Article

2009-09-07 Home Front: Politix

Sen. Mark Warner: 'No Place In Constitution That Says Health Care'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2009-09-07 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11133 views ] Top

#1 No kidding jerk off.

Posted by newc">newc 2009-09-07 06:48|| 2009-09-07 06:48|| Front Page Top

#2 But what it does clearly say is -

Amendment 10 - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Ever really read the document Mr. Warner?/rhet question. Since the government was not empowered to prohibit phone ownership, all it could do is regulate aspects of interstate commerce and coordinate standardizations.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-09-07 07:47|| 2009-09-07 07:47|| Front Page Top

#3 right to a telephone ....

Keep in mind the history:

Warner was a Congressional staffer who left and shortly thereafter won a very lucrative chunk of wireless spectrum from a Federal sale. Made a substantial fortune off of it, then went into politics.

Posted by lotp 2009-09-07 08:01|| 2009-09-07 08:01|| Front Page Top

#4 No right to own a telephone? He's got to be kidding. The concept of inalienable rights has been so horribly polluted by the Left that this jerk thinks he's talking logic here.

Posted by Richard of Oregon 2009-09-07 10:09|| 2009-09-07 10:09|| Front Page Top

#5 This little clip says a lot about Senator Warner and about the attitude of our rulers in general. A schoolteacher shows up at a townhall meeting and very politely asks an excellent question. Instead of responding in kind, Mr. Big Shot decides to embarrass her publicly with his superior knowledge of all forms of human endeavor.

His answer amounts to saying "Wassamatter, honey, ya never seen a bank robbery before?"

Posted by Matt 2009-09-07 10:48|| 2009-09-07 10:48|| Front Page Top

#6 He treated the teacher the same way a pusher treats a junkie who says they want to kick the habit.

"No constitutional basis for healthcare? Then you must want to get rid of Medicare, too, fight?" Until the answer to that question is yes, Hell yes!, we're all agreed on what the voter is, it's just a matter of price negotiation.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-09-07 11:20|| 2009-09-07 11:20|| Front Page Top

#7 Well if we're getting rid of Medicare, can I CASH OUT of Social Security as well?

Posted by Besoeker 2009-09-07 11:21|| 2009-09-07 11:21|| Front Page Top

#8 By George, I think he's got it.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-09-07 11:24|| 2009-09-07 11:24|| Front Page Top

#9 Well if we're getting rid of Medicare, can I CASH OUT of Social Security as well?

You won't get "your" money out, and you'll still have to pay in to support those who don't opt out, but you aren't required to take your payout when the time comes, Besoeker. Does that help?

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-09-07 15:51|| 2009-09-07 15:51|| Front Page Top

#10 Sure! You can CASH OUT anytime. But since your, and everyone else's accounts are deep in the Red.....

Posted by CrazyFool 2009-09-07 17:07|| 2009-09-07 17:07|| Front Page Top

#11 That's right, Mark - the Constitution does not give the federal gummint the right to interfere in health care, education, or welfare. It doesn't guarantee the right to a telephone, or health care, or education, or welfare. All that (except the telephone) is reserved to the states, or to the people.

So when precisely are you going to sponsor a bill to get the federal gummint OUT of the stuff it has NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to be involved in?

(I'm not dumb enough to hold my breath waiting for an answer.)

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2009-09-07 18:08|| 2009-09-07 18:08|| Front Page Top

#12 > "There's no place in the Constitution that specifically says education," said Warner.

Another GOOD idea. Those responsible for those getting educated should be the ones paying.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2009-09-07 18:54|| 2009-09-07 18:54|| Front Page Top

#13 Another thing: Higher education was affordable until the federal gummint got involved. Health care was affordable until the federal gummint got involved.

I think I see a pattern here....

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2009-09-07 19:06|| 2009-09-07 19:06|| Front Page Top

#14 It's as if the state is based on violence and just isn't any good at providing non-violent stuff.

Posted by Bright Pebbles 2009-09-07 19:55|| 2009-09-07 19:55|| Front Page Top

#15 Housing was affordable before the gummint got involved, too, Barbara.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-09-07 21:02|| 2009-09-07 21:02|| Front Page Top

23:05 rhodesiafever
22:40 rhodesiafever
22:27 Tommy Knocker
22:16 rhodesiafever
22:15 KBK
22:15 JosephMendiola
22:08 JosephMendiola
22:04 JosephMendiola
21:58 rhodesiafever
21:49 JosephMendiola
21:45 rhodesiafever
21:37 DMFD
21:23 trailing wife
21:21 trailing wife
21:19 Phil_B
21:11 Pappy
21:10 Frank G
21:09 3dc
21:04 Pappy
21:02 Nimble Spemble
20:54 Pappy
20:33 SteveS
20:26 SteveS
20:05 Black Bart Cloth3767