.

Hey, I have an idea, I am going to institute a government service that no one is allowed to go without!

Any idea people, I think this could be a boom idea.

Forced purchase of services or product instituted by the government. I am sure if we can threaten prison or a bullet to the head, we could make HUGE profits!

reply to post by zzombie


Send him to war - him and the feds.

Kill or be killed - what a sick joke.

They are so safe - get into the killing fields, you creep!

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Southern Guardian

 

You are not being forced to do business with a private police force. You are not being forced to pay for a city run police force, you are taxed. You are only taxed on what you are liable for.

Liable for the service of protection? Why should I be forced to pay for the protection of somebody else but not the healthcare of somebody in need? You and the fat lady in the video still fail to explain this to me.

Postal service which is accountable to the public.

The postal service, I need to be forced to pay towards somebodies mail to be packaged? And how this different from paying for somebody in need of healthcare?

Your fallacious argument ignores

Nope, its just that people like you and the woman in the video prefer to pick your grapes when it comes to arguments like these.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Liable for the service of protection?

You can't play games of semantics when it comes to the law, S.G. If you are liable for a tax, then you owe that tax and you don't get to choose how that tax money is spent, and can only petition the government for a redress of grievances. If you are not liable for a tax, then why would you pay it? It is really that simple. Just pay the taxes you are liable for.

Why should I be forced to pay for the protection of somebody else but not the healthcare of somebody in need?

You are forced to pay for the healthcare of somebody in need. Tax dollars are spent on indigent health care everyday. Your disingenuousness knows no bounds. Forcing people to purchase health insurance is not you paying for their health care, so get over your self righteous self.

You and the fat lady in the video still fail to explain this to me.

I just did explain it to you pal, but do you think you will listen? I am pretty certain you will not.

Nope, its just that people like you and the woman in the video prefer to pick your grapes when it comes to arguments like these.

You are accusing me of your actions, sport. The current legislation forcing people to buy private health insurance is unconstitutional. Congress does not have the legal authority to legislate such a mandate, that is a fact.