Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Health Care is For Crazies

Hey, here I am again!

More than 1500 Americans have joined a lawsuit against President Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that challenges the constitutionality of the entire health care law. While several lawsuits are pending against the health care law, this lawsuit may be the only one taking broad aim at the law's constitutionality.

Tennessee attorney Van Irion, a Republican candidate for Congress, filed the complaint Thursday in Eastern Tennessee’s Federal District Court. Irion allows concerned citizens to join the lawsuit through a form on his Web site.

"We've been surprised at how many people from across the country want to join," Irion said in an e-mail to Fox News.

Eighteen state attorneys general and other individuals have filed suits that attack only the specifics of the health care law. This is an attack on the law's very foundation, claiming that nothing in the Constitution grants the federal government authority to regulate health care. Therefore the plaintiffs claim the law violates the 10th Amendment that reserves powers not granted to the national government to the states.

The complaint claims that the high-profile Democratic defendants abused their power and violated their oaths of office. The suit claims they failed to uphold and defend the Constitution by supporting legislation the plaintiffs say is unconstitutional. The plaintiffs argue the defendants violated their constitutional rights, and they are seeking “injunctive relief, declaratory relief,” and “damages to redress and remedy of the violations” to prevent “irreparable harm and future violations” of their rights and the rights of others.

A constitutional law professor at Emory University says this lawsuit is unique because it questions the long-standing interpretation of the Constitution’s commerce clause. That clause, which says that Congress has power to regulate commerce among the states, is central to this lawsuit. During Franklin Roosevelt's presidency, after passage of the New Deal policies, the Supreme Court broadened the definition of "commerce" to allow more federal regulation, setting a precedent that stands today.

“I think [this lawsuit] is different,” Robert Schapiro said . “It doesn’t even really pretend to argue under the way the Constitution is [currently] interpreted. It’s saying we should have some other interpretation of the Constitution.”

Confronting and reversing the court's precedent is Irion's goal.

“It’s a direct challenge to the Supreme Court’s commerce clause precedent of the 1930s and '40s,” Irion said. “If the Supreme Court was to overturn its commerce clause precedent, the size and authority of the Federal Government would be slashed.”

Irion says he is taking this case pro bono. The initial plaintiff was Anthony Shreeve, a Tennessee Tea Party activist, but now the complaint will be changed to include the hundreds of individuals and companies from every state that have signed on as plaintiffs. Irion is seeking class-action status for the suit.

The plaintiff registration process is relatively simple, and any individual or company can participate, according to Irion. After each person signs up, his or her contact information and place of residency is confirmed, and then they are added to the complaint as plaintiffs. No attorney fees or costs will be charged to them.

Though the lawsuit is unique, Schapiro says ultimately it lacks merit, and that the legislation is on firm Constitutional footing, based on precedent from Supreme Court cases on commerce regulation.

“It would be unwise and destabilizing to say we should try to abandon the evolution of the Constitution that has taken place over so many years, and to start from scratch and reconstruct a constitutional system from that,” Schapiro said.

By law, the defendants have 60 days to respond to the complaint. Schapiro says they will most likely move to dismiss the lawsuit “on a number of different grounds.”

The suit was prompted by the Tennessee attorney general’s announcement that he would not file a suit against the federal law. Irion says his intent in filing the suit was to give the citizens of Tennessee a voice, but the idea has caught on around the nation.

Irion is running for Tennessee’s Third Congressional District seat. Long-time Democratic incumbent Rep. Zach Wamp is leaving to run for governor. Irion faces an uphill battle. As of Dec. 31, he had less money than any of the six other Republican candidates, according to federal filing records. He had only $304 cash on hand, compared to Republican candidate Charles J. Fleischmann’s $451,369.{source}

Woot woot! Haha, this is great! It's so nice to see people getting excited about standing up for our constitutional rights.
The thing I'm afraid of, is a bunch of (and God bless 'em, I love them) Tea Party folks will get involved and then this will be turned into another poor case of "crazy teab*ggers." And I swear, I don't want that. I think the Tea Party peeps are pretty fly and completely right. So, it's not that I'm against them, dude, I'm the opposite. So, don't get me wrong here. I'm just sick of the media bias--on nearly everything--and the fact that they blame everything on us. We attack Obama--Heaven forbid!--and we're racist. Now, when they attacked George Bush--who I'll admit, didn't make the brightest decisions--it was perfectly perfect. :)
It's lopsided and it's crazy.

I think it's awesome that is going on. And maybe we can get this bill from Hell overturned. Hey, anything is possible. We did elect--well, not me, 'cuz I can't vote--maybe I should rephrase that...Some ding-dongs with air in the brain elected an inexperienced, racist prez with Socialism advisors. I think now we can do anything. Like clean out Congress in the upcoming elections. The key is to not believe the Dem's lies, keep the support up, and make sure we don't elect any half-Repub half-Lib people. Sen. Graham, is a perfect example.

Alright, well, that about wraps it up!
Thanks for reading.
Love, Palin, and Crowder...

Major, Major Sorry!!!

I am so sorry for not updating. The homework level was just too much, so...yeah
Thank you for still coming back to check.
Anywho...I'm back! :)

So, what should I rant about tonight...
How about health care?

Before I post the article, and then smother the entire page with my ranting, I'm gonna talk about my opinion of the health care fiasco. I think it's a big pot of yuck. 'Bam and the Gang are trying--and succeeding--to ruin this beautiful country. Do you see any more people with jobs? Does the economy look better? Has Gitmo been closed? Nope. Nada. All Obama's cared about is his danged health care. Oh, it's change alright. But, the point is, it's NOT good change. I've been saying--along with the smarter folks like Glenn Beck and Limabugh--that he never directly mentioned what kind of change we were going to receive.

Heck, we're on the road to Socialism.

Oh, we're off to get Socialism
The wonderful Socialism of Utopia (and Comunisim too!)

Ya got Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid skipping down the road, linkin' arms with Obama, smiling like a two year old in a candy shop. It's bad news, folks. They don't care about the good America; they want to see it smushed and blown up. It's the whole "one world" crud that makes me want to barf.
Speaking of Pelosi and Reid (oh, they make me laugh) watch this video in which Glenn Beck speaks everybody's mind about the duo.
Oh, they are quite a pair aren't they. Crazy libs!

Anyways, the health care bill was a whole lot of bad stuff. It's unconstitutional (duh!). Even my 11 year old sister knows that. What, do you think we're idiots or something? My parents taught us well. (Hi, mom)
We're gonna be just like Canada. Watch Steven Crowder's (my hero!!!) vid from like, last summer where he reenforces everything I've said. Purty much. I love that dude.

Well, there's something for now.
Look for the next post which will have an article in it from Fox News.