PrisonPlanet Forum
July 29, 2014, 12:40:20 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Kathleen Sebelius Compares Right to Health Care With Right to Own TV  (Read 876 times)
Catalina
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,489


Government Censorship, Protecting You From Reality


« on: February 01, 2011, 04:11:26 PM »

What an idiot!!!!  Angry

http://www.breitbart.tv/kathleen-sebelius-compares-right-to-health-care-with-right-to-own-tv/
Logged

Spare no cost for truth's sake, neither depart from it for any gain. -Proverbs 23:23

Bestow not the gifts that God has given you to get worldly riches. -Proverbs 23:4
DireWolf
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,122


Freedom, Liberty & death to the NWO


« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2011, 05:26:38 PM »

I am unaware of a right that states I am entitled to a TV or health care.

I am also unaware of any rights other than those defined within our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Does she have privileged information of a new set of rights she is keeping from the general public?

Will the masses now demand a TV because one misinformed moron says it's a right?
Logged

Freedom and Liberty, or slavery and death, your choice, choose wisely.
agentbluescreen
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,510


« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2011, 05:39:45 PM »

Our rights to our Congress's duty to "provide for our common defense" against diseases under the constitution are no different than our rights thereunder to a "common defense" against "Al CIAduh" (LOL).

Both are vicious, merciless, hostile national enemies that we must wage war against that threaten all of we the people...

As to the enemy of TV I dunno WTF about that Roll Eyes, but we (*with the exception of Larry Silverstein) sure aren't waging war against "Al CIAduh" with for-profit insurance-gambling subscriptions.
Logged
pac522
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,828


Peace sells, but who's buying?


« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2011, 05:53:24 PM »

Bill would require all S.D. citizens to buy a gun


Written by
Jonathan Elli

Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self-defense.”

The bill, which would take effect Jan. 1, 2012, would give people six months to acquire a firearm after turning 21. The provision does not apply to people who are barred from owning a firearm.


Nor does the measure specify what type of firearm. Instead, residents would pick one “suitable to their temperament, physical capacity, and preference.”


The measure is known as an act “to provide for an individual mandate to adult citizens to provide for the self defense of themselves and others.”


Rep. Hal Wick, R-Sioux Falls, is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.


“Do I or the other cosponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms? Of course not. But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance,” he said.

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20110131/UPDATES/110131031/Bill-would-require-all-S-D-citizens-buy-gun



Oddly enough, this bill would actually save more lives than Obamacare would.  Cheesy
Logged

This country did not achieve greatness with the mindset of "safety first" but rather "live free or die".

Truth is the currency of love. R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution!

We are all running on Gods laptop.
The problem is the virus called the Illuminati.  ~EvadingGrid

The answer to 1984 is 1776.
jofortruth
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12,748



WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2011, 06:13:47 PM »

Virginia v Sebelius (She (gov) lost this case. Judge ruled forcing people to buy healthcare insurance violates the Constitution) Therefore, this lady has no credibility on this subject!
http://www.scribd.com/doc/45244074/Virginia-v-Sebelius

The Florida judge said the same this past week. Sebelius and company are trying to grab power they don't have, and the courts are telling them they are out of line.

Logged

Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110
decepticon
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,497


Bury the past, rob us blind, leave nothing behind.


« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2011, 06:48:12 PM »

The Commerce Clause is an enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes". Courts and commentators have tended to discuss each of these three areas of commerce as a separate power granted to Congress. It is common to see the Commerce Clause referred to as "the Foreign Commerce Clause", "the Interstate Commerce Clause", and "the Indian Commerce Clause", each of which refers to a different application of the same sentence in the Constitution.

Dispute exists as to the range of powers granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause. As noted below, the clause is often paired with the Necessary and Proper Clause, the combination used to take a broad, expansive perspective of these powers. Many strict constructionists deny that this is the proper application of the Commerce Clause because it refers specifically to "the foreign Powers"
Logged

Ron Paul 2012...because Liberty is too big to fail.
Beat Bailout Barry!!!!!!!!
jofortruth
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12,748



WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2011, 07:23:05 PM »

The Obama admin and Congress both violated the commerce clause of the Constitution when they mandated that we must buy health insurance.  Obamacare revolves around that mandate, so his Act is in serious trouble.

http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=8897&st=0&#last


Read the Florida Judges summary judgment at link above. It explains the history.
Logged

Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110
decepticon
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,497


Bury the past, rob us blind, leave nothing behind.


« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2011, 07:41:31 PM »

I don't believe it's constitutional or anything, i was just making the information accessible. IMHO it violates the clause because the power is to "regulate" commerce[2. Control or supervise (something, esp. a company or business activity) by means of rules.] to me this would give them the right to regulate prices or other factors within the healthcare sub-matrix, but not mandate that people who are not insured buy insurance.

but of course the coutroom, from my understanding, operates exactly like this forum. everyone can have their opinions on what it should/shouldn't mean, but in the end, the guy in the black robe (the mod)  Grin will decide what he thinks it means, and the rest of us will live with it.

UNTIL WE GET NEW MODS !!! don't take it personal mods  Tongue
Logged

Ron Paul 2012...because Liberty is too big to fail.
Beat Bailout Barry!!!!!!!!
jofortruth
Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12,748



WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2011, 08:11:59 PM »

Right, the original intent of the Commerce Clause was about selling, buying, trade, exchange of goods. It had nothing to do with forcing people to buy anything, much less the gov abusing their power to tell us to.

This overreaching is coming from the bozos in Congress who believe our Constitution is a "living Constitution" so can change it the way they want. Sorry, they are wrong.



Logged

Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110
Valerius
Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4,691


« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2011, 08:13:01 PM »

I wonder if she was a fan of the old Max Headroom show?
Logged

"No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck."  -Frederick Douglass
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!