A few peripherally related news items…
The community organizing and educational organization, ACORN, is ceasing operations. ACORN the subject of wild conspiracy stories during the 2008 campaign, a hidden camera sting operation and allegations of pervasive mismanagement, announced today that it would cease operations as of April 1.
In another story, Virginia Thomas, wife of Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, has started a political organization aligned with the Tea Party movement.
“I am an ordinary citizen from Omaha, Neb., who just may have the chance to preserve liberty along with you and other people like you,” she said at a recent panel discussion with tea party leaders in Washington. Thomas went on to count herself among those energized into action by President Obama’s “hard-left agenda.”
(Some sexual innuendo is trying to sneak into this article, but will not be tolerated.)
I noticed a targeted ad at the bottom of the LA Times story linked above. It said: “Gresham Barrett, He stood against Obama more than any other Congressman but one.” Barrett used to be my Congressman before I moved. Now he’s running for governor of South Carolina. We could do worse, for example SC Attorney General Henry McMaster, who announced today that he was joining the attorney general of Florida (also running for governor of his state) and 9 other states in suing to undo the health care bill passed yesterday. So will Clarence Thomas recuse himself from the challenge to the health care bill if his wife is lobbying for the challenge?
“The health care legislation Congress passed tonight is an assault against the Constitution,” said South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster. “A legal challenge by the states appears to be the only hope of protecting the American people from this unprecedented attack on our system of government,” he said in a statement.
You always have to be careful when you talk about states’ rights and South Carolina. Remember what they did back in 1860.
Unlikely, given that it would demonstrate principles beyond mere self-preservation and the furthering of wingnut talking points into law.
I’m not a lawyer, but the argument on the health care law seems very weak to me. The opponents say that the law requires someone to buy insurance from a private company. Actually, it doesn’t. It imposes taxes which one can avoid by buying insurance.
That is no different from many other provisions of the tax code, such as:
-Reducing your taxes by giving part of your salary to a private mutual fund company to invest (401(k)s and IRAs). In that case you pay a penalty tax to withdraw your own money before you reach a certain age
-Getting a tax credit for buying a house from a private seller
-Getting a tax credit for having a private company insulate your house
-Getting cash for clunkers to buy a car from a private company
One can argue whether such provisions are good policy, but what is unconstitutional?
Also, insurance is required for any motor vehicle. That’s not unconstitutional.
But that is a state law, not a federal law.
Yes, Misha, though the argument is that no one is required to own a motor vehicle.
I still see this as no different from any of the dozens of other credits/deductions in the tax code for doing X or Y. HCR imposes a tax which one can avoid by buying health insurance, just as one avoids taxes by funding an IRA, buying a house, etc.
“that is a state law, not a federal law”
True, but state laws are still subject to a Constitutional test. If a state law was deemed unconstitutional, it would be stricken.
It is interesting to see how just passing the HCRA has brought out the violent crowd…
http://jezebel.com/5498461/conservative-blogger-calls-for-obamas-assassination-on-twitter-updated
“Earlier today, self-described conservative blogger Solomon “Solly” Forell posted a tweet that included a call for assassination, as well as this line: “We’ll surely get over a bullet 2 Barack Obama’s head!”
http://gawker.com/5498712/meet-the-obama-death-tweeter-who-will-be-arrested-today
“Earlier today you met Solly Forrell, the conservative blogger now under investigation by the Secret Service for threatening Obama on Twitter. Well, here’s another Twitter user helping to keep the Secret Service busy with his own death threats. According to his Facebook page, Jay Martin graduated from Vatterott College last year with an IT degree and currently resides in Federal Way, WA. His About Me Page says: “Socially aware, Deep thinker, Artistic, Hip Hop Aficionado, free thinker, Funny Guy.” Oh, and he really, seriously, honestly, wants to kill President Barack Obama. (Thanks for the add, Jay!)”
Or this loon…
http://americangrandjury.org/final-count-on-the-senate-bill-is-219-dems-for-176-reps-and-34-dems-against
“goldie wilbur Says:
March 23rd, 2010 at 10:07 am
I agree, this illegal Muslim pretender is so very evil and will do all in his power to kill America and put the citizens in FEMA camps and say “we are protecting the citizens from the terrorists” He is a liar, a cheat, and how can anybody say he is nice. He is always kissing Pelosi, I wonder just how far that goes. I have been told he is bisexual and has Reggie Love living in the White House with Michelle, maybe juat a fine, upstanding friendship? Not sure about anything at this point in time, I got some advice from my daughter-in-law, she was concerned as I so very upset over the vote, she says, pray, pray and ask My Lord and Savior for help, I agree prayer is about all we have left, when a Congressman says, we have no rules, we make them up as we go on, I just am completely surprised at what has been running this country for many, many years. Prayer for idiot Psalm 109.8 and will hope it happens fast and soon. God Bless All caring posts. and God Bless America and Semper Fi!”
Unlikely, since any Dem/Liberal wouldn’t do it either.
It amazes me how people still think politicians have principals and morals. They are ALL bankrupt – even the ones in YOUR party (which ever party that happens to be).
If the last few months haven’t been a testament to that fact, then you will never be able to see the forest for the trees.
And here is comes….spin, spin, spin…..and more spin is still to come I’m sure this site will not disappoint in that area.
Where was this outrage when Bush was constantly disrespected and threatened with impeachment?
Ohhh…I see, no outrage is warranted when you personally don’t like the President, but when you do, then outrage is then warranted.
Oh yes, and I’m so glad no dems/libs were violent when Bush was in office. The fringes on both sides are out there – now, how much and whether you hear about their escapades is quite another story and much dependent upon which news organization you choose to listen to.
Dear Sen Brown: Your election lit a fire under the Dems and helped pass health care. I thank you on behalf of 30 million or so who will now get access to health care.
“Where was this outrage when Bush was constantly disrespected and threatened with impeachment?”
Actually I was outraged by those on the left who accused Bush of various thing immediately after his election, before they had any cause to disrespect him.
“Ohhh…I see, no outrage is warranted when you personally don’t like the President, but when you do, then outrage is then warranted.”
I have nothing against outrage against a politicians actions. I was outraged by Bush taking us into war in Iraq for no valid reason, when we had an ongoing war in Afghanistan that needed our full attention. I was outraged by the Bush’s administrations outing of a CIA agent. I wasn’t however whining about Bush’s election a year after the election. Nor was I spreading vicious rumors about Bush or his family.
“I agree, this illegal Muslim pretender is so very evil and will do all in his power to kill America and put the citizens in FEMA camps and say “we are protecting the citizens from the terrorists” ”
I would be just as outraged if someone had said this about Bush. Do you agree with this statement or do you find it outragious also?
Be outraged about the health bill as much as you want- that is a political issue which we can disagree on.
“Oh yes, and I’m so glad no dems/libs were violent when Bush was in office. The fringes on both sides are out there”
I am sure there must have been threats against Bush, but that doesn’t mean that when we hear of whacko’s threatening Obama that we should tolerate them. Threats of violence against a sitting President should always be condemned- always.
Or do you disagree?
So Scott, you think the Justices of the Supreme Court are politicians with no morals?
What a dismal view of the world.
Impeachment is one thing Mr. 60th vote. It is entirely another thing to advocate violence and murder of the President of the US. People disliked Bush and thought he should be impeached because he led us into a unwarranted war with needless casualties. However I don’t recall anyone advocating secession from the US and filing numerous lawsuits regarding the President not being eligible to be President. So comparing the 2 is ridiculous. However I am not surprised. The so called right is hesitant to condemm violence if the target is someone they dislike. Not once in your comment did you say that the violent threats against the President were unwarranted. That is a telling fact.
Funny Bush had almost the total universal backing of the country after 9/11 and then squandered the good will. It took the shell game in Iraq and the losing of an entire city to standing water, torture, etc for people to get pissed off. Even then it was rare that I saw people call for Bush’s assassination but rather prosecution. From Day 1 the Republicans have fought tooth and nail against Obama. Radicals have threatened, disrespected, etc even before Obama got into office and have not let up. So yeah I don’t see how you can compare the two.
The fact is if a 9/11 attack happened during a democrat’s watch you’d have those on the right totally demonizing the democrat, calling for impeachment, etc while Bush almost got a free pass.
Absolutely true. On 9/12, in Arlington, VA a client said to me “It’s a good thing we don’t have a Jewish vice president now.”
I think the better example is that mandatory health insurance program Medicare.
Excellent example
I totally agree with you, Bob Ross. Well said!
Um, “Scott Brown”, if you can’t see the simple difference between people calling for a legal procedure of impeachment and making death threats…sheesh!
Very simple for you. Death threats = totally wrong. Against the law! Not protected speech under the 1st Amendment. See: 18 USC Sec. 871:
I’m really getting sick of any of these *ssholes who are trying to stoke violence and encourage assassination or the destruction of this country! They need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law as the criminal and seditious bast*rds that they are!
Enough of this crap is crawling out of the woodwork in this overheated environment that it needs to be dealt with seriously and swiftly by law enforcement and the harshest penalties should be applied in order to tamp down on this slippery slope of excessive civil disobedience we are seeing before it is too late.
My point is that a state law could be constitutional while the same at the federal level not be. Some powers are reserved to the states.
Predictibly the right is using Healthcare to do what the birthers are famous for doing, and that is get money from their so called “marks”….
from our friend Sarah Palin….I wonder who they will blame if the Dems sweep…Either way remember to “donate” to the cause….
“With the president signing this unwanted and “transformative” government takeover of our health care system today with promises impossible to keep, let’s not get discouraged. Don’t get demoralized. Get organized!
We’re going to reclaim the power of the people from those who disregarded the will of the people. We’re going to fire them and send them back to the private sector, which has been shrinking thanks to their destructive government-growing policies. Maybe when they join the millions of unemployed, they’ll understand why Americans wanted them to focus on job creation and an invigorated private sector. Come November, we’re going to print pink slips for members of Congress as fast as they’ve been printing money.
We’re paying particular attention to those House members who voted in favor of Obamacare and represent districts that Senator John McCain and I carried during the 2008 election. Three of these House members are retiring – from Arkansas’s 2nd district, Indiana’s 8th district, and Tennessee’s 6th district – but we’ll be working to make sure that those who replace them are Commonsense Conservatives. The others are running for re-election, and we’re going to hold them accountable for this disastrous Obamacare vote. They are: Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-1), Harry E. Mitchell (AZ-5), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8), John Salazar (CO-3), Betsy Markey (CO-4). Allen Boyd (FL-2), Suzanne M. Kosmas (FL-24), Baron P. Hill (IN-9), Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL), Charlie Wilson (OH-6), John Boccieri (OH-16), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA-3), Christopher Carney (PA-10), John M. Spratt, Jr. (SC-5), Tom Perriello (VA-5), Alan B. Mollohan (WV-1), and Nick J. Rahall II (WV-3).
We’ll aim for these races and many others. This is just the first salvo in a fight to elect people across the nation who will bring common sense to Washington. Please go to sarahpac.com and join me in the fight.
Stand tall, America. Real change is coming!
– Sarah Palin”
Scott Brown, so is it also OK for the right to call the President “racist” like Glenn Beck did? Because under your theory if things were fair game under Bush then they were under Obama?
So FOX news contributor Pam Geller calls Obama a racist and says that she is “deeply ashamed for my once great country”. However when Michelle Obama said something similar, the right vilified her. So is there a double standard?
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2010/03/racist-obama-will-not-be-photographed-with-jewish-prime-minister-of-israel.html
Glenn Beck: Obama has “a deep seated hatred for white people.”
From the mouth of a junkie.
Disregarded the will of the people?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-03-23-health-poll-favorable_N.htm
Americans by 9 percentage points have a favorable view of the health care overhaul that President Obama signed into law Tuesday, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds, a notable turnaround from surveys before the vote that showed a plurality against it.
By 49%-40% those surveyed say it was “a good thing” rather than a bad one that Congress passed the bill. Half describe their reaction in positive terms, as “enthusiastic” or “pleased,” while about four in 10 describe it in negative ways, as “disappointed” or “angry.”
The largest single group, 48%, calls the bill “a good first step” that should be followed by more action on health care. An additional 4% also have a favorable view, saying the bill makes the most important changes needed in the nation’s health care system.
i’m sorry but the way that is worded makes it sound like they were polling frankenstiens.
” …… and an additional 86% asserted ‘ fire. BAD !!!! ‘ “.
i’d be curious how the poll was worded but……. still interesting info none the less.
It’s a Gallup poll, so they publish a press release when it’s released. It explains how the questions were worded.
That’s the funny thing though. They claim that people being rightfully mad at Bush years after he first took office and ended up screwing everything up makes Obama fair game. Well then how about what they did to Clinton when he first took office. The left didn’t start this, the right did.
thanks.
Scott, I’d call you a tool, but that would be inaccurate – tools are useful to have around and actually have a purpose.
No one will know if you don’t have health insurance unless you need to use it. Same as auto insurance. Just don’t get sick (/snark)