Friday, April 2, 2010

Red State Presents: Phil Hare Constitutional Genius.

15 comments:

  1. They are trying to run our government without reading their contract (which they took an oath to uphold)!

    ReplyDelete
  2. GREAT catch, Adam!

    Let's see ... they don't worry about the Constitution. They don't follow the oaths they took to uphold the Constitution. They don't read the bills they pass. They ignore the clearly expressed and sustained-over-time will of the people.

    But they want your tax dollars. And they will find you and imprison you if you don't comply with the laws they passed that they didn't bother to read.

    Hmm. Sounds like tyranny to me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. find = fine

    preview is my friend

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hare’s statement is reprehensible..

    He needs to be reminded that the Constitution is a completely exhaustive listing of EVERY power granted to the Federal government. A power not listed was not granted and therefore can NOT be legitimately exercised by the Feds.

    The notion that the phrase, “promote the general welfare” justifies things like Obamacare is preposterous. If the Founders had intended that phrase to be interpreted in that manner, then Section 8 of Article 1 -- which lists the specific powers granted to Congress -- would simply read, “Congress may make any law that promotes the welfare of some at the expense of others”.

    And if the Founders had intended “promote the general welfare” to be an all-empowering grant of sweeping powers, they certainly would NOT have added the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.

    The left wants to interpret the Constitution as permitting government to do anything not expressly and explicitly forbidden by that document -- but this is a total inversion and perversion of its actual meaning. It’s a hijacking of the Constitution so it can take us precisely where it was intended to prevent us from going: namely, to totalitarian government.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What a way to run a country. Ignore the desires of your constituents, and ignore the Constitution you swore to uphold.

    Throw the bums out.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Pugnacious PatriotApril 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM

    Hare is a testimony to the god of self. Whatever self wants, it rationalizes & justifies.
    Hare well knows the crowd with whom he runs wants the USA imploded with illegal aliens; & the "death-care" bill is a way to accomplish that goal. He is a testimony to the traitors within this wicked govt. who seek only the death of America.
    As long as they have their lifestyles (notice the lord giving his coat to his manservant/bodyguard) they will criminally tyrannize American citizens with illegal "laws".
    Nothing can be law if getting the "bill" "passed" is done through criminal actions (ie-bribing congresspeople, breaking existing laws, breaking Constitutional law, using coercion & threats to gain "votes", etc.). There is no LAW if crime & criminals were the methods of "passage".
    THANK YOU, ADAM, FOR LETTING US HEAR & SEE THIS TRAITOR IN ACTION!
    Pugnacious Patriot

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fantastic work all around, "An Army of Davids" indeed. I think everyone can accept the idea that sometimes the best and brightest don't make it into any branch of the Government, but it is absolutely SHOCKING to see just how ill-informed and patently stupid this congressman is compared to his constituents.

    The sickeningly sad part of this is that he is right- he just doesn't care, THEY just don't care. They don't care where their powers derive from, just that they have those powers. Phil Hare could have recited the safety-warning from the wrapper of a happy-meal toy, and someone could have said, "Well that's the happy meal toy warning and not the Constitution", and he would have responded EXACTLY as he did.

    Hare is painfully obviously unaware that the Constitution is the one thing that prevents benign or beneficial seeming Governmental steps towards tyranny, from happening.

    Like Amber Lamps, Phil Hare, just doesn't care.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Just another criminal from the District showing his true colors. Adam, you do realize that this bill was only shoved through because it is a revenue stream for the government to keep going and to use as collateral on loans? It has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare and the control aspect is just icing on the cake.

    Why else would one be paying taxes for something in the future?

    With any and all aspects of DC, one must look at the money trail.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oh look at the little rightys jumping on an out of context misquote. He clearly meant he cared more for the health of his constituents. And wtf do you mean by 'at the point of a gun?' The bill has an individual mandate but it will not be enforced, not even by the IRS. Read the bill sometime, loser You lying corporate lap dog rightards sicken me.

    -Liberaldude

    ReplyDelete
  10. One look at your video harassing the health care proponents with little old men and ladies with kids show what a cowardly bully you are. Something is only constitutional when the Supreme Court says it is. Hare "not being worried about it" is easily interpreted by any one applying actual logic to mean he doesn't think it is unconstitutional. Most constitutional lawyers seem to agree, but Fox News and Glenn Beck and Rushtard aren't saying it, so its probably out of your sphere of influence, eh DullElbow? You're pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If you do not believe in implied powers, and believe congress can only do what is stated in article 1 section 8, please explain the legality and constitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase and tell me why the any area of the United States beyond the 1787 borders should not be reverted to their previous sovereign as soon as possible. I'm looking for some consistency in your ideology. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Adam,
    Your video made it to Glenn Beck!

    And 272,577 views on youtube!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Democrat Phil Hare sticks to the play book: talk about the sick people who don't get all of their health care bills paid (pure emotionalism); an actual journalist (someone who questions those in power) asks a question about the bill using logic. Hare can only respond with more emotionalism. When the emotionalism fails to satisfy the journalist (who responds with more logic) he ends the discussion. The only thing out of the play book Hare didn't do was to call the journalist a racist. Most (but not all) Democrats that I've heard do the same things; they don't know how to pay for all their plans and they don't want to talk about the loss of freedom that their plans will bring about; and when confronted with these issues they respond with emotionalism ("you don't care about all the people dying!") or, they resort to name-calling (like the some of the bloggers commenting on this video). Keep up the good work Adam!

    ReplyDelete
  14. I find it curious that the media is going crazy over hateful "right wing" extremism. The most hateful and distasteful comments are made by those who don't agree with this blog. It's very interesting that its only news when the right says something you don't agree with- but liberals have free reign when it come to speech.

    Just found your blog when you were on Laura Ingraham. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete

Be Nice!